Liberal groups are already lining up to defeat Rick Santorum in next year's election. WHY? The answer is clear--HE'S A STRONG CONSERVATIVE LEADER, and he's not ashamed to say so.
One thing is for sure, at least from my point of view, being retired from State Service has one great advantage and that is that I don't have to worry about getting in trouble with the Civil Service Commission for making a political endorsement--So here it comes folks: I'M SUPPORTING RICK SANTORUM FOR RE-ELECTION TO THE U.S. SENATE in 2006, and I think every citizen of this great commonwealth should do the same, especially if they are concerned about the moral tail spin this country has been in for almost 6 decades.
I said it once, and I'll say it again and again--America needs strong conservative leadership, and that's why I'm supporting Rick Santorum for the U.S. Senate in 2006.
May 17, 2005
I'm for Rick Santorum in 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Your going to upset our liberal readers with posts like that Dave... (sheepish grin)
Oh well--I guess that's a cross I'll have to bear!!
First off, great site. Now here's a question I pose. Has Bush gone to far to the left for you? I agree we need a strong consevative leader.
I see the last election like this: Kerry is a Communist, Bush is a socialist. This leaves a true consevative without a viable canidate. So I guess it's the lesser of two evils once again.
Your thoughts?
To Shafter79: First, glad you like the site, although I am just one contributing member.
Second I never equated Liberalism to Communism, and as far as the President is concerned, in all the matters that count, he is as conservative as they come. He is a man of faith with strong moral values. But to specifically answer your question-No I don't think he has gone too far left, although there are some areas that could use some fine tuning.
If I might chime in as well. I believe that the President is attempting to walk a thin line. He is not only challenged by a strong-willed minority but must also deal with so-called conservative lawmakers who vote anything but...
P.A. and David- I agree with both of you to a point. The Democrats are strong willed. I wish some of the Republicans in office had that kid of will. Bush is a moral and faithful man. Tha is part of the reason I voted for him in 2000 and again in 2004.
On the political spectrum I've always associated communism far left. Socialism a little closer to center. Conservatism to the right. The Libetarian to the far right. Which is where I most likely fall. But I usually vote republican.
I follow you Shaft... If the Libertarian party could produce a real candidate I would have a decision to make, (that being unlikely) until then I will pick the much lessor of two evils.
AN OPEN COMMENT TO ALL--Now this is what I call a good debate. People of good will and intelligence airing out an issue/question from all perspectives--No name calling or trash talking, but an excellent exchange of ideas. THANKS TO ALL FOR A SPIRITED DISCUSSION. That's what this site is all about, and I think PA, you will agree.
Absolutely :)
shaft - your point is well taken, however strength isn't the question, it is what's just. The U.N has on a regular basis been simply a front for liberal nations to advance their agenda. Their voice outside the UN would be mute. It comes down to a question of values and commitment.
PS - Shaft - If you are Shaftorious.. Your links are very good. I took the liberty of perusing them - I will pass on to others.
PA
Thank you for your comments on my sites. Yes I go by Shafter or Shaftorious. I agree with you fully on thu UN it is useless. I couldn't believe it, I believe in 1998, when th US got thrown off the human rights board because of its poverty level. Yet the Sudan, who replaced it, still has slavery.
So my point is. Unless we have the ability to deal with the consequences of breaking up the UN and forming a new International Coalition. Then we should leave things as they are. Speak with the UN and do what we feel is right.
For the Leftys who would attack the current administration for this, remember Clinton did it also. He never went to the UN when he missiled the medicine factory in Iraq. Which he bombed because he though it was a chemical weapons plant. He also never went to the UN for Milosevic.
To PA- Becareful what you wish for. The next thing might be worse.
Hey PA--Really liked the addition of the Santorum links to the site.
Post a Comment