Santorum for President.
That’s what he’s thinking:
In an interview with The Daily Caller, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum said he’s actively cultivating donors, staff and supporters so he’ll be in a position to run for president in 2012 as a Republican if he decides to do so by early next year.
“I’m going through the process of what someone who is seriously considering running would do,” Santorum said by phone, “in order for when the time comes to decide, I’m in a position that I have a choice.”
Santorum—who was elected to the Senate in 1994 but left in 2006 after losing his seat—said he plans to make a decision on a presidential bid by either the end of this year, or the beginning of 2011.
Now, Ricky’s got some hurdles to overcome. Like the thrashing he took on Election Day in 2006. AMERICAblog did an hour-by-hour countdown til the polls closed at 8:00 in Pennsylvania. Check out our 8:00 PM post here.
The latest polling on same-sex marriage is going to make it harder for Santorum to base his campaign on hating the gays. Might help get him the GOP nomination (they still hate gays), but Ricky wants to be President. Gay marriage has been one of Ricky’s favorite subjects for years. Remember this infamous gem from 2003?:
Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. Why? Because society is based on one thing: that society is based on the future of the society. And that’s what? Children. Monogamous relationships. In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality —
AP: I’m sorry, I didn’t think I was going to talk about “man on dog” with a United States senator, it’s sort of freaking me out.
SANTORUM: And that’s sort of where we are in today’s world, unfortunately. The idea is that the state doesn’t have rights to limit individuals’ wants and passions. I disagree with that. I think we absolutely have rights because there are consequences to letting people live out whatever wants or passions they desire. And we’re seeing it in our society.
AP: Sorry, I just never expected to talk about that when I came over here to interview you. Would a President Santorum eliminate a right to privacy — you don’t agree with it?
SANTORUM: I’ve been very clear about that. The right to privacy is a right that was created in a law that set forth a (ban on) rights to limit individual passions. And I don’t agree with that. So I would make the argument that with President, or Senator or Congressman or whoever Santorum, I would put it back to where it is, the democratic process. If New York doesn’t want sodomy laws, if the people of New York want abortion, fine. I mean, I wouldn’t agree with it, but that’s their right. But I don’t agree with the Supreme Court coming in.
Think of the fun we’ll have with this campaign.
