In the Republican Primary Debate that occurred on January 26, 2012, on the campus of the University of North Florida (which of course is in the wonderful state of Florida), one witnessed Newt Gingrich and Gov. Mitt Romney at each others throats once again. This time over what to do with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Yet, instead of answering the question and providing solutions the two candidates dived head long into Personal Attacks about each others records. With Romney once more hitting Gingrich hard with the accusation that he consulted and advised Freddie and Fannie, stating "we needed a whistle blower not a horn tooter." With Gingrich responding in kind, speaking about how Romney’s huge investments included shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Then in stepped Daddy Santorum.
 
More After the Break

Santorum was passionate about the personal attacks that have occurred during the campaign and scored huge points with the audience and many Americans at home I’m sure, when he suggested that all four candidates on stage should agree to stop with the personal vendettas and attacks and deal with the real issues and providing solutions to those issues. Santorum decisively put Romney and Gingrich to shame, for I think that all Americans agree that they want solutions, they don’t care about who did what when it comes to things that don’t have any real bearing on the issues and how to fix them. Yet, Santorum put this most succinctly when he stated (this will have to be a paraphrase) "you have to stop the attacks on the speaker for him using the skills that he learned and developed as a Congressman to consult companies, and speaker you have to stop with the attacks against Romney because he worked hard to earn his fortune and become a successful business man."

I will admit right here, that even though I am backing Santorum (which I have stated many times) he does gain some political insulation by making this proposal, in that his own consulting for health care companies would not be questioned under such a truce. However, I do believe that Santorum should be commended by proposing the not so radical idea of getting rid of the personal attacks and entering into a more fruitful and far more important exercise. A productive discussion of the issues. Something I think every American, Democrat or Republican wants.

It is clear that Santorum took control of the debate for a good chunk afterwards, for when Wolf Blitzer asked the next question, which was in regards to Newt’s personal attacks against Romney for his Swiss bank accounts, Newt immediately attempted to side with Santorum and asked to move on to the issues. Something which Blitzer refused to do and insisted an answer to the question, prompting Newt to turn to Santorum and state "would you like to try again." Yet, just as children, after being separated from fighting with each other, Romney took a quick jab at Newt, stating that it would be nice if people didn’t make attacks that they weren’t willing to defend up here. Once more souring the mood between the two candidates.

Which is clear, when Gingrich attempted to appeal for a truce to which Romney both during the debate and afterwards, during a short interview, stated no, I will continue to attack you. Adding, "when I am shot at, I will shoot back." Clearly demonstrating a lack of maturity from the two candidates, especially Romney (who seems to be bitter over his loss in South Carolina), that was once again, only present in Rick Santorum.

- Corey S.
<THINK ABOOT IT>