Santorum the Progressive Conservative, okay with abortion until 3rd trimester

[Amelia]

Rick Santorum Cast Himself As 'Progressive Conservative,' Non-Reaganite In First Campaign

Well ... gee ... I could have supported Santorum in 1990. I think I like Republicans who are running for office in Blue States.

When they run to the right to try to get today's conservative vote ... that's when things get iffy.



Edit: Hmmm ... looks like he veered hard right on abortion some time during 1990. Well, maybe I could still have voted for him then. Interesting article anyway.

 

[oreo]

Rick Santorum Cast Himself As 'Progressive Conservative,' Non-Reaganite In First Campaign

Well ... gee ... I could have supported Santorum in 1990. I think I like Republicans who are running for office in Blue States.

When they run to the right to try to get today's conservative vote ... that's when things get iffy.

Your title is very MISLEADING--Santorum is against abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtHkDDqexHs]Santorum: No Rape or Incest Exceptions - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Amelia]

Rick Santorum Cast Himself As 'Progressive Conservative,' Non-Reaganite In First Campaign

Well ... gee ... I could have supported Santorum in 1990. I think I like Republicans who are running for office in Blue States.

When they run to the right to try to get today's conservative vote ... that's when things get iffy.

Your title is very MISLEADING--Santorum is against abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

Santorum: No Rape or Incest Exceptions - YouTube

Now he is. But it looks like he was pro-choice in 1989 and then switched to anti-abortion in 1990. If I have read that article correctly.

 

[g5000]

Your title is very MISLEADING--Santorum is against abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

If you read the link in the OP, you will see that in his 1990 campaign Santorum issued a position paper stating he "had limited his opposition to abortion to cover only the time in which a fetus is considered viable - usually taken to mean the final three months of pregnancy".

So it appears Romney is not the only GOP candidate who has flip-flopped on his abortion position. This is a significant revelation considering the weight conservatives have given to Romney's earlier position on abortion.

 

[Cuyo]

He's an opportunistic weathervane, same as the rest of'em.

Without knowing a terrible lot about him, except that he's radical hard-right on just about everything (at the moment), I find him to be more repulsive than most.

 

[Valox]

Too bad there isn't a strong conservative Republican running who has been principled and consistent for decades. If there was such a candidate, Republicans would flock to him in droves.

BTW, do you know what is really disturbing? Santorum's wife dated a well-know abortionist doctor before they met....and that doctor was the same doctor who oversaw Karen's birth. Now that is fucking disturbing.

 

[Amelia]

Too bad there isn't a strong conservative Republican running who has been principled and consistent for decades. If there was such a candidate, Republicans would flock to him in droves.

BTW, do you know what is really disturbing? Santorum's wife dated a well-know abortionist doctor before they met....and that doctor was the same doctor who oversaw Karen's birth. Now that is fucking disturbing.

That does raise eyebrows.




p.s. I suppose you're talking about Paul as the principled and consistent one. Well ... he'd be one example of why I don't necessarily like today's idea of "strong conservative". Some of the things he has been associated with in the past coupla decades are real turn-offs.

 

[Missourian]

Why won't y'all just put "Huffington Post" in the thread title, so I don't waste any bandwidth clicking on it.

If you get you news from HuffPo, save some time and just vote Democrat.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Intense]

Rick Santorum Cast Himself As 'Progressive Conservative,' Non-Reaganite In First Campaign

Well ... gee ... I could have supported Santorum in 1990. I think I like Republicans who are running for office in Blue States.

When they run to the right to try to get today's conservative vote ... that's when things get iffy.

Your title is very MISLEADING--Santorum is against abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtHkDDqexHs]Santorum: No Rape or Incest Exceptions - YouTube[/ame]

Now he is. But it looks like he was pro-choice in 1989 and then switched to anti-abortion in 1990. If I have read that article correctly.

In This Link he claims he was not pro-choice. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Google News Archive Search

 

[whitehall]

Geez even when the guy tries to be moderate the left goes crazy. Here's what Barry Obama did when he was state senator. When partial birth abortion was outlawed a nurse blew the whistle on a despicable secret method of late term murder of premature babies in Chicago after a custodian handed her a living baby who had been dumped in the garbage. Obama defended the procedure in the state legislature and the nurse was ultimately fired while the manslaughter went on.

 

[Missourian]

Your title is very MISLEADING--Santorum is against abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

Santorum: No Rape or Incest Exceptions - YouTube

Now he is. But it looks like he was pro-choice in 1989 and then switched to anti-abortion in 1990. If I have read that article correctly.

In This Link he claims he was not pro-choice. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Google News Archive Search

It's a HuffPo Blog...did you expect honesty?

 

[Amelia]

Why won't y'all just put "Huffington Post" in the thread title, so I don't waste any bandwidth clicking on it.

If you get you news from HuffPo, save some time and just vote Democrat.

Thanks in advance.

That's as bad as people saying they won't follow a Fox link or a Breitbart link.

The article has newspaper clippings from 1990. But I guess they don't count until an approved news source has validated them?

 

[Amelia]

Your title is very MISLEADING--Santorum is against abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

Santorum: No Rape or Incest Exceptions - YouTube

Now he is. But it looks like he was pro-choice in 1989 and then switched to anti-abortion in 1990. If I have read that article correctly.

In This Link he claims he was not pro-choice. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Google News Archive Search

Too bad we don't have a copy of that position paper which "had to be quietly withdrawn".

The Pittsburgh Press - Google News Archive Search

 

[Missourian]

Intense's link is right from the Blog...

Santorum plainly states "I don't take positions to get votes. If I took positions to get votes, I would do what [Welgren, his opponent and the instigator of the falsehood that he changed positions] does. and that's straddle the fence on every position."

Thread Fail.

 

[Amelia]

Intense's link is right from the Blog...

Santorum plainly states "I don't take positions to get votes. If I took positions to get votes, I would do what [Welgren, his opponent and the instigator of the falsehood that he changed positions] does. and that's straddle the fence on every position."

Thread Fail.

My link above your post is right from the Oct. 28, 1990 newspaper.

Santorum said he had always opposed government funding of abortions, but "beyond that I tried as much as I could to dance around the issue, not really take a position on it."

But in fact, Santorum had taken enough of a position that he drew up, around December, a position paper that later had to be quietly withdrawn. In that paper, Santorum said, he had limited his opposition to abortion to cover only the time in which a fetus is considered viable -- usually taken to mean the final three months of pregnancy -- and to public funding of abortion.

Santorum later had the papers withdrawn from his campaign after settling on a position opposing most forms of legalized abortion.

Of course, Santorum would maintain that he doesn't take positions to get votes. lol

 

[Amelia]

The Pittsburgh Press, October 28, 1990

 

[Missourian]

Why won't y'all just put "Huffington Post" in the thread title, so I don't waste any bandwidth clicking on it.

If you get you news from HuffPo, save some time and just vote Democrat.

Thanks in advance.

That's as bad as people saying they won't follow a Fox link or a Breitbart link.

The article has newspaper clippings from 1990. But I guess they don't count until an approved news source has validated them?

Fox, CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS and BBC are news organizations, I don't completely trust them, but I read them.

If you read Breitbart, Newsbusters, HuffPo, ThinkProgress, Newsmax...and believe what they say without verifying every word, you are a complete idiot. Period.

You might as well believe every post on this messageboard.

There is not a single shred of evidence in the newspaper clipping to support the allegation.

It is as if I claimed you were a member of the communist party and the newspaper wrote an article about it.

That evidently makes you a former member of the communist party, right?

Surely you are not that stupid.

 

[Amelia]

Why won't y'all just put "Huffington Post" in the thread title, so I don't waste any bandwidth clicking on it.

If you get you news from HuffPo, save some time and just vote Democrat.

Thanks in advance.

That's as bad as people saying they won't follow a Fox link or a Breitbart link.

The article has newspaper clippings from 1990. But I guess they don't count until an approved news source has validated them?

Fox, CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS and BBC are news organizations, I don't completely trust them, but I read them.

If you read Breitbart, Newsbusters, HuffPo, ThinkProgress, Newsmax...and believe what they say without verifying every word, you are a complete idiot. Period.

You might as well believe every post on this messageboard.

There is not a single shred of evidence in the newspaper clipping to support the allegation.

It is as if I claimed you were a member of the communist party and the newspaper wrote an article about it.

That evidently makes you a former member of the communist party, right?

Surely you are not that stupid.

Not a shred of evidence? Are you alleging that the reporter made that up in 1990?

You don't believe the position paper existed and was withdrawn?

 

[Valox]

That does raise eyebrows.

Yes, it does.

p.s. I suppose you're talking about Paul as the principled and consistent one. Well ... he'd be one example of why I don't necessarily like today's idea of "strong conservative". Some of the things he has been associated with in the past coupla decades are real turn-offs.

You are correct. However, I can only think of one incident that may be a turn off to you, not a couple. I'd be interested in hearing about these other activities besides his so-called racist newsletters, which were never based on racism.

 

[Missourian]

The Pittsburgh Press, October 28, 1990

Except there is no evidence of a position paper, and even according to the article, he has always been opposed to abortion and public funding of abortion.

Unlike Romney who was Pro-choice, then personally opposed, then finally Pro-life, when he decided to run for president.

And wasn't public funding of abortion part of Romneycare?