Ron Paul: Santorum is 'very liberal'
January 2nd, 2012
01:23 PM ET
2 years ago

Ron Paul: Santorum is 'very liberal'

(CNN) - Ron Paul dinged rival Rick Santorum Monday for being a "very liberal" candidate, saying the former Pennsylvania senator and staunch social conservative voted for too much spending during his time in Congress.

Speaking to CNN Senior Congressional Correspondent Dana Bash before a campaign event with his son, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, the White House hopeful said his rival had taken positions counter to true conservative ideas.

- Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker

"I mean, have you looked at his record? Go look at his record," Paul said.

He continued: "He spends too much money. He wasn't leading the charge to slash the budgets and vote against big government."

Rand Paul added that Santorum's vote history proved he wasn't a true conservative.

"He voted to double the size of the Department of Education," Rand Paul said. "He voted to expand Medicare and add free drugs for senior citizens and he has voted for foreign aid. Those are not conservative principles. Seventy-seven percent of the American people are opposed to foreign aid and Rick Santorum has voted for it every time it's come down."

Paul also spoke in some of the strongest terms to date about the potential of a third-party bid should he fail to secure the GOP nomination.

"I have no plans in doing that," Paul said. "Tomorrow is a big day. We'll see what happens but I have no intention of doing that, no plans and no desire."

Also see:

Gingrich mulls strategy shift after Iowa


Leading Perry backers head to Iowa for final push


Bachmann: Polls not a good measure of support


Romney goes on offense


Filed under: 2012 • Iowa • Rand Paul • Rick Santorum • Ron Paul
soundoff (213 Responses)
  1. Morons.

    @cybersport @strategic bob
    Did both of you even read or listen to what exactly he said? Ordid you just see that he called him a liberal and all of the sudden that makes him unqualified for president? Dumb a$$es. He said he spends like a liberal and his record reflects more of a liberal leaning foreign policy and spending. Not to mention Rick is nuts and more like a modern day hitler.

    January 2, 2012 02:19 pm at 2:19 pm |
  2. J Mann

    the most interesting candidate from either party – Ron Paul. as a Viet Nam War surviving Vet – I gotta pay attention when a Republican has the nuts to speak out against stupid wars, since the rest of them wont serve, but love to send your kids to fight and die for nothing but big bucks for their big business friends. hasn't won him any friends in his party, but it sure has got a lot of Americans ready to vote for him, if given a chance.

    January 2, 2012 02:22 pm at 2:22 pm |
  3. Briteone

    Well everyone that's saying he is/isnt a liberal you all seem to ignore that people are fiscally conservative/liberal and socially conservative/liberal. Just because you are something fiscally doesn't mean you have the same mentality socially.

    January 2, 2012 02:22 pm at 2:22 pm |
  4. conoclast

    'Seventy-five percent of Americans are opposed to foreign aid' eh, Doc? We haven't caught you believing your own "polling" here have we? Recently you and your republican bretheren have tried to tell us that same 75% oppose medicare too! Again, according to whom? You're just another republican Mr. Paul, regardless of how you wrap yourself!

    January 2, 2012 02:22 pm at 2:22 pm |
  5. Ivy League Trains Idiots

    It's great to see the Repugnicans knifing each other so thoroughly. They trained so long in the art of backstabbing, it was inevitable they would eventually start in on each other.

    January 2, 2012 02:26 pm at 2:26 pm |
  6. aurelius

    Ron Paul is lucky if he's still around on inauguration day. If elected, he'd look like a dinosaur among world leaders; perhaps the perfect image for the US.

    January 2, 2012 02:29 pm at 2:29 pm |
  7. Brett

    Who said that liberals support personal freedoms? Classical liberals did. Today's self-declared liberals support NDAA. That bill is pure destruction of everything the country was founded on. It's anti personal freedoms.

    The only candidate who stands against the patriot act and NDAA is Ron Paul. That should be America's first and foremost priority - electing someone who wants to return your freedoms/rights. Everything else should be secondary issues.

    January 2, 2012 02:33 pm at 2:33 pm |
  8. skarphace

    @Keith in Austin: if you want to judge wheither a candidate has a good foreing policy stance or not, ask active military service members. As for Republican donations, they overwhelmingly support Ron Paul. He has gotten around 70% of all donations from active military servicemen, and has even outpaced Obama who got their support in 2008.

    Once again, only Ron Paul takes votes away from Obama in the general election.

    January 2, 2012 02:33 pm at 2:33 pm |
  9. mb2010a

    Ron Paul is not going to win anything and neither is Rick Santorum. If the GOP wants to make any kind of showing at all in the 2012 election they will run Romney, even though he can't beat Obama either. The GOP is going to lose the House and the Senate by a landslide...history is just repeating itself again. We won't see another Republican President or Republican majority in either House of Congress for at least the next fifty years...

    January 2, 2012 02:33 pm at 2:33 pm |
  10. skarphace

    @ryan: Ron Paul does not want to end regulations, he just feels that regulation should be handled on the State level, not the Federal level. The states already take care of it on a local level, so why do we even need the EPA? All it does is add an unneeded level of bureaucracy and therefore costs the taxpayers money.

    January 2, 2012 02:35 pm at 2:35 pm |
  11. Common Sense In PA

    We couldn't stand Santorum when he was a senator in PA, and he was crushed in his re-election Senate bid. Why in the world would anyone think he is capable of being the POTUS? Dr. Paul nailed this; Santorum is a true social conservative, but he spends money like all the other bloated politicians.

    January 2, 2012 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  12. Mario U

    There are several areas where I do not have full agreement with Ron Paul, but I would vote for him, rather than Obama.

    The rest of candidates is more of the same. Who needs Huntsman or Romney: they are cousins, they are mormons, and they are more of the same.

    January 2, 2012 02:44 pm at 2:44 pm |
  13. Larry L

    Paul's idea of defending America with "four submarines" is a great example of an out-of-touch old anarchist. Although it's true that four submarines can deliver a devastating blow, this plan would reduce America's military options to a single choice – strategic nuclear war. If Somali pirates captured an American tanker – would we nuke them? If civil war from Mexico spread to South Texas would we nuke Mexico City? How about going to Israel's rescue if the Syria situation gets out of control. Do we nuke Syria? He was an Air Force physician long ago and apparently they don't train their surgeons in military strategy any better than we did in the Army.

    His messages appeal to unsophisticated (often very young or very old) people unwilling or unable to visualize the complexity of problems in the modern world. If you want a small government – move to Somalia.

    January 2, 2012 02:45 pm at 2:45 pm |
  14. Williams

    I believe that Americans are tired of all the WARS and LIES.
    Ron Paul has been speaking TRUTH to POWER for 35 years.
    It is time for this Great Nation to Change Course!

    Please do the right thing...
    Vote for PEACE, LIBERTY and PROSPERITY.
    Vote for RON PAUL 2012

    January 2, 2012 02:51 pm at 2:51 pm |
  15. paul sucks

    Speaking of the John Birch Society. Is Ron Paul going to be the key note speaker.....again?

    January 2, 2012 02:51 pm at 2:51 pm |
  16. s

    Guess Ron Paul never servered in the Military, COWARD

    January 2, 2012 02:53 pm at 2:53 pm |
  17. skarphace

    @Larry L: once again, 70%. This is Pauls support among active military servicemen. These are the people you are calling 'unsophisticated" and "unwilling or unable to visualize the complexity of problems in the modern world."

    I am sorry, but I trust their judgement over yours with the issue of defending our country.

    January 2, 2012 02:56 pm at 2:56 pm |
  18. skarphace

    @s: please do some research before posting such drivel. Ron Paul served for 4 years. Can any of the other candidates say the same?

    January 2, 2012 02:57 pm at 2:57 pm |
  19. thetruth

    Ron Paul's supporters are zealots, I can't believe they can support a man with such a naive approach to foreign policy and a downright scary approach to the military and Iran's nuclear aspirations...this is not the 1700s....

    January 2, 2012 02:58 pm at 2:58 pm |
  20. nru

    Rick is not liberal, he is just a spender – very different things

    January 2, 2012 02:58 pm at 2:58 pm |
  21. James Ruston

    Misanthrope 3: I would be interested to know what your definition of freedom is. Apparently, whatever it is, is threatened by government. However, for millions of people on the bottom end of the economic scale, government assistance gives them more freedom, more control over their lives, and more options than if that help were not available. I get the impression that for people like you freedom means the freedom to make as much money as possible no matter the consequences for the larger society and little else.

    January 2, 2012 03:02 pm at 3:02 pm |
  22. The Greedy Old PIgs have declared class war on US!

    "You can't be for freedom of any kind and be in favor of growing government, which by definition exists only at the expense of the governed's freedoms"

    See, as soon as you post such cliched (and false) tripe, you out yourself as a Fakes News hatemonkey or an Ayn Rand nutjob/groupie. People who have a functioning legal system, well-regulated economy, and robust social and physical infrastructure enjoy FAR more freedom than those who live in places where those things do not exist (or exist in some smaller degree). Since the government has an important and distinctive role to play in our llegal system, economy and infrastructure, any suggestion that government involvement in these things reduces freedom is simply manure, or perhaps the product of a mind only capable of processing manure.

    January 2, 2012 03:02 pm at 3:02 pm |
  23. NATHAN WIMBERLY

    The GOBP wingnut/teabagger/Ron Paul trainwreck implosion continues full speed ahead.

    January 2, 2012 03:03 pm at 3:03 pm |
  24. paul sucks

    Do the soldiers in Ft Hood know Ron Paul was against going after the guy who told the shooter he should kill as many Americans as possible?

    January 2, 2012 03:06 pm at 3:06 pm |
  25. D. Tree

    oooh, he voted for education and senior citizens, he's a big bad liberal!

    Mr. Paul, you are attempting to redefine "conservatism" into amoral anarchy.

    If you want a civilized and prosperous nation, you need to have educated children and care for the elderly.

    Anything less if barbaric. That is simple the price if civilization.

    January 2, 2012 03:09 pm at 3:09 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9