Rick Santorum Santorum's answer on NDAA really surprised me since he was fine w all parts of Patriot Act

[sailingaway]

etc Here is his record on Homeland security:


Rick Santorum on Homeland Security

http://ontheissues.org/2012/Rick_Santorum_Homeland_Security.htm

 

[Intoxiklown]

I'll be honest, this shocked me to. However, I can't wonder how genuine it really was. Call me kooky, but we're getting to that stage where people lika to pander to da votes.....

 

[Brett85]

The NDAA bill is ten times worse than anything contained in the Patriot Act. I don't support the Patriot Act, but the NDAA bill makes the Patriot Act look mild in comparison.

 

[Cutlerzzz]

I believe Santorum. He is dumb enough not to see the inconsistency.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

What surprised me was that Romney came out solidly for it, as written. I was almost sure that the conservative party would like to halt such a blatant robbery of the powers a president is not supposed to have under the Constitution. It surprised me that even such a drastic measure as indefinite detention with no trial, something used only by dictators until now, could possibly be acceptable enough to Republicans that flip-flop Romney would take the position FOR the bill that passed in Barack Obama's Congress and was signed into law by his own hand. In fact, Romney's answer surprised me even more than Rick Santorum's answer. I was little more than RELIEVED at Rick Santorum's answer because he had enough backbone to stand for the Constitution on the most blatant override of American's civil liberties EVER and not be called a traitor.

 

[TheTexan]

Color me shocked also. As far as lesser of two evils goes... I'd rather see Santo take the office over the Romster because of this.

 

[low preference guy]

Santorum is pandering of course.

 

[Moo2400]

I'll admit, I fully expected Santorum to answer in favor of the NDAA and Romney to answer somewhat in favor of the NDAA but vague enough so that there's enough wiggle room to retract anything unpopular associated with what he said (ie. "I think we need all the tools we can get to fight terrorism in the United States"). So both surprised me. I'm not sure whether Santorum is pandering or not, but I doubt he is. Thing is, what he says is often very different from what he does, so I can still seem him signing the NDAA if it was him.

 

[JJ2]

Actually, if you listened carefully, Santorum did not oppose the indefinite detention part of the NDAA in total. It was unfortunate that Paul let Santorum try to co-opt the issue and make it look like he too opposed the NDAA, when he was only opposing the "no lawyer/trial" part!

 

[down-under]

There is a tube video of him uploaded 11 days ago explaining why he is against the NDAA bill:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oLcn2NQYvM

 

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

What surprised me was that Romney came out solidly for it, as written. I was almost sure that the conservative party would like to halt such a blatant robbery of the powers a president is not supposed to have under the Constitution. It surprised me that even such a drastic measure as indefinite detention with no trial, something used only by dictators until now, could possibly be acceptable enough to Republicans that flip-flop Romney would take the position FOR the bill that passed in Barack Obama's Congress and was signed into law by his own hand. In fact, Romney's answer surprised me even more than Rick Santorum's answer. I was little more than RELIEVED at Rick Santorum's answer because he had enough backbone to stand for the Constitution on the most blatant override of American's civil liberties EVER and not be called a traitor.

He even defended Obama.

 

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Of course, Santorum went on in the debate to try to say Dr. Paul is anti-gun

People may be suckers sometimes, but that was as dumb as Romney above. I predict both candidates lost many former supporters who just woke up to who they actually are.

Everytime one of these candidates does something like this, people remember what other people told them months ago about those cadidates.

 

[The Goat]

Santorum disagreed with not having access to a lawyer or trial.

So you would have to assume that he agrees with American being a battle field. And he believes that the MILITARY should be able to detain American citizens in America.

Can't say that feel much better about his views. their just not quite as bad as romney.

 

[Brett85]

Romney's position on this issue and others that he spouted during the debate cemented in my mind that there's no possible way I could ever vote for him. I thought there might be a chance that Ron's growing support would make him move closer to Ron on the issues, but obviously that's not going to happen.

No One But Paul.

 

[RockEnds]

I was surprised by Santorum's answer as well, but did he answer the question? I don't recall whether he said he would or would not have signed the bill, only that he believed American citizens should have access to a lawyer.

ETA: What really surprised me was that the question was asked during a debate.

 

[erowe1]

I think Santorum sees Glenn Beck's audience as his base now. So he has to say whatever he thinks they want to hear.

 

[erowe1]

The NDAA bill is ten times worse than anything contained in the Patriot Act.

But in Santorum's worldview, what you consider 10 times worse is 10 times better.

 

[sailingaway]

The NDAA bill is ten times worse than anything contained in the Patriot Act. I don't support the Patriot Act, but the NDAA bill makes the Patriot Act look mild in comparison.

It does, but this is absolutely contrary to his tack on everything else. I think he is responding to what is popular, and would respond to a different swing of what is popular, tomorrow.

 

[Zap!]

I really wanted Perry and Newt to get to answer the question. My guess is Newt loves it, while Perry's position is similar to Santorum's.

 

[crh88]

I really wanted Perry and Newt to get to answer the question. My guess is Newt loves it, while Perry's position is similar to Santorum's.

That's what I was thinking as well.