133 votes

Santorum is Endorsing Romney

Just got the email as a (former) supporter: Excerpt: "Above all else, we both agree that President Obama must be defeated. The task will not be easy. It will require all hands on deck if our nominee is to be victorious. Governor Romney will be that nominee and he has my endorsement and support to win this the most critical election of our lifetime."

Guess I'm fully on board over here now.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

i love the labels

especially "paultard" and "paulbot"
the lower they stoop the sweeter the victory.
who could argue against sound currency?
KRUGMAN couldn't. neither can oramna.

"The two weakest arguments for any issue on the House floor are moral and constitutional"
Ron Paul

Sure, let the media use them

But don't use them on yourself.

vast splinter-the-vote conspiracy

... exists and is confirmed by this ( not ) "surprise" announcement. I saw this coming several months ago . .

First...

Buchman now Santorum...what a shocker. Is this what it is to be a social conservative in GOP? Someone with a lack of conviction?

The Libertarian Party, irrelevant since 1971.

No, but it is what it means to be a typical politician...

... in today's GOP.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

Ron Paul and the Bible

I highly recommend watching this series. It's really helpful in figuring out why Ron Paul is easily the most Biblical man running.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tYk5mEli68 is the introduction. You can go to individual chapters dealing with specific topics, or watch the entire thing.

Also, this is a great resource: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjzTLRhbTf8 It's the Ron Paul highlights from the debate held around Thanksgiving, called the Thanksgiving Family Forum. If you want, you can watch the entire debate here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY8Zw5NzUXQ

One of the biggest paradigm changes in becoming a Ron Paul supporter is recognizing what the President is legally, Constitutionally authorized to do. It takes a really, truly righteous man to not grab more power and authority than he should.

"Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." -- Thomas Paine

Following the Constitution

Many Santorum supporters are looking for a Christian revolution. Perhaps some of them can be convinced that it is still available. I am a Catholic Christian.

On that note, Merry Mom...

... I do think that it is interesting that Sen. Santorum is perceived to have had a greater following among Evangelical Protestants than among Catholics. In fact, he would really be the first Catholic Presidential candidate in American history to be embraced by Evangelical social conservatives as their standard-bearer. To me, this is all the more striking in that Santorum certainly would not be considered a nominal or "cafeteria" Catholic, but rather as someone who embraces and promotes the more distinctive and controversial parts of his faith (his public and detailed opposition to contraception comes to mind). Do you have any thoughts on this phenomenon? Thank you!

P.S.: It is my understanding that Sen. Santorum played a key role in former Kansas Senator (now Governor) Sam Brownback choosing to become Catholic. Brownback, despite his sleepy persona, has the interesting distinction of being one of the few prominent American politicians to have been, as an adult, a Mainline Protestant, an Evangelical, and a Catholic.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

Catholics and Santorum

Yes, it disturbed me here in Michigan when the exit polling showed that Catholics went for Romney here (as well as in many other states). I mean it is just totally bizarre that they would choose Romney over a devout Catholic major candidate. If they are cafeteria Catholics, they have nothing to fear from Santorum, because he has not and did not intend to try to legislate contraception. I think just hearing him articulate that he personally follows the teaching of the Catholic Church must make them uncomfortable. Evangelicals seem to be more likely to openly live their faith in all areas of their lives and not just on Sunday from 11AM to noon, or just on Christmas and Easter.

I have found in the last few days that there is a significant group of Catholics who support Ron Paul, and one of the reasons is the compromises Santorum made while in the Senate. He did vote for federal funding of contraception through Planned Parenthood, for example.

Abortion is given by the Catholic Church as a non-negotiable in making voting decisions according to your conscience. Therefore it has priority over other issues when choosing a candidate. By this standard, it is clear to me that in terms of the three remaining candidates, the order of adherence to pro-life principles would be Ron Paul (most pro-life), Obama (middle), Romney (least pro-life). I am assuming that pro-lifers who support Romney don't give much thought to their position. Romney materially cooperated with evil through actually funding baby slaughter in Massachusetts through RomneyCare. Romney also forced Catholic hospitals to provide abortifacient pills. Obama just talks about baby slaughter, but he can't hold a candle to Romney in terms of actual dead babies killed by his actions. Obama voted "present" and "no" on the BAIPA (Born Alive Infant Protection Act), but that had no actual effect on any babies--since every other vote was in support of it. Obama gives lip service to baby killing, but Romney actually makes it happen. (while saying he is "pro-life"). Do we just accept whatever label a candidate gives himself, regardless of the actions behind it? "Pro-life" Romney has way more baby blood on his hands than "Pro-Choice" Obama does.

Merry Mom, would you say that the embrace...

... of Sen. Santorum's candidacy by Evangelicals (both among pastors and among the rank-and-file) shows that there is less anti-Catholic sentiment among conservative Protestants than in previous decades? For example:

1928: Al Smith, the first major-party Catholic Presidential nominee, becomes the target of blatant anti-Catholic bigotry. Smith's opponent, Herbert Hoover, wins in a landslide:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1928_Presidential_election

1960: John Kennedy wins a narrow victory over Richard Nixon. The campaign saw a speech by the Catholic Kennedy (later criticized by Rick Santorum) where he stated that, "I do not speak for my Church on public matters – and the Church does not speak for me":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_elec...

2012: Evangelicals flock to the candidacy of unapologetically Catholic Sen. Rick Santorum. Despite surprising early victories, Santorum's campaign falters after narrow losses in Michigan and Ohio, where exit polls show that Catholic voters preferred Gov. Mitt Romney, a Mormon.

While I am neither Catholic nor Protestant (I am Orthodox, but with an Evangelical background), it seems to me that the major dividing line in modern American Christianity is not between Catholics and Protestants, but is instead between conservatives (Bible-believing, confessional) and liberals. What do you think? Thanks.

P.S.: You may have already seen these, but in case you did not, I posted other responses for you here and here.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

Uniting Faithful Catholics and Protestants

Yes, I would say that this is one thing that Rick Santorum's candidacy did accomplish. As a Catholic convert, I have been somewhat taken aback by the anti-Catholic sentiment so prevalent in some Protestant circles. Our Catholic moms' playgroup, for example, is regularly solicited in the park by the local Baptists telling us we are going to Hell. Perhaps the Santorum candidacy was an example of "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." When I met Santorum in Michigan, I also met the Duggar family who was traveling along with him--a phenomenon that symbolizes the new divide you describe.

Some Catholic parishes, along with many Methodist, Episcopal, and Presbyterian churches, have been taken over by "Social Justice" types. We visited a Catholic parish like this just last Sunday, where the priest was openly opposing the recent Vatican crackdown on radical socialist American nuns.

The Pope and New World Order (Political and Economic)

Last time I was in church was Easter Sunday, 2011. The pastor's sermon was on the importance of unions in American history. I walked out. If that's a rather obvious case... if people would only READ THE BIBLE THEMSELVES, they'd see how much pastors and priests leave out, so much that JESUS taught that would only empower us - as INDIVIDUALS (in the here and now, not just hereafter). They'd see how much is preached that doesn't come from the Bible and might be antithetical to what Jesus Christ Himself said, a.k.a., anti Christ.

Perhaps this NYTimes article explains part of any anti-Catholic sentiment. Are good Catholic elected officials supposed to support the pope's encyclicals, such as Benedict's call for GLOBAL GOV'T? Perhaps it explains the anti-Paul sentiment among so many Catholics.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/world/europe/08pope.html

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

Catholic vote

Merry Mom, your observation is born out in my own experience with a local tea party group, acquaintances of mine who are Catholic or Jewish (observant), including among the group's leadership. Despite tea party messages about Constitutionally-limited government and fiscal responsibility, when it came right down to it re a choice for president, those issues became irrelevant - trumped by the abortion issue. Ron Paul, the "godfather" of the tea party movement, was dismissed altogether. I'm not saying that that reflects the tea party movement as a whole, but it's the case in my group here (in an area heavily populated by Irish and Italians). Although they despise the president, whom they view as a socialist, I do think they'd vote for him if he only promised to outlaw abortion. Thanks for making a compelling argument that people can share with others.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

Assuming his supporters hear

Assuming his supporters hear of this, many of them will be alienated by it.
He spent so much time railing against Romney and now he loves him.

To climb the mountain, you must believe you can.

Santorum proves he is weak

To endorse everything he has been critical of over the past few months is nothing but weakness. One of his biggest complaints was Romneycare, and now he endorses Mr. Romneycare himself?

And, every election they tell us it's, "the most critical election of our lifetime."

*yawn*

Marine Corps Major Miller - We Need Real Change!

Ron Paul 2012!

Why Santorum waited

My guess is Santorum waited to give his endorsement until today because the establishment knew Ron Paul would win big at the conventions this past weekend. This gives the MSM a reason to bury what little coverage they gave to these historic wins, and shift the attention back to their BS narrative of how the party is coalescing around "The Presumptive Nominee Mitt Romney."

peace + liberty = prosperity

Well, let them snooze & lose...

We are in to win!

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

Delegates

Does this mean Santorum's Delegates are unbound?

Now, that is an excellent question...

... if so, then we are on our way to an outright majority in Louisiana, for starters... and maybe a plurality in Oklahoma, hmmm...

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

Oh What A Surprise..Santorum Supports Romney?! Who couldnt see

this coming from a mile away. I knew when the race began this would happen. that was santorums role...to galvanize the phony faction of evangelicals & then shift his support to Romney. Gingrich will likely do the same thing, if he hasnt already. Santorum endorsed Romney in 2008 too! Then in 2012 he was against Romney & now he is for him again! You cant write this stuff! What a circus clown this guy is.
...oh brother...what must it be like to be a sleazy flip flopping phony politician? Santorum knows all about that. I told my wife several months ago that this exact thing would happen with Santorum. He never stood for what he campaign on...his whole senate career he was basically identical to Romney. Then he saw that a lot of people didnt like Romney (still dont) so he acted like he was different from Romney (he lied). Now, his true colors come out once again. You can run but you cannot hide from who you really are. Thanks for finally telling the truth Santorum. This political card game was an easy one to figure out. You left all your cards showing but I think you thought you tricked us. Nope. Just made yourself look like a fool, thats all.

Trumpet, I agree with some of what you said...

... but Evangelicals are not a "phony faction" (I am talking about Evangelicals, not Sen. Santorum, mind you). Evangelicals are, by and large, sincere people with whom we should be seeking to find common ground. In fact, there are many Evangelicals in the Liberty Movement as it is, including (gasp!) Dr. Paul.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

My husband said the same thing a while back

Husbands love to be right. When I was supporting Santorum, my husband said "He's only going to disappoint you." Well, it didn't take long for that prediction to come true.

Welcome Merry Mom!

We always enjoy seeing new people, welcome!

I remember back in 2008, a classmate of mine in Nursing school announced on Facebook that anyone that was voting for Obama "is not Christian". I asked her what she meant and she said, "he is pro-choice."

There have been a few presidents since 1976 that didn't agree with abortion, or at least said they didn't, yet a woman could go and get an abortion during their presidencies, too (again, after Roe v Wade).

I started researching it, and it was a Supreme Court issue since its inception and a president could rave all he wanted against it and it didn't really matter. The SC had already stated they would not revisit it.

Ron Paul really does have the only plan to get it changed, by taking it off the federal floor.

That's not to say it won't still happen, just like before 1976. I'm of the opinion anymore that it shouldn't even be a campaign issue. Maybe it can be now that Ron Paul came up with a true way to change it.

Really we need to take it upon ourselves to educate our children about what happens when you have unprotected sex. So many parents just don't want to talk about it with their children, which is sad. We're failing.

Anyway, that's my two cents. I sure hope you enjoy your time here! Ron Paul is a great man. He turned this Democrat around, that's for sure.

The two most important days in your life are the day you are born...and the day you find out why. -Mark Twain

This is just another example

This is just another example of how the status quo stick together.

Santorum never let down how Romney was the guy who would lose this election to Obama, and now he says that Mitt's the guy to defeat him.

I can't handle the hypocrisy much longer. I thought Santorum really felt the way he did, and would simply hide somewhere until the convention.

Is the status quo really that scared that they have to pull this sheet?

End the Fed. End the Wars. Problems Solved. Ron Paul.

The Game

Yes, Santorum seemed sincere to me. Guess I am more gullible than I wanted to believe--even in my middle-age. I even met Santorum at a rally. The rally opened with a young person dressed as Patrick Henry reciting the Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death speech. We recited the Declaration of Independence in call and response format with Rick Santorum. Hard to believe it was all for show. Can't believe they got to him. It's like that Star Trek TNG episode where everyone starts playing that addictive game, and only Wesley and his friend are left un-brainwashed.

Actually, I think that Sen. Santorum is sincere...

... He seems to be a good family man, with a sincere faith and guiding principles. It may be that the most important of his principles is that he is loyal -- loyal to his God, to his wife, and to his team, the Republican Party. This loyalty led him to support the unconstitutional, Big Government No Child Left Behind and Medicare Part D bills. His "team player" mentality led him to vote for Planned Parenthood funding -- no, he is not secretly pro-abortion, but the funding was tucked into a bigger bill that the GOP wanted to pass. His loyalty even led him to campaign for Arlen Specter, the pro-choice fellow Senator from Pennsylvania who would later turn Democrat, when Specter was primaried by a pro-life conservative. Now, Santorum views the team as having chosen Gov. Romney as its nominee, so, therefore, Santorum endorses him.

This cautionary tale of a good man who went off track because his priorities were out of balance is something that we can all learn from. Many of us (myself included) want to work within the GOP, to transform it into the Party of Liberty. As we do this, we cannot allow the means -- the Republican "team," and our advancement therein -- to erode our goals -- the promotion of Liberty.

P.S.: For an example of a Republican in Congress who refuses to "go along with the team," I highly recommend the Facebook page of my favorite Congressman, Rep. Justin Amash (MI - 03). Amash posts an explanation of every vote he takes, along with the recorded roll-call of the vote (somtimes as the first entry in the Comments section). As he has not missed a roll-call vote since entering the Congress last year, his explanations and commentary provide an interesting window into the day-to-day activity on the House floor:

http://www.facebook.com/repjustinamash?filter=1

Amash is simultaneously among the most conservative and the most independent within the GOP Caucus, and his transparency and consistent adherence to Constitutionalist principles make him an excellent study of how a Liberty Movement legislator should stand against the partisanship and venality that so often taint the Congress.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

Going along with the team

Thanks for the link to Amash's page. I had heard of him, but didn't know too much about him--so now I can follow him. Yes, I think you are correct that Rick Santorum is sincere. He just thinks that things will continue along the way they are, so he keeps doing things the way he has always done them--and does a little bit of good here and there. I thought that he was all in and that he really did believe that radical change was necessary to the point of risking one's own standing within the party. But he must feel that it is more necessary to continue to play by the GOP written and unwritten rules. That's what shocked me about the original suspension. When I thought it was about his child, I accepted it. When I found out that it was about money and the "Anyone but Obama" mentality, I was less supportive. "Anyone but Obama" is not an effective battle cry.

Another party drone exposed.

Another party drone exposed. I guess his passionate, scathing condemnations of Romney were simply Republican test marketing to see which "flavor" of conservative attracted the most interest.

James Lipton should have Santorum on "Inside Actors Studio" for some of the performances he gave.

I hope at least some of the supporters of these erstwhile candidates have at a little concern for principle and policy beyond replacing Obama with his Republican counterpart.

Now we're down to one alternative that stands between the citizens of this country and four more years of recession, deficit spending, war, inflation, and police state expansion.

“Wasting a vote is sometimes voting for somebody that you don't really believe in."
-Ron Paul

you will never meet an ex-ron

you will never meet an ex-ron paul supporter. that tell's you something!