[We the jury] find the defendants incredibly guilty.
~ from Mel Brooks’ The Producers
By Gary P Jackson
In a recent article Supporting Sarah Palin’s Mission to Eliminate Corruption vs Presidential Politics I wrongly implied Presidential candidate Rick Santorum voted for TARP. Not only was I wrong, I was really, really wrong.
I pride myself in doing the research before I go off on one of my long tangents, and have links to back things up. It seems I failed Rick Santorum, and his supporters, spectacularly.
Much of that article talked about Sarah Palin’s record, as well the records of the candidates for president. Most of that text was devoted to candidates other than Rick Santorum, if for no other reason than I agree with Santorum on most of the issues, and the rest have so many problems I felt more compelled to discuss those candidates. I felt it was enough to say Santorum was the one candidate I could vote for and not have to take a hot shower afterward.
Going from what I thought was memory, rather research, I stated Santorum backed TARP. That was sloppy and as it turned out, incredibly wrong.
I’ve corrected the text, but that isn’t nearly enough.
Santorum has been outspoken against TARP.
Some examples:
At CPAC 2010 Santorum said this:
Whether TARP was the right thing to do for the economy at the time, it was the wrong thing to do for America, because it set a precedent of crony capitalism and government involvement in the private sector that will ultimately destroy this country.
In March Santorum spoke at the Woodbury County Republican Party forum:
From The New Hampshire debate:
At the Dartmouth University Economic debate:
Though we’ve rarely had to correct articles on our blog, this was such a glaring mistake it simply had to be addressed by more than just a change in the original text.
I sincerely apologize for any problems this may have caused Senator Santorum, or our readers.
![sarah-marvelous-eyes-trig[2]](https://thespeechatimeforchoosing.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/sarah-marvelous-eyes-trig2.jpg)
A Time For Choosing 
Class act, Gary! Sure hope it UN-ruffles a few “ruffled” feathers!! I don’t remember that part of the article – and I’ll bet most of your other readers (except the Santorum supporters, obviously!) don’t recal it either. We’re focused on other things than Santorum’s candidacy. I think he’ll survive; and, as an old PR hand, I used to almost welcome mistakes in the media – it gave us the opportunity to not only set the record straight, but it give whatever we were promoting add’l GRATIS coverage/space. Also, if people missed the ho-hum announcement the first time ’round (and, therefore, missed the goof), we were given a second chance to not only correct the record, but also throw in another pitch!! In the end, it was usually a win-win situation.
Thanks Joy. I really do take pride in the fact we rarely need to correct our article. This is, in fact only the second time. No one really complained on this blog. But it came to my attention, and that was such a major screw up, just correcting the text in the other piece, which as you say, may have gotten lost in the shuffle, wasn’t nearly enough.
I give all of the candidates a hard time, so it wouldn’t be right to give myself, or any of our writers a pass.
Don’t think you wrong when you said Santorum supported tarp.
Remember Bachmann in one debate also said he supported tarp.
Bachmann and Romney are the only two that said the will not support amnesty and benefits to illgals. All the rest said after the border is secure they would then support amnesy.
Romney is the only one that can beat Obama so lets now give him our support. All of the other candidates should now pull out and support Romney and fast.
No, I was wrong and so was that nut job Bachmann. Santorum was already out of office. I simply screwed up by working from memory.
It’s easy to do with some of the others, because I have written so much about them. Santorum, not so much.
As for Romney, I’m not ready to get behind a liberal democrat posing as a Republican just yet. Now don’t get me wrong, unlike most, I don’t think Romney is the Great Satan™, but the only way I’d vote for him is if I was forced to, i.e. he was the nominee.
He’s far better than con man Newt, mental patient Ron Paul, or corrupt Perry, but that’s a pretty low bar to clear.
I’m curious to see how Santorum does, though I’m not backing him either. In fact, I’m not officially backing any of these guys. I’m among the 46% who think none are really who I want.
Santorum is a Conservative. I’m a Conservative. Romney, is not. He will be the “lesser of two evils” candidate in the general. I suspect he’ll lose to Obama. Voters, when given the choice between democrat and “democrat light” almost always vote for the Full Monte, no matter how sucktastic they are.
Romney is a Northeaster liberal Republican. He’s not then answer if we want to see America restored. He had a horrible record as governor. After his first year in office Mass was #50 out 0f 50 in job creation, and when he was done, it sat at 47%, but that was only because Katrina had wiped out so many businesses and no one on the coast was hiring.
Then there is the whole RomneyCare thing, and the fact he had communist whack-jobs like Cass Sunstein advising him at one point leaves me totally unimpressed.
Pingback: The Endorsement Primary | American-Rattlesnake
Sen. Santorum did not speak out against TARP until after the vote. In fact, he didn’t speak out against it until it was clear that the people were opposed to the program. He either didn’t have the courage to take a stand until he was sure that the people agreed with him, or he choose his stand based on public opinion. The only man who surely opposed TARP was Rep. Paul. He voted against it, and was willing to stand against the party to do so.
Simply not true. As for Herr Doktor Paul, he was too busy collecting his earmarks to make a difference. Herr Doktor Paul is the second biggest con artist in the GOP, after Newt Gingrich.