Stability becomes an issue for the GOP, in Santorum's account, because “If we are going to be successful in this race, we have to nominate someone who is going to make Barack Obama the issue in this race, not be the issue himself in the race.” In other words, let's face it: neither Rick Santorum nor any of his remaining rivals really has anything positive to offer the nation -- not that the incumbent has much, either -- so the Republicans need someone who will not be distracted from slandering his opponent by having to answer for his own faults. This may be true, but the truth of it presents an obvious difficulty: who in the current Republican field is so faultless? Are we to believe that it's the man who in his last general election, running as an incumbent, was defeated in a landslide? The man who now flaunts an endorsement from Focus on the Family, which should be the opposite of an endorsement for any rational person? The nearest thing to a theocrat in the field? By his own statement, Santorum only disqualifies himself, if not his entire party. It isn't partisan of me to say so. All I'm saying is if a candidate can't lead with a positive agenda, he has no business running, and Santorum has just said that he won't. He can't even make a positive case for the Republican nomination, instead calling Gingrich unstable and Romney a Tweedledee to Obama's Tweedledum, and not deigning to notice Paul. With that attitude, I can see why Santorum isn't exactly setting conservative hearts on fire. Even they actually want to believe in something -- besides God, I mean -- and Santorum promises only negativity. I suspect that he'll go next.
19 January 2012
Santorum vs. Everyone
Stability becomes an issue for the GOP, in Santorum's account, because “If we are going to be successful in this race, we have to nominate someone who is going to make Barack Obama the issue in this race, not be the issue himself in the race.” In other words, let's face it: neither Rick Santorum nor any of his remaining rivals really has anything positive to offer the nation -- not that the incumbent has much, either -- so the Republicans need someone who will not be distracted from slandering his opponent by having to answer for his own faults. This may be true, but the truth of it presents an obvious difficulty: who in the current Republican field is so faultless? Are we to believe that it's the man who in his last general election, running as an incumbent, was defeated in a landslide? The man who now flaunts an endorsement from Focus on the Family, which should be the opposite of an endorsement for any rational person? The nearest thing to a theocrat in the field? By his own statement, Santorum only disqualifies himself, if not his entire party. It isn't partisan of me to say so. All I'm saying is if a candidate can't lead with a positive agenda, he has no business running, and Santorum has just said that he won't. He can't even make a positive case for the Republican nomination, instead calling Gingrich unstable and Romney a Tweedledee to Obama's Tweedledum, and not deigning to notice Paul. With that attitude, I can see why Santorum isn't exactly setting conservative hearts on fire. Even they actually want to believe in something -- besides God, I mean -- and Santorum promises only negativity. I suspect that he'll go next.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
After that bluster, I hope the story that takes him down is equally entertaining.
Post a Comment