Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I'm watching this Piers Morgan interview with Santorum.
I don't agree with Santorum's decision to vote for the invasion of Iraq.
But I'll say that I'm sitting here listening to the guy and he seems very informed on foreign issues. He broke down the difference between the threat of Saddam in Iraq and the threat of a crazed theocracy in Iran, and (sort of) expressed some regret that it seems we've done more to address Iraq then Iran.
He says he doesn't view America as the policemen of the world, I think he understands that we can be the world's leader without over-reaching. He discussed the dangers of our interference in Libya and seems to understand the volatile situation in the middle east. He seems to actually have a grasp on foreign policy.
Then I heard him discuss Obama, he was very polite, very professional, didn't call him a food stamp president, said he's a good family man and that he respected him but he simply has a fundamentally different idea about what makes America great.
He's hardcore on social issues.
He's not a flip-flopper.
Has a REASONABLE grasp on foreign policy.
Uhh... Republicans... why the Heck aren't we electing this guy?
The gridlock is killing us. Look at all the good bills in the house that are dead. Santorum doesn't strike me as the person that can draw votes from the other side.
Winning the race is only half the job. Then we need someone who can do something with it. In order to do that we need someone who can make the other side move.
I'm amused when Santorum criticizes Iran for being a theocracy, while I feel that he likes the idea of a Christian theocracy.
I'm watching this Piers Morgan interview with Santorum.
I don't agree with Santorum's decision to vote for the invasion of Iraq.
But I'll say that I'm sitting here listening to the guy and he seems very informed on foreign issues. He broke down the difference between the threat of Saddam in Iraq and the threat of a crazed theocracy in Iran, and (sort of) expressed some regret that it seems we've done more to address Iraq then Iran.
He says he doesn't view America as the policemen of the world, I think he understands that we can be the world's leader without over-reaching. He discussed the dangers of our interference in Libya and seems to understand the volatile situation in the middle east. He seems to actually have a grasp on foreign policy.
Then I heard him discuss Obama, he was very polite, very professional, didn't call him a food stamp president, said he's a good family man and that he respected him but he simply has a fundamentally different idea about what makes America great.
He's hardcore on social issues.
He's not a flip-flopper.
Has a REASONABLE grasp on foreign policy.
Uhh... Republicans... why the Heck aren't we electing this guy?
As has already been stated, Santorum believes that some of our fellow citizens do not deserve to exercise the same inalienable rights the rest of us have. Regardless of foreign policy, that kind of intolerance cannot be allowed in the White House.
And as an added twist, I'm not even talking about his stance on homosexuality.
I'm watching this Piers Morgan interview with Santorum.
I don't agree with Santorum's decision to vote for the invasion of Iraq.
But I'll say that I'm sitting here listening to the guy and he seems very informed on foreign issues. He broke down the difference between the threat of Saddam in Iraq and the threat of a crazed theocracy in Iran, and (sort of) expressed some regret that it seems we've done more to address Iraq then Iran.
He says he doesn't view America as the policemen of the world, I think he understands that we can be the world's leader without over-reaching. He discussed the dangers of our interference in Libya and seems to understand the volatile situation in the middle east. He seems to actually have a grasp on foreign policy.
Then I heard him discuss Obama, he was very polite, very professional, didn't call him a food stamp president, said he's a good family man and that he respected him but he simply has a fundamentally different idea about what makes America great.
He's hardcore on social issues.
He's not a flip-flopper.
Has a REASONABLE grasp on foreign policy.
Uhh... Republicans... why the Heck aren't we electing this guy?
As has already been stated, Santorum believes that some of our fellow citizens do not deserve to exercise the same inalienable rights the rest of us have. Regardless of foreign policy, that kind of intolerance cannot be allowed in the White House.
And as an added twist, I'm not even talking about his stance on homosexuality.
Yeah, your saying that because he has an (R) next to his name. And for the record only one poster referenced what your talking about and he, as usual, got it wrong.
The gridlock is killing us. Look at all the good bills in the house that are dead. Santorum doesn't strike me as the person that can draw votes from the other side.
Winning the race is only half the job. Then we need someone who can do something with it. In order to do that we need someone who can make the other side move.
Who would that be, then?
As has already been stated, Santorum believes that some of our fellow citizens do not deserve to exercise the same inalienable rights the rest of us have. Regardless of foreign policy, that kind of intolerance cannot be allowed in the White House.
And as an added twist, I'm not even talking about his stance on homosexuality.
Yeah, your saying that because he has an (R) next to his name. And for the record only one poster referenced what your talking about and he, as usual, got it wrong.
Oh really? Someone already talked about Santorum being against women working and making their own medical decisions? Someone already mentioned his stance that no one, man or woman, married or single, should have access to birth control? Someone already brought up his opinion that the Federal government can regulate the sex life of a male/female married couple?
Hmm. I must have missed that.
Laws against abortion, birth control, gay marriage all sound theocratic to me.I'm amused when Santorum criticizes Iran for being a theocracy, while I feel that he likes the idea of a Christian theocracy.
He wants nothing of the sort.
But why let facts get in the way of things?
Yeah, your saying that because he has an (R) next to his name. And for the record only one poster referenced what your talking about and he, as usual, got it wrong.
Oh really? Someone already talked about Santorum being against women working and making their own medical decisions? Someone already mentioned his stance that no one, man or woman, married or single, should have access to birth control? Someone already brought up his opinion that the Federal government can regulate the sex life of a male/female married couple?
Hmm. I must have missed that.
I await your links as well
As has already been stated, Santorum believes that some of our fellow citizens do not deserve to exercise the same inalienable rights the rest of us have. Regardless of foreign policy, that kind of intolerance cannot be allowed in the White House.
And as an added twist, I'm not even talking about his stance on homosexuality.
Yeah, your saying that because he has an (R) next to his name. And for the record only one poster referenced what your talking about and he, as usual, got it wrong.
Oh really? Someone already talked about Santorum being against women working and making their own medical decisions? Someone already mentioned his stance that no one, man or woman, married or single, should have access to birth control? Someone already brought up his opinion that the Federal government can regulate the sex life of a male/female married couple?
Hmm. I must have missed that.
Yeah, your saying that because he has an (R) next to his name. And for the record only one poster referenced what your talking about and he, as usual, got it wrong.
Oh really? Someone already talked about Santorum being against women working and making their own medical decisions? Someone already mentioned his stance that no one, man or woman, married or single, should have access to birth control? Someone already brought up his opinion that the Federal government can regulate the sex life of a male/female married couple?
Hmm. I must have missed that.
your post started with AS HAS ALREADY BEEN STATED.
Call me stupid but I figured you were actually referring to a topic that had ALREADY BEEN STATED.
I'm watching this Piers Morgan interview with Santorum.
I don't agree with Santorum's decision to vote for the invasion of Iraq.
But I'll say that I'm sitting here listening to the guy and he seems very informed on foreign issues. He broke down the difference between the threat of Saddam in Iraq and the threat of a crazed theocracy in Iran, and (sort of) expressed some regret that it seems we've done more to address Iraq then Iran.
He says he doesn't view America as the policemen of the world, I think he understands that we can be the world's leader without over-reaching. He discussed the dangers of our interference in Libya and seems to understand the volatile situation in the middle east. He seems to actually have a grasp on foreign policy.
Then I heard him discuss Obama, he was very polite, very professional, didn't call him a food stamp president, said he's a good family man and that he respected him but he simply has a fundamentally different idea about what makes America great.
He's hardcore on social issues.
He's not a flip-flopper.
Has a REASONABLE grasp on foreign policy.
Uhh... Republicans... why the Heck aren't we electing this guy?
Laws against abortion, birth control, gay marriage all sound theocratic to me.I'm amused when Santorum criticizes Iran for being a theocracy, while I feel that he likes the idea of a Christian theocracy.
He wants nothing of the sort.
But why let facts get in the way of things?
Oh really? Someone already talked about Santorum being against women working and making their own medical decisions? Someone already mentioned his stance that no one, man or woman, married or single, should have access to birth control? Someone already brought up his opinion that the Federal government can regulate the sex life of a male/female married couple?
Hmm. I must have missed that.
your post started with AS HAS ALREADY BEEN STATED.
Call me stupid but I figured you were actually referring to a topic that had ALREADY BEEN STATED.
You're stupid.
your post started with AS HAS ALREADY BEEN STATED.
Call me stupid but I figured you were actually referring to a topic that had ALREADY BEEN STATED.
You're stupid.
If only you were always this obedient.
Laws against abortion, birth control, gay marriage all sound theocratic to me.He wants nothing of the sort.
But why let facts get in the way of things?
Then you clearly have no freakin clue what theocratic means.
You're stupid.
If only you were always this obedient.
So, judging by your utter ignoring of my post, you agree with Santorum and believe the government can regulate people's sex lives and make medical decisions for them.
And here I thought you were for small government.
Oh really? Someone already talked about Santorum being against women working and making their own medical decisions? Someone already mentioned his stance that no one, man or woman, married or single, should have access to birth control? Someone already brought up his opinion that the Federal government can regulate the sex life of a male/female married couple?
Hmm. I must have missed that.
You're stupid.
If only you were always this obedient.
So, judging by your utter ignoring of my post, you agree with Santorum and believe the government can regulate people's sex lives and make medical decisions for them.
And here I thought you were for small government.
Oh really? Someone already talked about Santorum being against women working and making their own medical decisions? Someone already mentioned his stance that no one, man or woman, married or single, should have access to birth control? Someone already brought up his opinion that the Federal government can regulate the sex life of a male/female married couple?
Hmm. I must have missed that.
I'm pretty sure most or all of that is false or taken out of context in a significant way, but that's the very powerful, viscerally offensive impression Santorum would have to overcome.
I'm under the impression that the part about banning contraception came up as an abstract "it would be the state's right to choose" thing and I'm pretty sure that no state would choose it, but the fact that he's willing to even talk about banning contraception in a theoretical sense makes him a little scary.
