Monday, February 13, 2012
George Will on Why Ron Paul is Right About Foreign Policy and Mitt Romney is Wrong
George Will on Why Ron Paul is Right About Foreign Policy and Mitt Romney is Wrong
Writes George Will:
Few things so embitter a nation as squandered valor, hence Americans, with much valor spent there, want Iraq to master its fissures. But with America in the second decade of its longest war, the probable Republican nominee is promising to extend it indefinitely.
Mitt Romney opposes negotiations with the Taliban while they "are killing our soldiers." Which means: No negotiations until the war ends, when there will be nothing about which to negotiate…
The U.S. defense budget is about 43% of the world's total military spending more than the combined defense spending of the next 17 nations, many of which are U.S. allies. Are Republicans really going to warn voters that America will be imperiled if the defense budget is cut 8% from projections over the next decade? In 2017, defense spending would still be more than that of the next 10 countries.
Do Republicans think it is premature to withdraw up to 7,000 troops from Europe two decades after the Soviet Union's death? About 73,000 will remain, most of them in prosperous, pacific, largely unarmed and utterly unthreatened Germany. Why do so many remain?
Since 2001, the United States has waged war in three nations, and some Republicans appear ready to bring the total to five, adding Iran and Syria. (The Weekly Standard, of neoconservative bent, regrets that Obama "is reluctant to intervene to oust Iran's closest ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.") GOP critics say Obama's proposed defense cuts will limit America's ability to engage in troop-intensive nation-building. Most Americans probably say: Good…
Romney says: "It is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon…" (Leon) Panetta says Iran acquiring nuclear weapons is "unacceptable" and "a red line for us" and if "we get intelligence that they are proceeding with developing a nuclear weapon, then we will take whatever steps necessary to stop it."
What, then, is the difference between Romney and Obama regarding Iran?
Osama bin Laden and many other "high-value targets" are dead, the drone war is being waged more vigorously than ever, and Guantanamo is still open, so Republicans can hardly say Obama has implemented dramatic and dangerous discontinuities regarding counterterrorism. Obama says that even with his proposed cuts, the defense budget would increase at about the rate of inflation through the next decade.
Republicans who think America is being endangered by "appeasement" and military parsimony have worked that pedal on their organ quite enough.
**JP** Latest Jobs & Scholarships in Pakistan and The World, 2012-2-12
| Hello joinpakistan, | February 13, 2012 10:53:12 PM PKT, |
| You're receiving this email because of your in relationship with Socialsindhis.com. If you do not want to receive any email of this type, please unsubscribe. Feel free to forward this email to your friends, groups and networks. | |
| | |
Re: White Supremacists Showcased At CPAC Conservative Conference: Peter Brimelow, Bob Vandervoort
VDARE has been rated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a white
nationalist hate group. Brimelow responded by calling the SPLC a
"treason group."
nationalist hate group. Brimelow responded by calling the SPLC a
"treason group."
On Feb 11, 10:01 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> White Supremacists Showcased At CPAC Conservative Conference
>
> Two white supremacists are set to speak at panels at CPAC, the
> Conservative Political Action Conference that will also feature
> speeches by Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum.
>
> The first white supremacist is Peter Brimelow the owner of the website
> VDare, which is labeled by the SPLC as an anti-immigration hate
> website. VDare has featured the works of noted white supremacists,
> Jared Taylor, Sam Francis, Virginia Abernethy, Kevin MacDonald as well
> as conservative pundits, Michelle Malkin and Pat Buchanan.
>
> Brimelow has been a featured guest on the white supremacist talk show
> "The Political Cesspool" and is a prominent anti-immigration activist
> despite the fact he was born in England. Brimelow will speak on a
> panel called "The Failure of Multiculturalism: How the pursuit of
> diversity is weakening the American Identity."
>
> The other white supremacist is Robert "Bob" Vandervoort who spoke on a
> panel called "High Fences, Wide Gates: States vs. the Feds, the Rule
> of Law & American Identity." Vandervoort works for the site
> ProEnglish.com and also was the organizer for Chicagoland Friends of
> American Renaissance which met regularly with the Chicago Chapter of
> Council Of Conservative Citizens.
>
> American Renaissance is white supremacist organization run by
> notorious racist Jared Taylor that organizes a conference of racists
> including neo-Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan including David Duke and
> Stormfront owner, Don Black. The Council Of Conservative Citizens is
> another white supremacist organization.
>
> More:http://newsone.com/nation/casey-gane-mccalla/white-supremacists-showc...
>
> GOP Presidential Candidates Should Denounce Bigotry of White
> Nationalist Featured at CPAC
> People For the American Way today called on GOP presidential
> candidates to speak out against the inclusion of a white nationalist
> leader this week at CPAC, the Conservative Political Action
> Conference.
>
> The conference—which will be addressed by Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich,
> Rick Santorum and other GOP leaders— will be hosting Peter Brimelow,
> the founder of VDARE, a white nationalist website which frequently
> publishes the works of anti-Semitic and racist writers. Brimelow, an
> immigrant from Great Britain, has expressed fear of the loss of
> America's white majority, blames non-white immigrants for social and
> economic problems and urges the Republican Party to give up on
> minority voters and focus on winning the white vote. He said that a
> New York City subway is the same as an Immigration and Naturalization
> Service waiting room, "an underworld that is not just teeming but also
> almost entirely colored."
>
> "It's shocking that the CPAC would provide a platform for someone like
> Brimelow," said Michael Keegan, President of People For the American
> Way. "Responsible GOP leaders should speak out against the bigotry and
> hatred that Brimelow and VDARE push on a regular basis. That's doubly
> true of anyone who aspires to the presidency of the United States.
> Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum need to make it perfectly
> clear that they won't be silent when they're confronted with racism
> and anti-Semitism."
>
> VDARE has published the work of people like Robert Weissberg, who says
> that black and Hispanic students are responsible for problems in the
> American education system, Marcus Epstein, the Youth for Western
> Civilization leader who karate-chopped a black woman after calling her
> a n****r (and later pled guilty to assault), and J. Philippe Rushton
> of the eugenicist Pioneer Fund.
>
> "The inclusion of Brimelow is all the more galling given the fact that
> another group, GOProud, was excluded from the conference simply for
> advocating equality for gay people," said Keegan. "CPAC should make
> very clear that hatred has no place in our civic discourse."
>
> The Southern Poverty Law Center lists VDARE as a White Nationalist
> hate group and notes that "VDARE.com's archives contain articles like
> 'Freedom vs. Diversity,' 'Abolishing America,' 'Anarcho-Tyranny —
> Where Multiculturalism Leads' and 'Why Immigrants Kill."
>
> More:http://www.pfaw.org/press-releases/2012/02/gop-presidential-candidate...
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
Best Power Point Evah!!!!
WordPress.com
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
If You See Something, Film Something (Recording The Police is a Dangerous but Necessary Thing to Do)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XxlL0I5AWLI
Someone sent me an email telling me about the above video which I
thought was very well made, keep it moving forward.
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
Rusin in FPM: "CAIR's Fight Against Pennsylvania Foreign Law Bill"
 | ||||
| Home | Articles | Blog | About | Donate | ||||
| Please take a moment to visit and log in at the subscriber area, and submit your city & country location. We will use this information in future to invite you to any events that we organize in your area. CAIR's Fight Against Pennsylvania Foreign Law Billby David J. Rusin http://www.islamist-watch.org/9192/cair-fight-against-pennsylvania-foreign-law-bill
  Be the first of your friends to like this.Resistance to a new bill aimed at limiting foreign law in Pennsylvania courts serves as a case study of how Islamists and their allies operate: peddling falsehoods about Shari'a, painting Muslims as victims, and denying that anyone seeks to institutionalize aspects of Islamic law — even as they vigorously promote that very agenda. With similar legislation being debated across the U.S., understanding their tactics is critical. At issue in Pennsylvania is House Bill (HB) 2029, which stipulates that "a tribunal shall not consider a foreign legal code or system which does not grant … the same fundamental liberties, rights and privileges" as guaranteed by the federal and state constitutions. Introduced in November, it follows the American Laws for American Courts (ALAC) model and makes no mention of Shari'a. A preliminary memo sent to legislators last June in the name of Rep. RoseMarie Swanger, HB 2029's chief sponsor, does highlight Islamic law, but she later said that it had been circulated accidentally. Regardless, concerns about Shari'a are warranted due to its many provisions that conflict with the standards of American jurisprudence. For example, it disadvantages women in terms of inheritance, divorce, child custody, and other areas of family law. Shari'a already has shaped numerous cases nationwide, including in Pennsylvania, where one state court decided how assets should be distributed according to Islam. Pushback against HB 2029 has been led by the Philadelphia office of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-PA) and was punctuated by an interfaith press conference (video here) at CAIR-PA headquarters on December 14. The overall campaign reflects CAIR's usual recipe of distortion, victimology, and contradiction between words and deeds. Attacks on bills like HB 2029 begin by sowing confusion about Shari'a. Because Islamic law encompasses virtually every facet of life — governing personal activities such as eating and worship, but also forming an oppressive social and legal structure — suit-and-tie Islamists work to emphasize its unthreatening pieces whenever possible. CAIR-PA executive director Moein Khawaja's suggestion that Shari'a should worry Pennsylvanians no more than halal gyros is a fine example of this technique. Others brazenly misrepresent the unsavory components, as Haider Ala Hamoudi, a University of Pittsburgh law professor, did when he was interviewed by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Hamoudi insisted that women and children would suffer if judges could not consider Shari'a — a stretch, given how it discriminates against women, including in disputes over children. Moving beyond the types of cases that are adjudicated in U.S. courts, he depicted the requirement of testimony by four male witnesses to convict someone of adultery as an exemplar of Islamic enlightenment that protects against false accusations. In practice, however, it can be a nightmare for women in those Muslim countries where the same scriptural passages are interpreted as mandating four witnesses even to prove rape. Robert Spencer further explains, "If the required male witnesses can't be found, the victim's charge of rape becomes an admission of adultery," too often leading to her imprisonment. Hamoudi also contended that harsh punishments used in Iran and elsewhere, like cutting off hands for stealing, have little to do with Shari'a and are "more a matter of identity politics" in response to Western influence. The man deserves credit for artful misdirection, as it is not every day that brutal penalties prescribed by the Koran itself are chalked up to blowback from cultural imperialism. When distortion of Shari'a is insufficient, Islamists and their collaborators characterize Muslims as the targets of a shadowy cabal of "Islamophobes." Hence, Pennsylvanians were treated to Marwan Kreidie, a major figure in the Philadelphia Islamist scene, describing Swanger's faith-neutral bill as "an exercise in discrimination" and claiming that "there's a conspiracy afoot here." CAIR-PA's Khawaja followed up by taking the ad hominem route, trashing HB 2029 as the brainchild of "anti-Muslim, white supremacist David Yerushalmi." See Yerushalmi's recent article for a reply to the typical assaults on his character. Yet no hyperbole topped that of Rabbi Linda Holtzman, who played the Nazi card at CAIR-PA's press conference. "The echoes for me are strong of Germany in the 1930s," she said, "when repeatedly Jewish law was brought forward and defamed in the courts as a means of defaming all of Jewish tradition." Aside from the sheer ugliness of the analogy, Shari'a could be "defamed" only by spreading inaccuracies about it. HB 2029 does not reference Islam or Islamic law, while the memo correctly labels Shari'a as "inherently hostile to our constitutional liberties." Sometimes the truth hurts. Islamists also maintain that bills such as HB 2029 are unnecessary because, they say, there is no attempt by adherents of Islam to undermine the American legal system, but their actions away from the cameras inevitably belie their soothing words. Indeed, not long after it issued a press release dismissing concerns about the advance of Shari'a as "conspiracy theories" to be "mocked," CAIR-PA announced that its 2012 banquet will be headlined by two men who have expressed support for transforming the U.S. into a Shari'a-run state: Siraj Wahhaj and Sherman Jackson. Wahhaj, a radical imam who appeared on a federal prosecutor's "list of unindicted persons who may be alleged as co-conspirators" in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, has warned that "unless America … accepts the Islamic agenda," it will fall. He has talked positively of Islamic law supplanting the U.S. Constitution and opined that "if only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate." Jackson, now a professor at USC, has been equally explicit. Calling him "an outspoken proponent of the Islamist subversion of Western civilization," Cinnamon Stillwell explains that in a book Jackson coauthored, he "proposes that American Muslims approach the 'difficult task of penetrating, appropriating and redirecting American culture' … to 'influence the legal order in America.'" He writes that "once this is done, there are no Constitutional impediments to having these [Islamic] laws applied in the public domain." Jackson even muses about how gradual "changes in American culture" could result in the normalization of barbaric punishments such as stoning and flogging. In short, Islamists do not merely insult the character of those who back bills like HB 2029; they insult the intelligence of all through claims that turn reality on its head and are contradicted by their own actions. Nothing less should be expected. They obfuscate Islamic law and portray Muslims as victims because the facts about Shari'a simply are not palatable to most Americans. Moreover, stealth jihadists shamelessly say one thing and do another because they have faith that the mainstream media will not hold them accountable. How to proceed? Education neutralizes falsehoods, so Americans need to continue the long-term project of informing themselves about Shari'a and the challenge it presents; useful resources may be found at this website. Likewise, all politicians must learn to speak more precisely about Islamic law, carefully distinguishing between practices that are protected by the U.S. Constitution and those that are not, thus minimizing the confusion that Islamists exploit. As for individuals who equate Nazism with defending Americans from foreign laws that infringe on fundamental rights, they should be called out for affronting both history and decency. Citizens also must encourage legislators to press on with these bills despite Islamist propaganda, biased media, and the occasional scolding from their multiculturalism-obsessed counterparts; readers wishing to contact the primary sponsor of HB 2029 may do so here. Finally, as Islamist groups often argue against restrictions on foreign law by denying the existence of any campaign to insinuate Shari'a into American society, their own records of participating in this very movement should be hung around their necks for all to see. Given that much of the opposition to ALAC-inspired efforts throughout the U.S. has been helmed by branches of CAIR — an offspring of the Muslim Brotherhood, which dreams of implementing Islamic law worldwide and describes its mission in North America as "eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within" — the letters, op-eds, and blog posts can practically write themselves. While it is important to wade into the details and answer specific criticisms of bills to curb foreign law, the best defense may be a good offense. Just as Islamists make the supporters of such legislation an issue by smearing them as bigots, those supporters must make the opponents an issue by exposing their rank dishonesty and jihadist objectives, which comprise exactly the kind of subversion that these bills are designed to thwart.
Related Topics: Children, Entertainment / Media, Gender Relations, Government, Halal, Interfaith, Islamic Law (Shari'a), Legal, Lobby Groups, Marriage, Mosques / Imams, Multiculturalism | David J. Rusin This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL. | ||||
| To subscribe to this list, go to http://www.islamist-watch.org/list_subscribe.php |
Print
Send
RSS
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
**JP** Daily Quran and Hadith
Thanks & Best regards,
Imran Ilyas
Cell: 00971509483403
****People oppose things because they are ignorant of them****
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "JoinPakistan" group.
You all are invited to come and share your information with other group members.
To post to this group, send email to joinpakistan@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com.pk/group/joinpakistan?hl=en?hl=en
You can also visit our blog site : www.joinpakistan.blogspot.com &
on facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Join-Pakistan/125610937483197
Re: Norris: Why I chose Newt over Santorum
Its funny. I live in Massachusetts. We were constantly berated
with, "You've had 4 consecutive republican governors . . ."
with, "You've had 4 consecutive republican governors . . ."
Well fisrt of all, only in Massachusetts, could Bill Weld, Paul
Cellucci and Jane Swift be even considered republicans, and Jane Swift
was never elected to anything.
With that caveate, Mitt was our first republican governor since Ed
King, and Ed was a democrat.
Which is inevitabley followed by the, "Romney left Mass in a mess,
bullshit"
Mitt was BEGGED (as in slurppies) by the DEM legislature (we are
talking up of NINETY percent here), to rescue them and our bond rating
(from Junk), by giving him carte blanche Emergency 9c powers - ie,
ANYTHING.
He did, and now they and dems around the country bitch about how he
did it!
Boldface - "He DID"
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
**JP**
Soya Nahi Hoon Mujhe Sula Do Meri Maan
Aa Jaao Mujhe Loori Suna Do Meri Maan
...
Ashk Meri Aankhoon Main Jam Say Gaye Hain
Kerkay Dil Pay Jaber Mujhe Rula Do Meri Maan
Dekho Kitni Bay Tarteeb Ho Gaye Hay Zindagi
Bikhray Hain Meray Baal Bana Do Meri Maan
Aik Karb Say Aashna Rehta Hoon Her Ghadi
Is Dard Ka Ahsaas Mitta Do Meri Maan
Jal Reha Hoon Main Andekhi Aag Main
Chomo Mera Mattha Aag Bujha Do Meri Maan
Bohat Darr Lagta Hay Mujhe Duniya Say
Tum Mujhe Duniya Say Chhupa Do Meri Maan
Thak Gaya Hoon Bohat Duniya Say Ladtay Ladtay
Tum Mujhe Apni Aaghosh Main Panah Do Meri Maan...!!
--
Regards:
Muhammad Ali Raza
Mob. # 03215256419
maraza1984@gmail.com
maraza_1984@yahoo.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "JoinPakistan" group.
You all are invited to come and share your information with other group members.
To post to this group, send email to joinpakistan@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com.pk/group/joinpakistan?hl=en?hl=en
You can also visit our blog site : www.joinpakistan.blogspot.com &
on facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Join-Pakistan/125610937483197
Re: Norris: Why I chose Newt over Santorum
Newt and Santorum are good Christian men, both of whom are passionate
to
fight the war on religion (specifically Christianity) being unleashed
by
the Obama administration. They are also avid supporters of Israel.
---
reason enough to ignore them
to
fight the war on religion (specifically Christianity) being unleashed
by
the Obama administration. They are also avid supporters of Israel.
---
reason enough to ignore them
On Feb 13, 9:34 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/why-i-chose-newt-over-santorum/
>
> WND.COMMENTARYWhy I chose Newt over SantorumExclusive: Chuck Norris asks,
> 'How can alternative to Romney be Romney supporter?'Published: 18 hours ago
> [image: author-image]*by*Chuck Norris <http://www.wnd.com/author/cnorris/>Email
> <cnor...@wnd.com> | Archive <http://www.wnd.com/author/cnorris/>
> Chuck Norris is the star of more than 20 films and the long-running TV
> series "Walker, Texas Ranger." His latest book is entitled The Official
> Chuck Norris Fact
> Book."<http://superstore.wnd.com/books/The-Official-Chuck-Norris-Fact-Book-A...>Learn
> more about his life and ministry at his official website,
> ChuckNorris.com <http://www.chucknorris.com/>.More
> ↓<http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/why-i-chose-newt-over-santorum/print/#>Less
> ↑ <http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/why-i-chose-newt-over-santorum/print/#>
>
> In 2008 when my wife, Gena, and I were on the campaign trail backing former
> Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee for president, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick
> Santorum was fighting to get former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney elected.
> (Listen in this video how Santorum passionately endorsed and elevated Mitt
> in his bid for the Oval Office <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iu50Hb61jVQ>
> .)
>
> Just three years ago in his interview with radio host and conservative
> commentator Laura Ingraham, Santorum also emphatically told millions of
> listening Americans: "If you're a conservative, if you're a Republican,
> there is only one place to go, and that's Mitt Romney."
>
> Why an alleged conservative like Santorum would fight for the flip-flopping
> Massachusetts moderate on the presidential campaign trail, especially in
> light of the fact that Huckabee and even McCain were running then with a
> much clearer conservative record, I will never know.
>
> Yet Santorum now admits that Romney "bragged he's even more liberal than
> Ted Kennedy on social issues."
>
> And the question that keeps coming to my mind now is this: How can the
> "alternative to Romney" also be a Romney supporter?
>
> Newt and Santorum are good Christian men, both of whom are passionate to
> fight the war on religion (specifically Christianity) being unleashed by
> the Obama administration. They are also avid supporters of Israel.
>
> However, in light of the potential global clash outside our country with
> regimes like Iran and Syria, and the ongoing domestic assault within our
> country from the Obama administration, we believe America needs the best of
> the best veterans of political war to lead us forward.
>
> We truly believe Newt's experience, leadership, knowledge, wisdom, faith
> and even humility to learn from his failures (personal and public) can
> return America to her glory days. And he is the best man on the battlefield
> who is able to outwit, outplay and outlast Obama and his billion-dollar
> campaign machine.
>
> While I commend Santorum for some of his stands since leaving Congress,
> like opposing TARP, the stimulus, the Fannie-Freddie bailout and the auto
> bailout, I have a slew of problems with what he did while serving in the
> U.S. Senate from 1995-2007.
>
> As noted by the Club for Growth, Taxpayers for Common Sense, the South
> Carolina Hotline Blog, and other watchdog and news sources, here are the
> reasons that my wife, Gena, and I gave our endorsement to Newt, not
> Santorum:
>
> - Santorum was a serial earmarker, requesting billions of dollars during
> his time in the Senate, and not reversing his position on earmarks until he
> was out of Congress in 2010. As recently as 2009, Rick said, "I'm not
> saying necessarily earmarks are bad. I have had a lot of earmarks. In fact,
> I'm very proud of all the earmarks I've put in bills. I'll defend earmarks."
>
> - Santorum voted for H J Res 47 Debt Limit Increase
> Resolution<http://www.votesmart.org/bill/3272/7739/27054/debt-limit-increase-res...>
>
> - Santorum voted to raise the national debt ceiling five times
>
> - Santorum voted for the 2005 highway bill that included thousands and
> thousands of wasteful earmarks, including the Bridge to Nowhere. In fact,
> according to Club for Growth, "in a separate vote, Santorum had the
> audacity to vote to continue funding the Bridge to Nowhere rather than send
> the money to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina."
>
> - Santorum voted for CAFTA, which removes duties on textile and apparel
> goods traded among participating nations, resulting in nearly ALL
> textile companies leaving the
> South<http://www.votesmart.org/bill/3380/7728/27054/cafta-implementation-bill>
> .
>
> - Santorum voted for Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (though he now says he
> will repeal it), which imposes job-killing federal regulations on
> businesses.
>
> - Santorum voted
> against<http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_...>the
> National Right to Work Act of 1995, which would have repealed
> provisions of federal law that "require employees to pay union dues or fees
> as a condition of employment."
>
> - Santorum voted for taxes in the Internet Access Tax
> Bill<http://www.votesmart.org/bill/3250/7806/27054/internet-access-tax-bill>
>
> - Santorum voted for HR 3448 – Minimum Wage Increase
> bill<http://www.votesmart.org/bill/2784/7831/27054/minimum-wage-increase-bill>,
> which allows punitive damages for injury or illness to be taxed, allows
> damages for emotional distress to be taxed and repeals the diesel fuel tax
> rebate to purchasers of diesel-powered automobiles and light trucks.
>
> - Santorum voted to confirm President Bill Clinton's
> nomination<http://www.votesmart.org/bill/7631/21223/27054/alan-greenspan-federal...>of
> Alan Greenspan to be chairman of the board of governors of the Federal
> Reserve System for a fourth four-year term.
>
> - Santorum voted for Medicare prescription drug benefit known as
> Medicare Part D, though critical of it now. It is the largest expansion of
> entitlement spending since President Lyndon Johnson, which now costs
> taxpayers more than $60 billion a year and has almost $16 trillion in
> unfunded liabilities, according to Club for Growth.
>
> - Santorum voted in 1997 to support the Lautenberg Gun Ban, "which
> stripped law-abiding gun owners of their Second Amendment rights for life,
> simply because they spanked their children or did nothing more than grab a
> spouse's wrist," according to a press release from Dudley Brown, executive
> director of the National Association for Gun Rights.
>
> - Santorum voted in 1999 for a bill "disguised as an attempt to increase
> penalties on drug traffickers with guns … but it also included a provision
> to require federal background checks at gun shows," again according to
> Dudley Brown's release.
>
> - Santorum "came to anti-gun Arlen Specter's defense in 2004 when he was
> down in the polls against pro-gun Republican Pat Toomey. Specter won and
> continued to push for gun control during his years in the Senate," per
> Brown.
>
> - Santorum voted with Barbara Boxer in 2005 on the Gun Lock Requirement
> Amendment<http://www.votesmart.org/bill/7704/21354/27054/gun-lock-requirement-a...>
>
> - Santorum voted for the Firearms Manufacturers Protection
> Bill<http://www.votesmart.org/bill/3392/7775/27054/firearms-manufacturers-...>and
> then flip-flopped and voted against it in S 1805 – Firearms
> Manufacturers Protection
> Bill<http://www.votesmart.org/bill/3254/7776/27054/firearms-manufacturers-...>
>
> - Santorum voted against HR 2356 – Campaign Reform Act of
> 2001<http://www.votesmart.org/bill/3095/7717/27054/campaign-reform-act-of-...>
>
> - Santorum voted for an
> amendment<http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_...>to
> the Communications Act of 1934 that requires television broadcast
> providers to give their lowest rates to political candidates.
>
> - Santorum voted for HR 1 – No Child Left Behind
> Act<http://www.votesmart.org/bill/3087/8426/27054/no-child-left-behind-act>
>
> - Santorum sponsored legislation to force companies to pay laid off
> workers benefits<http://mediacdn.reuters.com/media/us/editorial/pdf/50Things.pdf>
> .
>
> - Santorum worked for an increase in funding big government programs
> like Head Start<http://mediacdn.reuters.com/media/us/editorial/pdf/50Things.pdf>
> .
>
> - Santorum voted for taxpayer money to go to Pennsylvania families for
> their heating
> bills<http://mediacdn.reuters.com/media/us/editorial/pdf/50Things.pdf>
> .
>
> - Santorum introduced and co-sponsored big government health-care
> bills<http://mediacdn.reuters.com/media/us/editorial/pdf/50Things.pdf>
> .
>
> - Santorum voted for HR 796 – the protection of abortion
> clinics<http://www.votesmart.org/bill/5480/21800/27054/abortion-clinic-access...>
>
> - Santorum actively supports the Global Fund, which was created by the
> United Nations to fight HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria, but also
> "channels a large portion of its funds through Planned Parenthood's
> affiliates around the world and through a British group Marie Stopes
> International (the largest chain of abortion mills in the UK, with 66,000
> abortions a year.)… to operate in Cambodia, Fiji, Bangladesh, Sierra Leone,
> Uganda, Burma, Kenya, Tanzania, and other countries," according to the
> pro-life Gerard Health Foundation that provides millions of dollars to
> pro-life groups.
>
> - Santorum boasted of teaming up with Joe Lieberman, Barbara Boxer and
> Hillary Clinton in his 2006 political ad for re-election to the U.S.
> Senate, which he lost to Democrat Bob Casey Jr. by the largest margin of
> victory ever for a Democratic Senate nominee in Pennsylvania and the
> largest margin of victory for a Senate challenger in the 2006 elections.
>
> - Santorum opposed the tea party and its reforms in the Republican Party
> and conservative movement just a couple years ago saying, "I have some real
> concerns about this movement within the Republican party … to sort of
> refashion conservatism. And I will vocally and publicly oppose it."
>
> It's no wonder in January that Rep. Ron Paul accused Santorum of having a
> "very liberal" political record.
>
> I'm also bringing this up now because, if Santorum were to win the
> nomination, Obama will definitely bring this up in his campaign for the
> presidency.
>
> And the question that keeps coming back to my mind about Santorum is: How
> can the "alternative to Romney" also be a Romney supporter?
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)