Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, September 29, 2006
Kathleen Parker :: Townhall.com Columnist
The beatitudes of Rick Santorum
by Kathleen Parker
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Rick Santorum can't seem to win for losing, no matter what he does.

The U.S. senator from Pennsylvania could save AIDS babies in Africa, end genocide in Darfur and put welfare mothers to work in his own office -- and he'd still be despised by a sizable number of those who hope Democrat Robert Casey Jr. will defeat him come November.

Come to think of it, Santorum has tried all those things mentioned above, with some success, but often at great political cost. He has worked for global AIDS relief with Bono, the U2 rock star and one of Santorum's more unlikely fans. For his AIDS efforts, Santorum earned the contempt (and veiled threats) of some in the abstinence-only, family-values crowd.

Santorum has been a leader in trying to stop genocide in Sudan, which he views as a front in the war against ideological Islam -- and has sponsored every major piece of legislation created toward that end.

At home in Pennsylvania, he put five welfare mothers to work in his own offices while leading the movement that resulted in the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, signed by President Clinton.

Santorum, in other words, is one of those rare politicians who puts his money where his mouth is -- even though his usual supporters turn on him as a result. And yet his staunch Roman Catholicism has earned him a reputation in some quarters as a weirdo. If Santorum is ``too Catholic,'' he has company in his opponent, who is also a Catholic and a near-mirror image of Santorum on most of the hot-button issues.

Both men are pro-life and both oppose same-sex marriage, though Casey allows some slight variations. Casey says marriage is between a man and women, but he opposes state and federal amendments protecting traditional marriage. He also supports civil unions, gay adoption and benefits for partners in non-traditional unions.

Like Santorum, Casey opposes public funding for abortion; both support state funding of contraception; both make abortion exceptions for rape and incest, though this is a recent compromise position for Santorum. Finally, both support the legal protection for human life from conception, and both want to see Roe v. Wade overturned.

The two candidates don't even differ significantly on the war in Iraq. Casey says he would have voted for the war, although based on false evidence. Both Casey and Santorum oppose a deadline for withdrawal.

There is one area where the two men diverge -- welfare reform -- which is the current topic of the television ads now running in Pennsylvania. Santorum helped make it happen; Casey opposed it.

To be honest, the ads are a little cringe-making. If Hollywood loves what Spike Lee calls the ``Magic Negro'' -- those spiritual characters who keep popping up to show white folks ``the way'' -- politicians can't help resist demonstrating their virtue with African-Americans helped by ``the man.'' No offense intended toward the women who appear in the ads.

The Santorum ad didn't come from his campaign, but was produced by a 527 group named ``Softer Voices,'' a conservative women's consortium trying to highlight the senator's record of helping women. The ad features a former welfare mother, Bylly Jo Morton, whom Santorum employed and helped attend college. Today, she's a teacher boasting three college degrees.

Not to be outdone, Casey worked a little magic himself and managed to produce a former fifth-grade student from his days as a teacher. Now a grown woman, Arkecia Morris fondly recalls how Casey encouraged her to read in a loud voice because he wanted the world to hear her. And the world did hear her. And I suppose the world was glad.

The latest Pennsylvania poll, conducted Sept. 22-24 by Strategic Vision Political, shows Casey leading Santorum 50 percent to 40 percent, with 10 percent undecided. It's not clear what voters will gain by electing Casey given that the two candidates are seemingly indistinguishable, but there's no guessing what they'll lose in Santorum.

Love him or hate him, for the past decade, Santorum has been the conservatives' point man for the world's disenfranchised -- the poor, the sick and the meek. If he loses, the face of compassionate conservatism will be gone.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Kathleen Parker is a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Kathleen Parker's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Compassionate conservatism?
What is this 'compassionate conservatism' of which you speak?

Beyond that, the voters of Pennsylvania will not be getting a Santorum clone if they elect Casey to the Senate. If Casey wins, you can bet your bottom dollar that he will prove himself to be a typical liberal Democrat when he hits DC. He knows where his bread is buttered and he WILL tow the party line in the Senate. If not, it will be a Lieberman situation all over again.

As for Santorum being on the AIDS bandwagon with Bono, that's all well and good. But could it be that the 'abstinence only, family values crowd' that Kathleen sneeringly refers to are Catholics that think that Mr. Santorum is outside the teachings of the Vatican when he advocates for contraception?

Too bad
I have to admit if Santorum ends up losing his seat I'll be a bit sad to see him go (although as an aside I think the Democratic Party is in dire need of more moderate voices-of course, as Flagwaver pointed out, he could very well end up showing more left-leaning tendencies once in office). One of the main reasons I'm reluctant to go over to the other side, so to speak, is what I perceive to be the lack of true conservatives who stay true to their convictions in the Republican Party, and it seems he was, for the most part, one of those people. We need more of them.

The more important debate
Santorum has been on record through speech and debate on two issues of critical importance. He has been supportive of the Administration's efforts in combatting Islamoterrorism. He also is against any amnesty provisions for illegals.

Santorum's performance in the debates with Casey is not indicative of glib posturing. He votes his convictions that have been shaped by real knowledge and experience.

On the other hand, Casey had for a long time been nebulous or downright silent on his positions, waiting for his political machine and its national party funding to tell him what he thinks. Casey is relying on a powerful state teachers' union, the anti-Wal*Mart crowd of "progressives," and senior citizens who can never have enough Medicare subsidies in their prescription plans to win this election.

Rick
I've been dreading the results of this election for a while. If I have a hero in congress, it would have to be Rick Santorum. There are areas in which I disagree with him, but at least he is real!

Kozinator13
Also as a conservative Christian, I must respectfully disagree with you about enforcing beliefs by statute.

I believe it is morally wrong to steal, and I want that belief enforced by statute. I also believe it is wrong to set fire to other's property, to persecute the innocent, or that someone who engages in a mass murder spree should himself, when caught, forfeit his life. All these moral beliefs, and more, I honestly want to see enforced by statute.

I believe the law has always, always been a reflection of the moral beliefs of the society it governs. Yes, there has ever been a dance between tolerance and personal liberty on one hand, and that which society deems so immoral that it must be stopped on the other. But, to me, that is the life blood of democracy.

Rick Santorum is a man who understands the morality of the law, and where his morality comes from. If he loses, I will grieve more for what that says about our society.

The abortion issue
I am so disappointed by the fact that Mr. Santorum has exceptions (ie., incest and/or rape ) to his stance against abortion, if, in fact he really does. The child concieved from the act of either rape or incest is as innocent as are all the other babies in the womb.
The big question is: WHO gives Life!!!
What is really hurting Mr. Santorum is his earlier support of Arlen Spector. He chose to support the "bad" over the "good". A huge mistake, wouldn't you agree???

Can't forget disappointment
If I still lived in Pennsylvania, I would vote for Santorum again, but with less passion than before.

His public opposition to the conservative candidate, and strong support of liberal Spector in that primary has tarnished his image for us purists. This sort of behavior dilutes enthusiasm for those of us with memories, and could keep some home on election day.

"Compassionate Conservatism" ---Isn't.
"If he loses, the face of compassionate conservatism will be gone." And the problem is?

There is NOTHING "compassionate" or "Conservative" about using the force of the state to redistribute wealth. It is not a just or moral use of the force of government. It is theft under color of law, under color of right. The force of government tramples the property rights of the individuals from whom the exaction is extorted under credible threat of lien and levy of private property. The Internal Revenue code and the IRS are tools of government funded "charity." Charity is the exclusive purview of the individual. It is not within the proper purview of the Federal Government. The words of Pope Leo XIII are instructive:

"... To own goods privately, as We saw above, is a right natural to man, and to exercise this right, especially in life in society, is not only lawful, but clearly necessary. "It is lawful for man to own his own things. It is even necessary for human life." [10] But if the question be asked: How ought man to use his possessions? the Church replies without hesitation: "As to this point, man ought not regard external goods as his own, but as common so that, in fact, a person should readily share them when he sees others in need. Wherefore the Apostle says: 'Charge the rich of this world...to give readily, to share with others'." [11] No one, certainly, is obliged to assist others out of what is required for his own necessary use or for that of his family, or even to give to others what he himself needs to maintain his station in life becomingly and decently: "No one is obliged to live unbecomingly." [12] But when the demands of necessity and propriety have been met, it is a duty to give to the poor out of that which remains. "Give that which remains as alms." [13] These are duties not of justice, except in cases of extreme need, but of Christian charity, which obviously cannot be enforced by legal action...."
--Pope Leo XII, Rerum Novarum, May 15, 1891

Notice the repeated use of the phrases "to give" and "to share." The Pope did not advocate the use of the power of taxation to fund charity and he specifically denounced the use of legal action such as taxation.

Rick Santorum is free to give all or a portion of his salary or net worth to the charity of his choice. He is not free to redistribute my tax dollars to his pet charity, in the name of "compassionate conservatism."

Santorum vs. Casey
I've been a Santorum voter. I also voted for
Casey's father when he ran for Governor of PA.
I am a pro-life Catholic.

I can't vote for young Casey. If he had run as
an Independent, maybe. The democratic party
wouldn't let his dad (Gov. Casey) speak at the
democratic convention. I'd be damned if I'd
help out a party that did that to my old man.

As for Santorum. He helped my mother, and
thousands of other retirees, lose their prescrip-
tion drug plans (good plans) by forcing them to
join the much more costly MedicareRx Drug Plan.
The plan that my mother belonged to dropped
everyone, and then this same plan that dropped
all these retirees was allowed to become a member
in the MedicareRx Drug Plan.

My family contacted Senator Santorum's office by
phone and letter. We also contacted Cong. Curt
Weldon's office by phone and letter. My family
were supporters of Santorum and Weldon. To this
day, months after these contacts, we have yet to
hear anything from Santorum, or Weldon. And so,
you guessed it, I won't be voting for Santorum
and Weldon. For goodness sake, all we wanted
was a letter saying that they cared, that they'd
do something about preventing Prescription Plans
from dropping it's members and then reaping huge
profits by charging premiums and high proces for
prescription medication.

I won't be voting for Casey, but I won't be
voting for Santorum or Weldon, either.

Rick Santorum
I am a conservative. Santorum is exactly the kind of Republican that conservatives are sick of. During the last Pennsylvania senator's Republican Primary race, he supported Arlen Spector over the conservative challenger, Pat Toomey. That was not a pragmatic choice, it was a betrayal of principle. If you betray your stated principles, it shows you don't really have any. Santorum's conservatism, like that most Republicans, is not a belief, it is a position, a brand differentiation. It is his packaging. Santorum views conservatism merely as his marketing niche. I hope he loses. We are tired of Republicans like him, no matter how conservative he pretends to be.

Did anyone tell Laura Ingraham?
Isn't Santorum one of the biggest backers of the immigration/close the borders issue?

If yes, then something is wrong as Ingraham has assured us that this issue will make or break Republicans.

If no, then quick call Santorum and tell him to get off the GOP/support Bush wagon and on to the "BUT MONKEY--I support Bush BUT" Ingraham train.

How much do you want to bet that there IS a difference between Casey when it comes to the immigration issue--and I am sorry but as much as I hate the race card, for most people the fact that the GOP wants to close the Mexican but NOT the Canadian borders, makes this "national security issue" sounds racist.

As I've said before...3 issues is what MOST voters care about...no attacks on US soil...great economy...and a move toward sanity in our values. In all 3 issues, the GOP is winning.

When we're not in a fight for our lives...when the elites aren't trying to split up the nation and yes our party...when there is some parity in the media...THEN you can talk about things like immigration (without tagging on the trump card of "national security), pork spending, working with Democrats and foreign leaders, and changing the education system.

When there is peace, you talk change. When there is war and upheaval...you talk about stability.

Simple...Sanity 103


Mark M
I agree - it didn't look very principled to traipse around with Bush in support of the loathsome, reptilian Specter. Nationally, conservatives were stoked at the possibility of his political demise, and consequently money and support flowed into Toomey's coffers from around the country. Bush may have been obligated to show up for Specter, but Santorum wasn't - he just looked like a conspiring assassin. Together, they tipped the scales and lured enough votes away from the very principled Toomey to save the very leftist Specter.

Just look at how Specter's acted since - and at how much help (for whatever it's worth) Santorum's gotten from him and Bush (for whatever it's worth). Now Rick's going back to right, saying all the right things, expecting the conservatives to fall dutifully back into line behind him - but this time the well might be just a little too dry. I wonder at how much he now regrets ever having compromised and debased himself on Specter's behalf.

WELL SAID!
Mark M and Conman......

I'm glad someone else sees that for what it was: An unforgiveable betrayal. There is a spirited "debate" going on right now on grassrootspa on this very subject. Here's a link:
http://www.grassrootspa.com/blog/?p=10759

A few thoughts regarding Santorum
Why punish Pennsylvania and America because Santorum isn't a perfect conservative; will it really be better if Santorum loses and the Senate ends up in the hands of Kennedy and Schumer, etc? Santorum knows, as did the founders of this country to a man including Jefferson, that public Christian virtue alone would preserve it from being torn apart from within as now seems to be happening. Santorum also knows that the law is the measure of public virtue; that what the law permits it promotes.

And one thing more
If Specter had lost the primary he would have campaigned against Toomey in the general election and Toomey would have lost anyway. The way to get a more conservative Senate isn't to keep throwing out Senators who are less than perfect and exchanging them for more liberal ones; this just plays into the hands of the Democrats.

FortyFive
Don't get me wrong - given the choice between Carey and Santorum, it's Rick hands down. However, as a previous poster stated, it wouldn't be passionate support - as none of it is now.

Santorum reflects a characteristic that seems to be endemic among GOP Senators, probably based on the fact that they're insulated from public approval for five of their six year terms (best reason for repealing the 17th amendment) - their despicable penchant for engaging in despicable, self aggrandizing, Machiavellian machinations - something akin to arrogant political royalty.

It's only the sixth year that they begin to act and talk conservatively - Specter is famous for pulling off this Jekyll/Hyde act.

Also, if Toomey had won the primary, it wouldn't have mattered what Specter did. Toomey'd have won the election - he had the momentum and national financial support behind him. But he also had something that people of both sides respect - integrity. He promised to limit his terms and kept that promise.

deserves to lose
Name-calling isn't an argument. Democrats must love this; their politicians can't get in trouble with their own voters except under the most extreme circumstances, and Republicans go around eating their own young for being politicians. So go ahead, cut off your right hand to spite your arm. It won't make anything better, but will make things a lot worse for a long time to come. If Santorum loses, it will drive more Republicans into the middle or left to survive? That'll show 'em.

Beatitudes of Rick Santorum
Kathleen Parker, in “The beatitudes of Rick Santorum” calls Senator Santorum “one of those rare politicians who puts his money where his mouth is.” Unfortunately, Parker misinforms her readers (some of them Pennsylvania voters) by equating Santorum and Casey. According to Parker, Casey and Santorum, are both Catholic, and “both…pro-life and both oppose same-sex marriage, though Casey allows for some slight variations.” She continues, “Like Santorum, Casey opposes funding for abortion”, both support legal protection for human life from conception, and both want to see Roe V. Wade overturned.”

Nice try with the Casey-whitewash Kathleen, but a chasm the size of the Grand Canyon separates the two. Yes, Senator Santorum has “put his money where his mouth is” by sponsoring, co-sponsoring and promoting pro-life legislation. Santorum’s successes include The Unborn Victims of Violence Act (also know as the Lacy and Connor Law) and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act to prevent infanticide. The brightest jewel in the crown of Santorum’s pro-life successes, is the hard-fought and won, Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. It will end the inhuman practice of brutally aborting a viable infant who has been partially delivered. These are but a few of Santorum’s pro-life efforts.

Casey, with no pro-life legislation to his credit will likely never have any. Casey has said abortion would not be his focus in Congress. (Carrie Budoff, Unlikely Allies are Sizing Up Casey", The Philadelphia Inquirer, July 3, 2005.) Are we to believe Casey wants Roe v. Wade overturned if he will take no action to limit abortion when he has the power to do so?

Casey, claims to support legal protection for human life from conception but has supported the sale of “Plan B” without a prescription. “Plan B” has three modes of action, one of which according to the FDA’s own web site, “prevents implantation” of the new human life. Santorum opposed “Plan B”.

Concerning same sex marriage, we must again contrast Casey’s meaningless “opposition” to an issue and Santorum’s convictions that result in action. Santorum, is a co-sponsor of the Senate version of the Federal Marriage Amendment and has defended his position in public forums. Casey simply calls “same sex marriage’ by another name, “civil unions” and supports that Casey has accepted $80,000 from the radical homosexual group, Human Rights Campaign, (Bob Casey for Pennsylvania Committee Quarterly Report, Oct. 15, 2005), Casey supports homosexual adoption according to a 2004 Archdiocese of Philadelphia candidate questionnaire. Casey also addressed extremist homosexual rights activists in Philadelphia according to a Feb. 19, 2006 AP article. Wow, that’s some slight variation Kathleen!
Sue Cirba








Other issues have jeopardized Santorum
Unique to PA politics is the midnight pay-grab green-lighted by Rendell at the state level. A "throw the bums out" mindset created a backlash against most incumbents at any level of government representation regardless of their records of achievement. Casey has been realizing the fruits of this thoughtless discarding of some meritorious politicians, Santorum being one of them. It is not merit that has given Casey his poll numbers but less than critical thinking of the PA voters to distinguish whom to discard and whom to keep.

Appeal
Santorum is a near perfect Senator. He is guided more by his conscience and duty to country than by interest in re-election.

His defeat would be a severe blow to the United States and a tribute to the fact that ignorance is the friend of the monarch.

A disagreement on one or two issues is poor justification to turn to the other side. The difference is as night to day or heaven to the other choice
Pray think carefully before casting your vote.


PA Clout
I have reservations about re-electing Senator Santorum. But none which are that serious to lead me to dump him and the clout he brings to PA for a newbie with no provan track record and no desire to let you know where he stands.

Senator Santorum is also the only elected representative who has ever answered letters and email I have sent to his office. Murtha and Spector did not answer any.

When you vote, just remember that Casey had to be recruited for this race and will owe the party machine big time if he is elected.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.