SantorumBlog

Issues - Fiscal

Archived Posts from this Category

November 9, 2006

Eternal Optimism and the Message of the Election

The message to the Republican Party is clear - reclaim your conservative roots or be condemned to minority status for decades.

The Republicans must immediately begin to convincingly work for the conservative principles which they promised to support when they got elected. As Michael Savage says, Borders, Language, Culture. Republicans had four years to secure the borders - they didn’t do it. Republicans had four years to make English America’s official language - they didn’t do it. Republicans had four years to get the garbage in the media out of our children’s faces - they didn’t do it. Republicans had four years to cut government spending - they didn’t do it.

The result of these failures, combined with the failure to fight back against liberal partisanship and lies, was the bloodbath we saw on Tuesday. President Bush is called every despicable name imaginable every single day, and what does he do about it? He laughs it off. That’s all well and good for Bush, but when he doesn’t go out and explain how he is being slandered, people start to believe those lies. It’s exactly the same with Senator Santorum.

I am optimistic that most Republicans will get the message and clean up their acts. They have two years starting now to prove to America that they’re sorry for breaking their promises, and that they’re now serious about supporting conservative values - which are American values.

I hate to break it to the moonbats who inexplicably continue to troll on this blog and post asinine comments, but America didn’t reject conservatism on Tuesday. America’s conservatives rejected the non-conservative actions of the Republican Party by sitting this election out.

Most Americans want lower taxes. Most Americans want to cut government spending. Most Americans want restrictions on abortion. Most Americans want to secure the borders. As George Will wrote, this election was a defeat for Republicans - not a defeat for conservatism.

Be honest with yourselves, moonbats. You just elected Bob Casey, a man who says he’s pro-life, anti-gay marriage, anti-embryonic stem cell research and pro-gun. Does it sound like you just voted against the “Christian fascists”?

Seven states voted to ban gay marriage on Tuesday. Only one state in which a ban was proposed did it fail - Arizona - and it failed by the slimmest margin. And that’s with the Republicans staying home! So much for the “AmTaliban” being repudiated.

Democrats win elections by pretending to be conservative. Republicans lost this election by not being conservative enough. The Republican Party must embrace conservatism for victory in 2008!

November 6, 2006

Investing in Terror

Filed under: Issues - Fiscal, Issues - National Security — AlexC @ 6:08 pm

Santorum Press Release

    Today on MSNBC, Bob Casey, Jr. denied investing in companies that do business with terrorist-sponsoring states, but yet again Casey is misleading the public. Pension fund money is invested in companies tied to states sponsoring terrorism, and as Treasurer, Casey has done next-to-nothing about it.

    “It’s not surprising that Casey is misleading the public on his abysmal record as State Treasurer just one day after The Philadelphia Inquirer reported Casey had no ‘office days’ from July through September,” said campaign manager Vince Galko. “In 2002, Ed Rendell criticized Casey for running a campaign ‘filled with lies’ about his record. It appears Casey didn’t learn his lesson.”

More of the Same

Filed under: Issues - Fiscal — John Lewandowski @ 4:40 pm

The Dow Jones Industrial Average has gone 2,000 points higher since Election Day 2004,
when Republicans won great and historic victories across the nation

Ignore Democrat Spin; the Bush Economy Is Solid by Kevin Hassett

A Vote For Bob Casey is a Vote for Nancy Pelosi

Ultra-liberal Nancy Pelosi says that she wants to take America back from the “radical right-wing”. Of course, to Pelosi, the “radical right-wing” consists of people who think that we should have some limits on abortion, such as parental notification or a ban on partial-birth abortion. It consists of people who think that voluntary school prayer - free speech - might not be such a bad thing. It consists of people who don’t have a problem with the Ten Commandments hanging in a courtroom or a schoolhouse, because they understand that the Ten Commandments being on the wall doesn’t hurt anyone. It consists of people who think that if you lower taxes, people can keep more of their own money, and then invest that money to result in great federal tax revenues. It consists of people who want judges who obey the law instead of inventing the law.

In the final days of his campaign, Bob Casey chose to spend his time with the House Minority Leader, Rep. Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi wants to be the Speaker of the House, which would make her third in line for the Presidency and give her a great deal more power in our government. In short, this would be a disaster for our nation and for the world.

Nancy Pelosi wants to force her San Francisco values on the entire nation. And no, that’s not just gay marriage, though nearly every state in the Union opposes gay marriage but she would force it on us all anyway.

-It’s also extreme taxation. Taxation which seeks to punish people for being successful, slowing or even reversing our current economic growth. This is America; we don’t punish success here, Pelosi!

-It’s also socialized health care, which gives everyone in a country access to the same pathetic, worthless treatment, but as Pelosi might say, at least it’s free! It’s not exactly “free” since our money will be stolen through taxation to pay for it, but it’s similar to something that is free because we would get what we were paying for. We would have long waits and short visits at the doctor’s office, and rarely would we ever actually see a doctor - instead we’d see an assistant. The quality of American health care would drop dramatically, but Pelosi would be happy, since everyone would be “covered” and taxes would be sky high.

-It’s also taxpayer funded abortion. For years, the pro-choice people have said that we need to stay out of their personal, private decisions. Dishonest liberal like Pelosi, however, aren’t satisfied now that they have legalized abortion on demand. Making complete hypocrites of themselves, they now demand that the American taxpayer fund abortions. We are to be forced to fund something which we will not be allowed to regulate, and the tax dollars of pro-lifers will be used to pay for killing unborn children, with pro-lifers no doubt being called “right wing radicals” if they object.

-It’s the support of judicial activists who think that the Constitution is a living document which changes - and conveniently, it changes according to the personal ideology of the judicial activist. The US Constitution can only be changed by Amendment. Amendments are voted on by Congress. Judges do not and should never have had the power to change the US Constitution, but if Pelosi gets her way, there will be more and more liberal activists on our courts.

-It’s also a hatred of our military and the great liberating work it has done. The politicians of San Francisco despise our troops, and work to undermine and insult them at every turn. Their plan for the war on Islamic fascism is to have a full retreat and then apologize to Osama bin Laden for making him mad. Pelosi would hand the Islamic fascists their greatest victory of all time by surrendering to them Iraq.

Bob Casey and Nancy Pelosi - “Vote Democrat”… if you want higher taxes, socialism, an end to religious freedom, activist judges who legislate from the bench, taxpayer funded abortion, and a policy of surrender in the war on Islamic fascism

November 5, 2006

Five Reasons to Vote for Rick Santorum (And Five Reasons Not to Vote for Bob Casey)

Five Reasons to Vote for Rick Santorum:

1 - The Republican tax cuts supported by Senator Rick Santorum have led the Dow Jones Industrial Average to increase by 2,000 points since the 2004 presidential election. The Dow has been propelled to an all-time high. Unemployment is at its lowest rate in five years. The budget deficit for 2006 is $248 billion - down from $412 billion in 2004. Why is it important to remember the 2004 numbers? Because it shows what progress we’ve made since America went out in force to elect conservative Republican leaders two years ago. It shows that we must do it again, and re-elect Rick Santorum.

2 - The war against Islamic fascism could very well be the most important issue of our time. Senator Santorum has shown that he understands this conflict more than any other Senator. He recognizes that we must secure the borders to prevent Islamic fascists from bringing deadly substances into America. He recognizes that we must encourage the people of Iran to fight for their freedom and put an end to the tyranny in their country, not only for their own sake, but for the sake of the world. He recognizes that we must finish the job in Iraq, because if we allow the Islamic fascists to defeat us there, they will be emboldened like never before.

3 - Senator Santorum is a conservative, no doubt about it, but he is also willing to challenge his conservative colleagues when he disagrees with them, and work with liberals when they agree on an issue. He has worked with Democrats to help fight poverty and AIDS. He has stood up and opposed President Bush’s immigration and Iran policies. While he is a conservative and therefore agrees with the President often, he is not a “rubber stamp” for anyone.

4 - We only need one more originalist Justice on the Supreme Court to undo decades of ideological decisions made by left-wing Justices who abused their power and became judicial activists. Senator Santorum has been a fighter to get originalist judges on all courts - judges who will not make decisions based on their own personal opinions, but rather based on the law. In 2004, Rick Santorum supported the re-election of Senator Arlen Specter, and many conservatives were upset - upset that Specter would block originalists from the Supreme Court. Yet thanks to the influence of his Republican colleagues like Rick Santorum, Senator Specter not only allowed a vote on John Roberts and Sam Alito - he voted in favor of their nominations. Senator Santorum and Senator Specter voted together to put Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Sam Alito on the Supreme Court, two solid originalists who will remain on the Court for decades. We only need one more originalist Justice to have a majority of originalists on the Supreme Court, and that’s why we need to re-elect Rick Santorum.

5 - Agree or disagree with him, you always know where Senator Santorum stands on the issues. Everyone knows that Rick Santorum is pro-life, against euthanasia, and against government funding for emergency contraception and embryonic stem cell research. As a social conservative, I applaud Santorum for his positions on these vital issues. But maybe you’re not a social conservative, so you disagree with Santorum on these issues. Still, you must recognize that he is a man of integrity who stands up for what he believes in and always tells us what he thinks, and that’s exactly the kind of leader we need to represent us in Washington.

Five Reasons Not to Vote for Bob Casey:

1 - Bob Casey wants to ‘roll back the tax cuts’ (in other words, raise taxes) which have been responsible for the improvement in our economy over the past two years. When asked what programs he would cut, Casey couldn’t give a single answer - all he wants to do is raise taxes, and he thinks that will cure all of America’s ills.

2 - Bob Casey is MIA in the war against Islamic fascism. He wants President Bush to replace Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, but that’s about all he wants to change in Iraq. In spite of the fact that he constantly blasts President Bush and Senator Santorum for supporting the Iraq War, Casey tells us that he also would have supported the war and that he opposes leaving Iraq. He has no idea about what to do in Iran, and he is not serious about securing America’s borders.

3 - Bob Casey likes to pretend to be a conservative or moderate Democrat, but he says that he will not lead on any conservative issues. Instead, he says that as a Senator he would push for liberal economic policies. He is supported by all manner of far-left groups, from MoveOn.org to NARAL to Daily Kos. These groups are counting on Casey to be a pawn of Chuck Schumer and the Democrat Party leadership.

4 - Bob Casey says that he would have voted to filibuster some originalist justices branded as “extreme” by Chuck Schumer and Ted Kennedy. Casey is once again MIA on the issue of judicial activism, and frankly doesn’t seem to understand it. Many Americans have voted in favor of State Constitutional amendments to protect traditional marriage, understanding that such amendments are the only way to stop judicial activists from redefining marriage on their own whim. When it comes to the issue of judges, Bob Casey is out of touch with the people of Pennsylvania.

5 - Does anyone know what Bob Casey really believes? Does Bob Casey himself know? He says he is pro-life, yet he is supported by NARAL and Planned Parenthood and he denies the scientific fact that the morning-after pill can have an abortifacient effect prior to implantation. He says he’s against gay marriage, yet he is supported by all manner of radical homosexual groups. He says he wants strong borders, yet he supports Amnesty. He says that we need a new direction in Iraq, yet he provides no such new direction. He never gave a straight answer to a question in any of the debates he was involved in. When asked to appear on numerous news and talk shows to discuss his views, he didn’t show up, claiming that he was too busy doing something else to talk to the people of Pennsylvania. We Pennsylvanians must not send a man to Washington when that man absolutely refuses to take a clear and consistent position on any issue. Pennsylvania deserves better representation than someone who will not even tell us what he believes.

November 4, 2006

Catholics-in-Name-Only Blast Santorum’s Catholicism

Filed under: Liberals, Issues - Fiscal, Issues - Religion — John Lewandowski @ 1:40 pm

I wish the far-left would make up its mind - do they want Rick Santorum to be a theocrat, or do they want to eliminate any religious ideas from government?

Daily Kos: The Song of Santorum

The Kos kid tells us that Santorum is not a real Catholic because:

-Businessmen support Santorum because he’s a capitalist
-Unions oppose Santorum because he’s a capitalist
-Santorum opposes socialism because he’s a capitalist

In other words, the argument is that economic conservatives can’t be real Catholics. You must support socialist economic policies to truly live according to the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Nevermind that not once in the any of the Gospels did Jesus say that it was Caesar’s job to help the poor. According to Jesus, who is responsible for helping the poor? Is it George Bush? Is it John Kerry?

No. According to Jesus, YOU are responsible for helping the poor. Every single person must make their own personal choice to help the poor. This is called “charity”. Charity is voluntary, unlike socialism. Socialism is forced and it breeds hatred between the classes. It also ignores the fact that some people are just more productive than others, and it slows their production down, hurting the economy and decreasing tax revenues.

Liberals who calls themselves Catholic like to say that capitalism is in violation of the Commandment not to covet your neighbor’s property. However, which economic system is inherently covetous? Capitalism is about working hard and succeeding; not necessarily about being envious of anyone. Socialism, on other hand, is inherently about taking away what “the rich” have and forcing them to give it to “the poor” until everyone has the same amount of everything. While envy can be and often is involved in capitalism, is it not the central tenet of capitalism as it is with socialism. Socialism for the sake of socialism is both envy and theft, in violation of the Commandments.

Liberals like to say that we practicing Catholics only care about money since we support economic freedom. Nevermind that Catholics like Santorum are extremely charitable, living according to what Jesus actually taught instead of the Gospel According to George Soros.

Sure, we need the government to help the poorest among us, and most importantly, help them no longer be poor. That’s what Rick Santorum is working to do. But for far-left fake Catholics like this Kos kid, the federal government’s economic power needs to be expanded so much that we practically become a Communist country. That’s the only way to achieve their version of “social justice”.

Ridiculously, one of the Kos kids says in reply to this entry, “In my considered opinion the right wing groups in the church, including those in the hierarchy, are destroying the Church I love.

That must be the pro-abortion, anti-marriage, pro-cloning, pro-theft, anti-truth, anti-God Church he loves.

November 3, 2006

Rep. Nancy Pelosi to Campaign for Casey?

Filed under: Liberals, Issues - Fiscal, Issues - Abortion, Issues - Social — John Lewandowski @ 10:22 pm

Could it be that Nancy Pelosi is going to come to Pennsylvania to support Bob Casey’s campaign?

Most Americans don’t know who House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is. My most vivid memory of Pelosi is of her attending the largest pro-abortion march in American history and proclaiming that she is a “devout Catholic” who supports abortion rights, thereby publicly attacking the Catholic Church.

Washington Times: A look at Pelosi’s voting record

There are some libertarian Republicans who support Rick Santorum because of his positions on national security and taxes. There are some conservative Democrats who support Rick Santorum because of his positions on social issues. But I wonder exactly how Nancy Pelosi is going to explain her support for Bob Casey. My guess is that she’ll focus on how much they both hate President Bush and how much they both love socialist economic policies.

Now They Want to Talk Issues

Now that Senator John Kerry is rightfully being blasted by the media for his remarks in which he “accidentally” called our troops stupid and uneducated, liberals insist that we talk about issues, not non-issues like John Kerry’s troop bashing!

Liberals want to return to the issues? When have they ever been about issues?

Unless you’re talking about the important national issue of how Rick Santorum wants to spend more time with his wife and kids, so he doesn’t commute back and forth from Penn Hills to Washington DC every day, and that somehow makes him crooked.

Then there’s the issue of Santorum saying that parents should spend more time with their young children. That one makes him “anti-woman”. Hey, don’t ask me how that’s anti-woman. Ask the liberals.

Or how about the issue of how Santorum said that if the Supreme Court can find a right to sodomy in the US Constitution, then the Supreme Court can find a right to any kind of deviant sexual behavior in the US Constitution? Since Santorum showed a perfect understanding of democracy, constitutional law and precedent, let’s bash him as being “anti-gay”.

What about the issue of Santorum describing threats to traditional marriage, saying that homosexual marriage is one such threat. As he said, it’s not man-on-child or man-on-dog, but it is a threat to traditional marriage, nonetheless. But let’s just falsely state outright that Santorum compared homosexuals to dogs and accuse him of blaming all of the world’s problems on gays. Why not? People might even believe it if we say it enough times!

And we can’t forget the issue of Santorum going to pray with his constituents Bob and Mary Schindler as their daughter was being dehydrated to death by order of the state. That just proves that he’s a right-wing wacko, because only a Jesus freak would go pray for an innocent person who is being killed.

And finally, don’t forget about Bob Casey’s number one issue - the issue that Rick Santorum agrees with President Bush too much. After all, why should a Republican Senator agree with a Republican President? That just doesn’t make sense.

Those are some important national issues, alright.

Please. If this election was about actual issues, Santorum would get about 90% of the vote since Bob Casey refuses to take positions on the issues. Instead, this election is all about lies, innuendo, and emotional illogic. The last thing liberals want to talk about is issues.

It’s four days before the election, and I’m still not sure what Bob Casey wants us to do in Iraq. I still don’t know how he’ll vote on issues like abortion and gay marriage. I still don’t know if he’ll vote to filibuster or vote to confirm originalist judicial nominees. I still don’t know if Casey is serious about protecting America’s borders.

All I know for certain, in fact, the only thing that Bob Casey himself seems certain of, is that he wants to raise taxes.

Rendell: Throw in the towel

Filed under: Policy, Elections, Politics, Issues - Fiscal, Issues - Religion, Issues - Health — Ron Greiner @ 5:59 pm

Lost Bobby Casey just loves dangerous over-priced Short Term State health insurance for children and ends his debates with Children Insurance sound bites, exactly like all Democrats from coast to coast.  (They want your children)

Warning   Losing your child’s health insurance can be deadly.

Rendell should just drop out of this campaign.  Rendell could say he had a mild stroke or heart attack and everybody would believe that.  Look at him!!

Rendell signed the dangerous “Cover All Kids” state insurance for Pennsylvania children.  Now, federal taxpayers (Me) will be paying $143 a month to Blue Cross or UPMC for “Short Term” health insurance on Pennsylvania children (If their parents are “OFFERED” a group-employer-based-health-insurance) and pay OVER 600% more than the real cost of coverage with the security of portable INDIVIDUAL HSA Qualifying Health insurance on a child (from America’s oldest health insurance company) in Pittsburgh.  This is too pathetic.  Why are taxpayers paying 600% too much just to put Pennsylvania children in danger?

I talked with Rosanne Placey (717-787-3289) who Rendell lists as the “Contact” for his “Kid Ploy.”  I asked Rendell’s Spokesperson, “If a child gets cancer or breaks their neck at 18 years of age, will their “Cover All Kids” health insurance be terminated when they turn 19 years old?”  Rosanne said, “They Age-Out.”  I said, “My question is a yes or no question.  If a child gets cancer at 18 will they have their state insurance cancel at 19 years of age?”  Rosanne said, “They Age-Out.”  These people are scam artists.

A 30-year-old couple can put their child on HSA Health insurance for $23 a month that the child can keep if they get sick or hurt as a minor.  The whole family (30 year-old couple plus 1 child) can get insurance for $98 a month.  The State should pay the $98 for the [[family’s health insurance]] and then put $44 every month in the families HSA for 1st dollar coverage for medical, vision and dental expenses.  This way the State saves $1 below the price of paying Blue Cross for just ONE child ($143) with “Cover All Kids”.

Why won’t Rendell pay for private insurance on parents who work for small employers who don’t offer coverage to employees?  Why won’t the State pay for PRIVATE insurance for the self employed?  Why, because Blue Cross wouldn’t like that and the Blues have Rendell on a short lease and always have.  Rendell is like a poodle.
       
It would be easier for Rendell to fake a heart attack and quit than try and explain this corruption after the election.  Putting the children of the Commonwealth in DANGER just to pander to Blue Cross is an indefensible position for Red Rendell in the future.

Vote for sanity / Vote Swann and Santorum

Cross-Posted at Swannblog

New Direction

Filed under: Issues - Fiscal — AlexC @ 11:35 am

Five Year Low

    The unemployment rate fell to the lowest level in more than five years in October, the government reported Friday, a sign of unexpected strength in the job market.

    The jobless rate sank to 4.4 percent from 4.6 percent in September, the Labor Department said. It was the lowest since May 2001. Economists had forecast the rate would hold steady.

    The department also said that employers added 92,000 jobs in October, down from a revised 148,000 in September, and short of Wall Street forecasts for a gain of 125,000.

Since Jan 2001, after tax take home pay is up $2,660, a gain of 9.8%.

More of the same? Faster please.

November 2, 2006

At the End of the Day…

Filed under: Issues - Fiscal, Issues - Social Security — AlexC @ 6:15 pm

… Bob Casey wants to raise taxes.


I’m still wondering how he’s going to save Social Security, AND balance the budget on the backs of the top 5%. That’s not even getting into the additional spending he proposes.

Casey on the Issues

Times-Leader

On the War in Iraq

    The failure of Santorum and other Republicans to do the same with the Bush administration led to the “disaster” in Iraq – a war Casey says was entered into based on “blatant and deliberate lies” fed to the American people.

    Asked if the war was worth getting rid of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, Casey was quick to answer.

    “Based on what we know now, no,” he said.

Rape rooms, childrens prisons, a choice between feet first or head first into a plastic shredder.

Not worth it.

    Despite his feelings, Casey said he does not believe in setting a time limit to bring troops home. Rather, he supports setting benchmarks for the Iraqi government to achieve, with the most important being the securing of Baghdad.

    “I don’t want to abandon this mission, but we must transform this mission,” he said.

    That transformation starts with the firing of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, whom Casey said has lost the trust of the American people.

And replace him with….. ??? That transformation apparently ends there, because that’s the last thing they say about it.

Domestic

    Casey said the priority must be placed on curtailing the nation’s ballooning budget deficit, to ensuring Americans have access to affordable health care and improving security at home.

Budgets

    Reducing the deficit won’t be easy, but Casey is convinced it can be done within eight to 10 years by eliminating some of the tax cuts heaped on the wealthiest Americans and by instituting other controls that would prevent Congress from implementing future cuts unless it’s shown how they will be paid for.

Raising taxes on the rich, while increasing spending on other issues is no way to balance a budget. The rich simply won’t cover the short fall.

Tim Russert laughed in Casey’s face when he proposed that as a solution.

Terror

    On the terrorism front, Casey said the Bush administration policies have been woefully inadequate. He’s called for implementation of recommendations contained in the report prepared by the committee that investigated the Sept. 11 attacks.

This came up last night in a coffee-klatch get together I was at with Congressman Jim Gerlach. He said the forty one proposals are implemented. Democrats just disagree with the implementation.

Best answer?

    Asked about Santorum’s claims that some state funds have been invested with firms with ties to terrorist nations, Casey put the blame on the Bush administration, which he said has refused his request to release a list of the names of such companies.

This guy can’t do anything on his own?

Taxing the Dead

Filed under: Issues - Fiscal — AlexC @ 12:20 pm

The Evening Bulletin

    Sen. Rick Santorum yesterday pledged to continue opposing the estate tax and was praised by two senior advocacy groups who support its elimination.

    His opposition to the tax underscored the differences between him and Democrat Bob Casey, Santorum said at an appearance yesterday at an Italian grocery in the city’s Little Italy section.

    “We’ve reduced taxes over the last several years. He wants to increase taxes. We’ve tried to reduce litigation costs on businesses. He wants to increase litigation costs,” Santorum said.
    The estate tax, he said, affects small businesses and farmers.

    “It’s the little guy that gets hit with this,” he said. “Those are the ones we are trying to protect with this.”
    Casey spokesman Larry Smar said Casey “supports reform of the estate tax to help family farms and small businesses, but we can’t afford to give huge tax breaks to people like Paris Hilton.”

November 1, 2006

Libertarians

Filed under: Issues - Fiscal, Issues - Social — AlexC @ 9:58 pm

Yes, Virginia, there are Libertarians for Santorum.

Next Page »