Rick Santorum Attacks Ronald Reagan at Town Hall Meeting

This wasn’t one of Rick’s better moves. The former Pennsylvania senator attacked conservative Ronald Reagan during a town hall meeting yesterday in New Hampshire.
The Daily Caller reported:

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum committed one of the gravest sins in Republican politics on Wednesday evening by knocking the revered former President Ronald Reagan at a packed town hall meeting.

While addressing America’s entitlement crisis at his first New Hampshire event since his stunning near-victory in the Iowa caucuses on Tuesday, Santorum said Reagan contributed to the entitlement crisis by pushing Social Security’s sustainability issues down the road instead of dealing with them head-on in the 1983 bipartisan deal to fix Social Security.

“If Rick Santorum gets elected and we do what I said that we need to do, which is to deal with the entitlement programs now, not 10 to 20 years from now,” Santorum said.

“You’ll know — unlike Ronald Reagan who maybe was a better politician than me — you’ll know that it was Rick Santorum that worked together and got the American public to gather together to fix this problem. Why? Because it is our problem.”

Santorum was walking the audience through what he called the “ancient days of yesteryear” in a interminable and incredibly detailed response to a questioner. He explained that in the 1983 deal Reagan brokered with Democratic Speaker of the House Tip O’Neil to fix Social Security, the retirement age was moved back to 67, but that change wasn’t slated to be enacted until the politicians responsible were out of office.

“This was the brilliance of the politicians that did this,” Santorum said sarcastically.

“They were absolutely brilliant. They passed a bill that didn’t take affect for 20 years so nobody blames them. It was brilliant. They increased the Social Security age by two years back in 1983 and it didn’t start phasing in, it doesn’t fully phase in for almost 40 years. And so Ronald Reagan did that. Most people have no idea — no one associates Ronald Reagan with raising the retirement age. Why? Because all of the people it affected were nowhere near retirement and they didn’t know about it.”

Get news like this in your Facebook News Feed,
Gateway Pundit

Commenting Policy

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban.

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments

  • reliapundit

    RICK IS A GOOD GUY. HE’S BEEN RIGHT ON MANY ISSUES.

    BUT WRONG TOO.

    HE IS ALSO DOUR, HUMORLESS, SANCTIMONIOUS, SELF-RIGHTEOUS.

    HE CAN’T BEAT OBAMA.

    THE TRUE TASK AT HAND IS NOT SELECTING THE MOST CONSERVATIVE NOMINEE.

    THE TASK AT HAND IS SELECTING SOMEONE WHO CAN DEFEAT OBAMA.

    RICK MIGHT ACCOMPLISH THE FIRST, BUT NEVER THE LATTER.

  • noislamocommie

    I’m going for Santorum. Stalwart amnesty-blocker & blocker of bogus “guest-worker” schemes. I’ll take his checkered past on earmarks.

  • Lyrical Liz

    I’m 42. Anyone my age who actually still believes that they will get one dollar of their Social Security is bonkers. And if was Reagan who raised the age to 67, who was it that raised it to 70? That’s right….70. IF there was a way to regain solvency of the Social Security system, I’m not to see a dime until I’m 70.

    So, you can freak out about something Santorum said about Reagan all you want. To people like me who are facing a retirement without any Social Security, it’s all about nothing. I’m paying for druggies, whiners, pretenders and lameoids to sit on their butts and collect more than they’ve ever paid into SS. I’ll get none of it that I’ve paid in.

  • #1AMERICAN

    another usless socialist….god help us all with the dimwits running against ozero

  • Dittogirl

    Bingo Liz! Forced to pay for it, and then it is given away for nothing, to people that paid nothing into it.

    And then they are baffled why Americans feel they already pay more than their fair share.

  • KornKing

    Here we go again-“work together” We need someone who can lead.
    bg-here’s your cue to go into your “all slam Rick Perry, all the time” mode

  • Rose

    Rick is NOT a good guy.
    FIRST he caves whenever it counts the most – Supporting Arlen Spectre was only ONE of his MAJOR such moves.

    Now – attacking Ronald Reagan!!!!

    He is so dead to me. There is no consideration whatsoever, here. NONE!

  • just-saying

    They each get a week or so before they crash and burn — usually based on their own actions. Where, or where, is a genuine conservative with a little courage? (Rick Perry, you still there?? Or, is someone else ready to jump in the race?)
    .

  • Jay

    The problem isn’t just Obama. The problem is spending and debt. SSI and the other entitlements will crush us in the relatively near future. The entitlements are popular Ponzi schemes that are beginning to crash.

    Obama just sped up the coming crash, McCain would only have sped up a little less. I don’t see anyone being able to stop this train wreck and I see many willing to hasten our crash. Paul has some of the right ideas but he would never be able to get anything that would solve the problem through Congress.

  • newrouter

    jim you’re so lame

  • Rose

    It’s about GOP who throw Conservatives under the bus instead of the Democrat Marxist Programs.

    I.E., when he supported Arlen Spectre who voted with the DEMOCRATS all the time, it was AGAINST A CONSERVATIVE ALTERNATIVE that he did so.

    NOW he is throwing Ronald Reagan under the bus BECAUSE HE IS PLANNING ON ANOTHER DIM “FIX” for things like Social Security – INSTEAD OF A CONSERVATIVE SOLUTION.

  • Conservative to the Core

    All you Georgette Mosbachers out there can just relax. You have nothing to fear from Santorum or Ron Paul.

    *sigh*

  • Quietwolf

    I know Ronald Regan, is the one who others are measured by in our party but when your wrong your wrong. I’ve been around for awhile, I first voted for Richard Nixon, in his second term. The idea that ANYONE is the perfect conservative in ALL ways is silly. Ronald Reagan, was the best so far in my lifetime if for no other reason then breaking the Soviet’s! But he still has faults and to gloss over them or pretend he was perfect is something I’ll leave to the Dem’s and their hero worship of FDR/JFK and now the Chosen One.

  • RedBeard

    More foot-in-mouth nonsense. Perry, Santorum, Gingrich, and Romney have all demostrated an annoying tendency to shoot from the lip.

    Think, then speak.

  • Mimi

    Love a guy who can stand on his own two feet. Everyone knows Reagan wasn’t perfect and had flaws, shoot he raised taxes. I still love Reagan and Santorum. Perry isn’t even campaigning in SC until Sunday. He just isn’t serious. Go Santorum!!!!

  • jainphx

    It’s obvious to me that the blinders come on for Romney, but everyone else is suspect. Santorum’s only bad mistake was being talked into backing Arlen Spector by the establishment. So now anytime this conservative opens his mouth, he’s suspect. And who the hell can say he can’t beat Obama, just how do you know? The answer is you don’t. For crying out loud stop with this doom and gloom. A watermelon could beat this pos. Who among us would vote for Obama because Santorum is the candidate, and if you say you will, well then this country doesn’t deserve to be saved.

    It’s fine to support another candidate, but gosh, wake up. Romney is simply the worst choice we could make. Why? Because in a lot of things he’s to the left of Obama and is just as big a liar. The Establishment backs him which means a Romney presidency would go down the same path towards destruction, but just a tad slower. No for me the line has been drawn in the sand, and I refuse to continue down that road.

  • well surprise here we go again…………big establishment eating-it owns to help elect Romney…………..Rick and Newt need to team up together………..start pushing ahead ……..Romney is going have hard time here in deep South……….just sayin

  • Quietwolf

    While I have preferences I plan to support whoever the nominee is. My first choice was Sarah Palin, second Michelle Bachman and now Rick Santorum. Newt Gingrich, is to much of a weather vane, he goes however the wind blows or the money flows. But if he’s the nominee or even Mitt “Gag” Romney, I’ll still back them over the Socialist-In-Chief we have now.

  • martha

    I’m not going to parse every word that Santorum says to show how he’s not Conservative, he and Bachmann were the most reliable conservatives in the race, I do’nt agree with everything he says, but he’s still going to be a better Pres than Obama is.
    Any of them, with the exception of Ron paul who is a Jew-Hating liberal(We have one of those in office now) would be better than Obama. Somehow I think Santorum would not make recess appointments when the Senate is in Pro-Forma session.

  • Mimi

    Just saying Rick Perry is sleeping in until Sunday then going to SC He was too afraid to venture to NH, even though if you make it to the General you need all states.

  • Rose

    Jay – McCain COULD NOT have sped up LESS – he swore to POINTS SOUTH all through 2007 and 2008 on UNIVISION in SPANISH that the FIRST THING HE WOULD DO was sign a bill “LIKE McCain Kennedy” SHAMNESTY by January 31, 2009 – With that influx of ILLEGAL ALIENS padding the already ILLEGALLY PADDED “ENTITLEMENT ROLLS” – we would have spent AT LEAST as fast as Odrama Queen. McCain supported enough other heavy spending since then to show he was never going to be LESSER than Odrama Queen – he had 40 years of REVENGE to be got and he is as determined to get it today as he ever was.

  • Quietwolf

    jainphx, Romney’ #3 on my worst choice list the worst choice is to allow Obama, a second term the second worst is Ron Paul, the last thing we need is an isolationist as C in C. What the country has forgotten is that when you bury your head in the sand you leave big target for the “Bad Guy’s” to kick.

  • Rose

    #13 January 5, 2012 at 9:08 am
    Quietwolf
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    BUT – to throw Ronald Reagan or any other Conservative – or Conservative Ideas – Issues, or platforms UNDER THE BUS, because the “Conservative” GOP CANDIDATE has already decided to “Pragmatically” push certain DIM MARXIST PROGRAMS – and they want to use the EXCUSES FOR WHICH THEY THROW OTHER CONSERVATIVES UNDER THE BUS as COVER for themselves….

    We are talking about the man who PROMOTED AND HELPED SAVE Arlen Spectre AT A CRITICAL JUNCTURE – STAVING OFF a strong strong strong push towards Conservatism that was coming through like gang-busters. THEN when his own campaign got tough, BEGAN TO CAVE ON A LONG LONG LONG SERIES of Conservative issues.

    NOW as soon as he has a WIN under his belt, HE THROWS RONALD REAGAN UNDER THE BUS.

    What is he going to do for a follow-up????

    Is JESUS next?

  • zaugg

    “Attacks” ? Pretty harsh phrasing of Santorum’s analysis there Jim. You in the tank for Romney? Is his analysis wrong? Did Saint Reagan do that or not…. oh wait, why yes he did indeed raise the retirement age for me almost 30 years ago.

    Good grief. I can see a shark and a jump coming right at you.

  • Bill Mitchell

    Wow Santorum, really? I guess the thing about 15 minutes of fame really is true?

    I predict a Newt surge as he goes after Romney. And before anyone tries painting Newt as some fire-breathing, blood-drinking maniac going negative, watch his ads. They are positive and uplifting but they do contrast his position with Romney’s. These are not “attack” ads, they are “contrast” ads – BIG difference.

    Newt can still win this thing.

  • Quietwolf

    Rose, has it right. The only good thing about RINO’s like McCain, is that they are easy to spot, just look for the dirty knees from paying back political “favors” The ones like McCain, who have been around so long are even easier to spot as they had to move up to knee pads.

  • Texmom

    Nothing wrong with supporting Romney if that’s your choice, but this is a weak attempt to discredit Santorum. Reagan was a human being. If you’ll recall, Reagan got played big time on amnesty for illegals, too.

  • Scott

    Attacked Reagan? How? Is this the Think Progress blog?

    Because I expect inaccurate and misleading headlines from Think Progress.

  • Rose

    The WORST CHOICE is a man in the range of Gerald Ford, Robert Dole, and John McCain who will HAND the Election to Odrama Queen. OR TO THE LEFT OF IT.

    Each of those men handed us one of the THREE WORST USA PRESIDENTS EVER.

    Don’t be so anxious to pick another such as their caliber.

    After three rounds of it in your lifetime, if you haven’t learned that doing the same exact thing over and over and over, expecting different results is the very definition of CRAZY and INSANITY, you never will. And it will forever doom the GOP because it is on a Track now that has become deeply entrenched.

    NOW you are INSISTING on gravitating to the WORST the party has to offer, “because of name recognition” in SPITE of their known LACK of Character.

    Santorum has joined the list of Newt and Romney and Ron Paul, of men who MIGHT can win the NOMINATION – but CANNOT win a General Election. And Santorum did it a long time before last night – this [activity at the Town Hall last night] is just a SYMPTOM of the FACT.

    NOT BECAUSE OF DIMS, but because Conservatives fail to see any difference worth spitting between, much less VOTING FOR.

    THIS is NOT an Election where “THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS” will suffice. That difference isn’t acceptable, it isn’t capable of accomplishing what is necessary for the survival of this nation.

    Therefore, it isn’t worth fighting FOR.

  • Nancy

    I, too, worked for Toomey against Specter but I knew Santorum and liked him. What none of us knew is that we got Roberts and especially Alito on the court in return for Santorum’s risk of losing his seat and 6 years later we got Toomey, too. Do you think that promise of Specter to Santorum was worth it?

  • Rose

    #27 January 5, 2012 at 9:42 am
    Texmom

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    But Reagan fell for it THE FIRST TIME – and it was MINISCULE compared to the SECOND ONE – which is miniscule compared to THIS ONE.

    And REAGAN RENOUNCED IT ALMOST IMMEDIATELY when he saw how treacherous the DIMS of THAT day were to him, breaking ALL BARGAINS they made to GET that deal from him! ALL the bargains. AND IF THEY HAD KEPT THOSE BARGAINS the matter would have forever ended RIGHT THERE – once and for all!

    The GOP these days doesn’t even ASK for such bargains, they just want to GIVE for the sake of APPROBATION, now.

    THAT CANNOT BE COMPARED TO REAGAN!

  • Rose

    #30 January 5, 2012 at 9:47 am
    Nancy
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    No. I would rather have had the landslide for Conservatism that Santorum helped STOP.

    http://takeaction.wta017.com/wta/link.php?M=17026505&N=9904&L=5704&F=H
    Roberts says all justices should rule on Obamacare

  • I have no problem with this. Reagan was the best of the best…BUT HE WAS NOT A GOD.
    He made mistakes too and Rick is simply pointing out that he’s ready to tackle the issues EVEN REAGAN WOULDN’T.

    Good on ya Rick!

  • donh

    Receiving a dead baby from his wife’s womb makes Rick Sanitarium the perfect receiver to hand this nation over from the cold dead hands of Obama. However, I fear Rick is a necromancer who will finally cut off cash payments to helpless individual citizens as the political class struggles to keep its organized crime in business. A growing mindset of Democrats may be secretly happy to let Rick win so that he is at the helm when the titanic sinks . Then they can stick the biggest failure of recorded time on BOTH Republicans and an even bigger villian the traditional roman catholic.

  • megapotamus

    Wow, what a depressing and pathetic chore it was to read these comments. I was cautiously and conditionally for The Other Rick, now I think he is a secular Messiah! Everything he said was true, more to the point, it was important. Yes, idiots, the Reagan comrpomises have brought us where we are on entitlements. That is not to say that he did not do good and important things in some regards on that subject but so what? The bottomline is the bottomline. In addition to being Unconstitutional all these “programs” including those like SS and Medicare designed to bribe you out of your common sense CAN NOT CONTINUE! They just can’t and the Reagan payroll tax hikes, long ignored at the Church of Reagan, only ever were, yes, kicking the can. If even supposed conservatives can’t understand that then Obama deserves and will get a second term. The lesson has not been learned so the beatings must continue. I am appalled. PS Screw Reagan.

  • RR was NOT perfect-

    I remember well AMNESTY- for illegals–
    so-
    Santorum was right to bring out the truth-
    SOMETIMES the TRUTH HURTS-
    or is a benchmark to not make the same mistakes AGAIN!

    C-Christian Soldier

  • Fuquay Steve

    How’s that romney kool aid ? Or is it just the romney colored sunglasses that is causing you to make misleading headlines? This was no attack, we’ll let you know if there is an attack. Go back to reading romney’s biography.

  • Taqiyyotomist

    I agree that “attack” is a bit of a stretch here, Jim.

    He criticized a policy. That is an “attack”?

    Can anyone point out where Rick was factually incorrect here?

    Here, let me “attack” Ronaldus: Reagan didn’t even come close to understanding the threat of Islam, even after our Marine barracks in Beruit were blown up — he saw it as an “isolated incident”, he didn’t use the resources available to him to discover the connections between Hezbollah and the M.B. that went back to the 1920s, and he had his head as deep in the sand as any POTUS that came after him, regarding Islam’s pretend “splinter groups”.

    Also, “Reagan Beat Communism!” is the biggest lie we conservatives ever repeated to ourselves ten million times until we believed it — while Communism took our entire nation — it’s education system from pre-K to PhD. It’s publishing companies. It’s recording industry. It’s film industry. It’s ENTIRE jurisprudence system from the Law Schools to the lawyers to the judiciary.

    And it’s White House, and most federal agencies, to the very TOP of them.

    There’s an “attack”, compared to Rick Santorum’s tiny criticism of one obscure action taken by Reagan.

    And still, at 40 years of age, I know Reagan was the best president this nation has been blessed with in my lifetime. And I bet Santorum AGREES, even while “attacking”.

  • olm

    At this point, any one but Obama.
    Criticizing a legitimate Reagan fault is probably not a bad move on Rick’s part.
    However, this field of candidates worries me more every day.

  • Gus

    To say that Santotrum “attacked” Reagan is comical.

    Jim, if you don’t like Santorum, just say so.

    Who are you sucking up to today??? Perry or Romney??

  • Sasja

    ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Snore. So Reagan wasn’t a god. I want to know what Santorum’s ideas are re SS. Since he recognizes there is a problem what does he think should be done to “fix” it?

  • Meredith

    Bachmann was the only true Conserative and the rest of the field sought that as a threat (and rightfully so). Santorum’s warts will soon be brought to the surface and then it is aidos to the Moderate.

  • raugaj

    I’m so tired of hearing that only Romney can win. This country is not a leftist country, but a true progressive won last time. In the past, voters have responded to candidates with strong beliefs and I suspect that Santorum would appeal to more voters than a proven socialist, like the current pres.
    Also, Rick was right about politicians, such as Reagan, making promises that later leaders would have to suffer with.

  • Seth

    Reagan was a great President, but he wasn’t God–and he was a politician–and this business of raising the retirement age, but having the change take effect 40 years after enactment is a politician’s trick, and Santorum was right to call Reagan on it.

    The point being, that we have massive problems with bankrupting entitlement spending, right here and right now, out of control “mandatory” spending–consuming 63% of our entire Federal budget this year, 65% the next and so on– that will automatically ratchet up in the next few years to devour out entire federal budget, and that unless radical and immediate steps are taken now, it will be too late.

    Thus, we cannot fall again for tricks that put off into the future the radical and inevitably painful changes that have to be instituted, and instituted now.

  • bg

    ++

    truth is a biotch..

    oh wait,, i thought that’s what “we the people” wanted to hear
    from out politicians, not the same old same old “hope & change”
    mantra..

    and we tell Congress Reps to grow a pair, hah..

    ==

  • bg

    ++

    what to do about Social Security = Bush was right.

    ==

  • zmdavid

    Reagan was wrong on this. The 1983 SS deal was bad.

  • Rocky

    I wouldnt call what he did an attack on President Reagan. He may have disagreed. However, Rick needs to STOP bashing ANY REPUBLICAN. Especially Reagan! The fact that he disagreed with anything the best President in history did, lost him many supporters.

    His attack should be focused on one person and one person alone.

  • Fionnagh

    In a word – Newt.

  • #48: Exactly! Start bashing EARS instead of Reagan for cryin’ out loud. The GOP candidates need to start spelling out their SOLUTIONS and reminding ppl how the last 3 years has been for most working Americans. It hasn’t been pretty – and it still sucks!

  • Pingback: Rick Santorum Attacks Ronald Reagan at Town Hall Meeting | Liberal Whoppers()

  • bg

    ++

    one thing we all need to remember is to add “context”,
    albeit’s as if time stands still, one must not view 1983
    in the same contextual light as 2012..

    in 1983, that may have been the best choice, not that
    RR did anything wrong, hindsight never shines a good
    light..

    ==

  • Molon Labe

    Exactly what is it that Santorium said isn’t dead on? Hofter has gone off the tracks again trying to foist Romney on us.

  • Seth

    I don’t think that most, or enough, people understand, just yet, what an all-devouring, out of control robot—a juggernaut created by Congress in a way that never required them to justify or to vote on these program’s existence again, just wound up and turned loose– entitlements are.

    Because our population grows from natural increase and immigration, more and more people are pretty much automatically, inevitably eligible for these programs. Moreover, because the “poverty line”—gateway to these programs—automatically moves higher each year to compensate for inflation, in effect, that gateway opens wider and wider each year and more and more can fit through it, and are eligible. In addition, today’s current high unemployment and decreased incomes further increase the number eligible

    These entitlement programs have a “mandatory” claim on the Federal budget—they must be paid first. Thus, each year, automatically, inevitably—like a mindless, out of control robot, they will increase the percentage they devour of our Federal budget and, unless they are stopped, they will, within the next decade or two, devour our entire Federal budget.

  • LookUp

    I sincerely wish I had all the money taken from me that was “invested” into this “system” that too many people got their hands on called Social Security. I could have retired young.
    It’s high time to END this program along with quite a few others and TAKE CARE OF THE PROBLEMS YOURSELVES. The age of the baby bottle is over. It isn’t necessary to re-hash all the players in history who messed up on this issue. END the thing intelligently and mark it up as a failed policy of the USA instead of the demon of its demise.

  • Angel

    attack ??? wow what a headline.
    only thing is , to believe it you have to be not paying attention.
    IN NO WAY did he ATTACK Reagan.

    GO TO CSPAN AND WATCH IT, you’ll see the whole thing .

  • Rose

    #16 January 5, 2012 at 9:13 am
    jainphx
    “Santorum’s only bad mistake was being talked into backing Arlen Spector by the establishment.”

    ME: ONLY ONE OF MANY – you didn’t NOTICE the Domino string of casting down Conservative issues during his last campaign??? And there were OTHERS BESIDES.

    “And who the hell can say he can’t beat Obama, just how do you know?”

    ME: I KNOW! Because of my age and my voting record – which MIRRORS the Elections since Kennedy/Nixon of 1960.

    Here’s the Demarcation Line – Gerald Ford – Robert Dole – John McCain.
    I REFUSED TO VOTE FOR THEM. I didn’t cost them enough votes to make the difference – MILLIONS of voters who never discussed it with ME – OR ANYONE ELSE AT ALL – ALL reflected the same Bottom Line – I won’t say they reflected MY VIEWS – I seldom meet anyone who DOES!

    But the Bottom Line was they REFUSED to vote for those three Leftie Donkeys.

    I will not vote for Santorum or Newt or Mitt, – OH! AND RON PAUL!!! – and I know Millions will stay at home because they cannot see ANY SIGNIFICANCE between these FOUR and the Destruction of an Obama Administration.

    So they will say, WHY BOTHER TO VOTE when you cannot SPIT between them!!!

    I will vote. THAT IS WHERE I DIFFER FROM THESE MILLIONS WHO ALWAYS BACK MY PLAY without deliberately doing so. I mean, they don’t do that “FOR ME”. They do it because the GOP has spit in their face and they say “BACK ATCHA, STUPID!”

    I like to be an AGGRAVATION to those who want to KILL the USA. I will vote a WRITE IN – it will be the most aggravating vote, it has to be physically and manually recorded and counted and listed separately from all the others, and sent STEP BY STEP BY STEP all the way up the line, from Precinct to City to County to District, State, and National data counters.

    I will not vote for these men who have been terribly VOCAL in support of DIM MARXIST PROGRAMS for DECADES, and STILL ARE EVEN IN THIS CAMPAIGN!

    I don’t care WHO calls them “Conservatives”. Maybe they are Conservative Marxists, but that ain’t the brand of Conservative I will vote for.

    THAT is how I know. Where MY gut stops, the VOTING BASE of the GOP has NOT crossed that line. NOT in my entire lifetime.

    They won’t start, now. So the RINOS can get the NOMINATION – it’s just that it proves they hate the GOP VOTING BASE when they willfully nominate someone they KNOW the Voting Base HATES HATES HATES!!! WITH A PURPLE PASSION!

    It proves to us the RINOS love DIMS!

  • Rose

    #49 January 5, 2012 at 11:24 am
    Fionnagh
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    In a word: 45 MINUTES of NEWT LAUGHING at the Absurdity of Southern Border Security as HE PROMOTED McCain Kennedy SHAMNESTY.

    45 Minutes of Laughter. Out lough laughing, chuckling, belly-laughing contentment. AGREEING WITH ALAN SKULLHEAD COLMES, MUCH to the bemused confusion of Alan Skullhead Colmes.

  • Rose

    THIS IS AN ATTACK BY SANTORUM ON RONALD REAGAN.

    “This was the brilliance of the politicians that did this,” Santorum said sarcastically.

    “They were absolutely brilliant. They passed a bill that didn’t take affect for 20 years so nobody blames them. It was brilliant. They increased the Social Security age by two years back in 1983 and it didn’t start phasing in, it doesn’t fully phase in for almost 40 years. And so Ronald Reagan did that. Most people have no idea — no one associates Ronald Reagan with raising the retirement age. Why? Because all of the people it affected were nowhere near retirement and they didn’t know about it.”

    IT SHOWS ME THAT SANTORUM HAS HIS OWN DEALS IN THE WORKS AND IS GETTING COVER AHEAD OF TIME FOR THE DEALS HE IS GOING TO MAKE – WITH DIM MARXISTS.
    “Everybody does it – Even Reagan did it” excuses PREPARED AHEAD OF TIME.

  • Rose

    This is NOT “GREEN EGGS AND HAM” – this isn’t THE APPEARANCE of Putrid!

    THIS IS PUTRID ITSELF – GANGRENE! It’s done. finished. Over. It was done years ago and this is ONLY A SYMPTOM.

  • bg

    ++

    Molon Labe #53 January 5, 2012 at 12:16 pm

    Romney??

    shall i task myself with searching for & listing
    the anti-Romney-pro-Perry GP posts alone??

    aah, never-mind, i know you know better..

    ==

  • bg

    ++

    Rick Santorum Holds New Hampshire Town Hall

    Brentwood, NH
    Wednesday, January 4, 2012

    With the Iowa Caucuses behind him, Rick Santorum is now campaigning
    in New Hampshire. The former Senator from Pennsylvania holds a “Faith,
    Family and Freedom” Town Hall in Brentwood, NH.

    A Suffolk University/7 News poll released on Tuesday showed Rick
    Santorum attracting 5 percent of likely New Hampshire Primary voters,
    putting him ahead of Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry (both holding 2
    percent ).

    Front runner Mitt Romney polled at 43 percent of likely

    ==

  • bg

    ++

    oops re: #62 January 5, 2012 at 1:48 pm bg

    voters.. 😀

    ==

  • bg

    ++

    testing 123..

    ==

  • redpillpatriot

    Santorum is intelligent and speaks from the heart, he answers questions with facts and he answers them directly.

    Jim you are either totally sensationalizing all the headlines for your own benefit over our countries’, or you are a shill for the GOP machine. Either, way I am sick of your bullsh*t!

    In addition, if Romney wins the nomination, Obama will be re-elected, as a large percent of conservatives like me will vote 3rd party or stay home. I WILL NOT VOTE FOR THE LESSOR OF TWO EVILS!

  • I am completel with #15 – Mimi who commented:
    “Love a guy who can stand on his own two feet. Everyone knows Reagan wasn’t perfect and had flaws, shoot he raised taxes. I still love Reagan and Santorum. Perry isn’t even campaigning in SC until Sunday. He just isn’t serious. Go Santorum!!!! ”

    I love Reagan but news flash: HE WAS NOT PERFECT. Noone is. Crikey he was even a Democrat before he became a Republican.

    Sure seems to me Santorum was trying to make a point about politicians and accountability. That sounds refreshing to me…

  • Mama Grizzly

    It was all Reagan could do given Congress.

    Rick wasn’t dissing Reagan, he was pointing out that he will put things into action right away. Which can work with the agreement of Congress, and which will NEVER happen without the support of Congress.

    Reagan at least got the entrenched Democrats to acknowledge the need.

  • Candy

    There sure are a lot of hired posters commenting; When will the infestation stop?

  • Let’s get our adjectives right here. Rick is not sanctimonious. Self-Righteous, just by virtue of thinking our opinions matter on this trivial site we all have that in spades. And the president – don’t get me started on his excrement does not stink mantra. I do agree he needs a charisma lesson and a little more light-heartedness at moments. I blogged about what Rick can do to win. It is never too late to take a few public speaking and public persona lessons to polish up the superficiality. As heart though – he is a very good man, and that is what we need in the whitehouse.