TPMDC

Rick Santorum: I'm Not Sweating The CPAC Straw Poll

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!

Share

Former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

Share

Twitter Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

Former Sen. Rick Santorum, the Pennsylvania Republican who's currently in the opening phases of a run for the presidency, told TPMDC today that the CPAC presidential straw poll, the results of which are due tonight, is far from his mind as he works the conservative crowd at this year's conference.

"Nothing," Santorum said flatly when I asked him what he's done to win the straw poll, which pundits often point to as an early gauge of a potential GOP nominee's support with the conservative base of the party. Santorum said he's not paying attention to the poll, which he appears on for the first time this year.

It's likely at least one other presidential candidate at CPAC has a very different take on the straw poll than Santorum does. Mitt Romney, who spoke here on Thursday, has won the last three CPAC straw polls by campaigning hard among the supporters here. Romney, whose first steps onto the national political stage were marked with criticism that the former Massachusetts governor was not conservative enough to be the GOP nominee, has used the staw poll victory to bolster his claims that he carries the conservative mantle.

Santorum, of course, doesn't have a problem selling his conservative credentials to Republican voters. During his more than a decade representing Pennsylvania in Congress, Santorum was a social conservative firebrand, at the forefront of the "family values" movement of the 1990s.

Speaking with reporters after he addressed the CPAC crowd this morning, Santorum continued to occupy the far right lane of the social policy highway. As about the current push to eliminate the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy and allow homosexuals to serve openly in the armed forces, Santorum said he worried what changing the policy might do for military readiness.

Santorum said he's heard advocates of eliminating DADT say that if homosexuals weren't allowed to serve, the military would lose 13% of its active-duty personnel. "I have doubts if it would be 13%," he said. Santorum added that he thought that the military could suffer more losses from heterosexuals who would quit if forced to serve side-by-side with open homosexuals.

Which is not to say that Santorum thinks that homosexuals shouldn't serve at all. He just thinks the current policy requiring them to hide their sexuality while in uniform for the military than a shift to serving openly. That's not the take on DADT offered by some of the nation's highest-ranking military leaders, who have advocated for an end to DADT.

But Santorum said he questions that opinion, telling reporters he fears those leaders are worried more about doing what's "politically correct" than giving an honest take on DADT. He said he thinks the upcoming Pentagon review of the policy might not be enough to get the truth about what eliminating the policy might mean for the American military.

In his speech to CPAC this morning, Santorum outlined his concerns about the DADT review, as Dave Weigel reports.

"I'm not so sure that we have now so indoctrinated the officer corps in this country that they can't see straight to make the right decision," Santorum said to the crowd, according to Weigel.

He called for a outside panel of experts to review DADT when speaking with reporters after the speech. "I'm suspect of what this analysis might be," he said of the Pentagon review.

As for his presidential run, Santorum may not be concerned about the CPAC straw poll, but he's certainly worried about saying anything bad about Iowa and New Hampshire. He'll be visiting both states soon, and seemed extremely eager to talk them up with reporters today.

"They're America's HR department," he said. "They're a cross-section of the nation."

Comments (33) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (0)

February 20, 2010 12:24 PM   

Ev, is it more exciting or disturbing to meet a person like Santorum? It just seems like it would be so creepy.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 12:42 PM    in reply to Jorge

He is incredibly creepy and he got slaughtered in PA, with the Alabama T in the middle. He didn't even win the Alabama T. The guy is a dangerous creep.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 12:41 PM   

Iowa and New Hampshire are a cross-section of the country? WTF. Nothing against Iowa and New Hampshire, but they sure as sh*t are not a cross-section of the country. The population of the US is 38% minority. The populations of Iowa and New Hampshire are, what, less than 1%. Iowa is predominantly agriculture and New Hampshire is, I don't know what, the bulk of the population is a suburb of Boston maybe. Cross-section my a**.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 21, 2010 1:25 PM    in reply to Michael A

LMAO

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 1:19 PM   

Am I the only one who thinks that anybody who would quit the military because of DADT being repealed shouldn't let the door hit them in the ass on the way out? Maybe there'd be less sexual assault in the ranks if the uber-macho meatheads left...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 1:30 PM    in reply to Matt Jones

Good point. They can't handle a gay person, but they are supposed to kill the 9 foot tall islamo-fascist ninja warriors? That coward would be a risk to his or her unit and should be out anyway.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 1:31 PM   

Rick Santorum, c. 1947:

Santorum added that he thought that the military could suffer more losses from whites who would quit if forced to serve side-by-side with blacks.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 21, 2010 1:26 PM    in reply to commie atheist

LMAO

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 2:05 PM   

Santorum..isn't that where they put crazy people?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 2:10 PM   

I would jump for joy if the GOP race came down to Santorum or Palin. Santorum is like the distilled essence of smugness, totally oblivious to his own hypocrisy, and filled to the brim with half-witted right wingisms. The Palin of the South, in other words.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 2:58 PM    in reply to Headlight

So we get Palin/Santorum !! Wow that is some thick batshit !

As far as gays in the military, any guy or gal so freaked out that there is a gay person in the room that they have to quit should never ever be in the military to begin with. If they cannot handle something so petty why the fuck would you give them a gun? These would be the biggest assholes of all and troop morale would be greatly enhanced by getting rid of them.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 3:46 PM    in reply to hollywood

Either Palin/Santorum, or Palin/Tucker Carlson -- I don't know what made me think of him, except that he is a kind of chubby version of Santorum

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 2:55 PM   

Santorum and JD Hayworth making a comeback? Its like Dracula rising from his coffin.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 21, 2010 1:28 PM    in reply to JohnW1141

What about Newt & Cheney?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 3:49 PM   

Like the Afghan version, the American Taliban rises again. Santorum's narrow, judgmental world view would complement Palin's psychotic vision perfectly.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 3:55 PM   

Not sweating it.....

As long as I can score a gig on FOX, life is good.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 4:02 PM   

Rick "man on dog" Santorum opposing DADT? Can't imagine that!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 4:14 PM   

I thought Ricky lived in Leesburg Virginia... I saw him in the Leesburg Target a few days after he lost his last election. He was completely ignored and anonymous. Probably there to buy dog food.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 21, 2010 10:28 AM    in reply to glattonfolly

For his secret man-on-dog sessions.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 4:21 PM   

At least Rick Santorum is consistent in his vile views:

Wed Jul 13, 2005 at 09:33:29 AM PST
Senator Kennedy went to the floor this morning and responded to Senator Rick Santorum's verbal attack on the people of Boston. Santorum earlier stated that he was not surprised that the child abuse associated with the Catholic Church was focused in Boston, with its rampant liberalism. He repeated this statement in an interview at the Capitol on Tuesday.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/7/13/123329/182

Here are his words on Catholic Online in 2002 -- words he has stood by, in the intervening years:

It is startling that those in the media and academia appear most disturbed by this aberrant behavior, since they have zealously promoted moral relativism by sanctioning "private" moral matters such as alternative lifestyles. Priests, like all of us, are affected by culture. When the culture is sick, every element in it becomes infected. While it is no excuse for this scandal, it is no surprise that Boston, a seat of academic, political and cultural liberalism in America, lies at the center of the storm.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20050811.html

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 4:25 PM   

Santorum added that he thought that the military could suffer more losses from heterosexuals who would quit if forced to serve side-by-side with open homosexuals.

Which is not to say that Santorum thinks that homosexuals shouldn't serve at all. He just thinks the current policy requiring them to hide their sexuality while in uniform for the military than a shift to serving openly. That's not the take on DADT offered by some of the nation's highest-ranking military leaders, who have advocated for an end to DADT.


Santorum is completely oblivious ro reality, which makes him a true Conservative.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 5:02 PM    in reply to we r all husseins

Santorum seems to be saying that there are many closested homophobes who are afraid to come out about their true feelings.

It must be awful to have to live that way.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

mJJ

user-pic

February 20, 2010 6:37 PM    in reply to we r all husseins

Frankly, I am all for the repeal of DADT. What I find so strange is the moral relativism of these guys blabbing about a probable change. My grandson says that when he was in the military during the Vietnam conflict that he often had to listen to the most disgusting descriptions of heterosexual sexual behavior brags. When the army stops heterosexual hitters by a DADT rule, and only then, will I even consider the DADT law to be fair as it exists now.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 5:42 PM   

Mr "Man on Dog" speaks.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 6:51 PM   

If a serviceman is such a weenie that the prospect of serving alongside an (identified) nancy boy or two gives him the heebie jeebies, do we really want our government to issue firearms to someone so lily livered? Man up, for heavens sake!!

That having been said: Run, Ricky, Run!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 8:07 PM   

Hmmm he wasn't pushing his Man on Dog Sex Theory? That was his signature issue at one time. How times have changed.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 10:32 PM   

Really screwed the pooch this time Rick. The country is not lacking for a right-wing light-weight at the moment.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 20, 2010 10:44 PM   

Such are so many in politics, grandiose feelings of their worth. A bit of humble pie, even if an illusion, would help in seeing him as worthwhile. So many of them prove the Peter Principle. It's like something happens when they get a taste of adulation, they no longer seem to notice when it stops.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 21, 2010 10:05 AM   

That's awesome. Pricky from DC says the entire office corps of the US military is brainwashed and unable to make important decisions.

Stop at nothing to stop this freak.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 21, 2010 10:19 AM   

In that photo, Santorum looks like Tenniel's illustration of the Mad Hatter, without the hat.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 21, 2010 1:52 PM   

Dan Savage of of Savage Love" has the best description of "santorum" It is the frothy mix of lubricant and fecal matter of anal sex.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

February 22, 2010 7:35 AM   

Everything that Santorum says or does, as well as the way he looks, screams "creepy". He is among the most off-putting of conservatives, in general a very off-putting group.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Joe

user-pic

February 22, 2010 8:48 AM   

Every time ol Prick Santorum opens his mouth, he loses another 50,000 votes!

And that's a good thing! :-)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on