Santorum is a Fake Conservative

[level.eleven]

I volunteer for the new sex police division of government.

Yeah, but what if you get assigned to the Retirement Community Division?

 

[sepe]

Yeah, but what if you get assigned to the Retirement Community Division?

Unless the residents are married, they shouldn't be having sex. Sex is meant to be conjugal and unitive but also procreative.

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

I saw the pull quote. I don't pay attention to sound bites because there is no context. I've done lots of media. I've had my words taken out of context. The more edited the piece, the less accurate it is.

I was referring to this video:



where he clearly says he doesn't care what people do in their bedrooms.

Talk about out of context.

That video absolutely did not show Santorum saying he doesn't care what people do in their bedrooms. It is a 2 minute speech on the exact opposite. According to Ricky (in that video), use of birth control and the idea of sex that isn't at least in part for the purpose of procreation is an important public policy issue that needs to be reviewed from a moral standpoint.

 

[hornadylnl]

If we shouldn't worry about what (social reforms) Santorum would do if elected, because as POTUS, he would have little power to make those changes happen, then why in the hell are you worried about Obama being in office??

Yep. Sanatorium or Paul are helpless to change anything yet Obama is one policy away from destroying all of civilization worldwide. How is it that those on the right can attribute so much power to Obama yet say Paul would be powerless? Or that Santorum (I love that iPad auto corrects Santorum with sanitarium) wouldn't be able to implement his theocratic tendencies. If congress is capable of keeping Paul or Santorum in check, why are they incapable of keeping Obama in check? Especially with a repub house? Seems to me, repubs and dems alike in congress are holding the bag just as much as Obama.

 

[firehawk1]

Talk about out of context.

That video absolutely did not show Santorum saying he doesn't care what people do in their bedrooms. It is a 2 minute speech on the exact opposite. According to Ricky (in that video), use of birth control and the idea of sex that isn't at least in part for the purpose of procreation is an important public policy issue that needs to be reviewed from a moral standpoint.

I am on record as stating Santorum is VERY good at stepping on his d**k, so keep that in mind here. I am NOT a Santorum supporter.

I saw/heard nothing about him wanting to impose the apparent belief he has on these subjects on anyone. He was stating he thinks the issues he is bringing up need to be discussed out in the open in a public forum. That is all I came away with.

This same kind of crap came up when JFK was running, and has been brought up about Romney's religion. I believe it has been shown a President can have certain religious beliefs, and NOT let them spill over into his public policy. I don't know what all the hyperventilating is about this. Personally some need to get a paperbag and take a few deep breath's!

DISCLAIMER: The preceding post is only my opinion and is not meant to persuade anyone one way or the other.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Sure, he doesn't care what people do in their bedrooms.

As long as it is a married man and woman having intercourse in the missionary position.

The article I linked provided the context. Stop dancing around it. You can't pick and choose the statements you like and ignore the ones you don't. Well...you can. It just makes you look foolish.

OK, so we have a legitimate disagreement on what we heard. I heard absolutely nothing to pursuade me that he want to legislate bedroom activities. I heard him directly say he doesn't care. You hear what you want to hear.

Talk about out of context.

That video absolutely did not show Santorum saying he doesn't care what people do in their bedrooms. It is a 2 minute speech on the exact opposite. According to Ricky (in that video), use of birth control and the idea of sex that isn't at least in part for the purpose of procreation is an important public policy issue that needs to be reviewed from a moral standpoint.

And again where exactly did he say he sought a legislative intervention? He didn't. In fact he specifically said he doesn't care.

You can keep repeating the same lie and there are some foolish enough to believe it. I'm not.

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

I am on record as stating Santorum is VERY good at stepping on his d**k, so keep that in mind here. I am NOT a Santorum supporter.

I saw/heard nothing about him wanting to impose the apparent belief he has on these subjects on anyone. He was stating he thinks the issues he is bringing up need to be discussed out in the open in a public forum. That is all I came away with.

This same kind of crap came up when JFK was running, and has been brought up about Romney's religion. I believe it has been shown a President can have certain religious beliefs, and NOT let them spill over into his public policy. I don't know what all the hyperventilating is about this. Personally some need to get a paperbag and take a few deep breath's!

DISCLAIMER: The preceding post is only my opinion and is not meant to persuade anyone one way or the other.

He must have meant something else when he said "public policy" then.

Speaking of this coming up during the JFK campaign... I'm guessing JFK handled his campaign talking points a little different, especially since Santorum said last fall that reading JFK's speech from 1960 makes him want to throw up.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Yep. Sanatorium or Paul are helpless to change anything yet Obama is one policy away from destroying all of civilization worldwide. How is it that those on the right can attribute so much power to Obama yet say Paul would be powerless? Or that Santorum (I love that iPad auto corrects Santorum with sanitarium) wouldn't be able to implement his theocratic tendencies. If congress is capable of keeping Paul or Santorum in check, why are they incapable of keeping Obama in check? Especially with a repub house? Seems to me, repubs and dems alike in congress are holding the bag just as much as Obama.

Because Paul or Santorum would follow the Constitution while Obama s**ts on it.

 

[firehawk1]

He must have meant something else when he said "public policy" then.

I listened to it again and sorry I heard nothing in it where he states HIS belief should be made into public policy. He simply states that in HIS opinion these are important public policy issues that need to be DISCUSSED.

 

[hornadylnl]

Because Paul or Santorum would follow the Constitution while Obama s**ts on it.

Wait, I thought Paul didn't follow the constitution?

 

[sepe]

Wait, I thought Paul didn't follow the constitution?

And I thought Santorum wouldn't on the constitution...

I do have to admit that I giggle like a school girl every single time I hear or read "Santorum surges from behind".

 

[firehawk1]

Am I the only one who has this gut feeling Santorum is OVER doing the sex thing? Like he's over compensating, or does he just like stepping in it all the time?

He may be on the up and up on this but somehow it would not surprise me if he was found to be another Jim Baker type. Something just doesn't pass the smell test here somehow.

DISCLAIMER: Again just my opinion and it may be WAY off base.

 

[rambone]

Am I the only one who has this gut feeling Santorum is OVER doing the sex thing? Like he's over compensating, or does he just like stepping in it all the time?

He may be on the up and up on this but somehow it would not surprise me if he was found to be another Jim Baker type. Something just doesn't pass the smell test here somehow.

He certainly has an obsession with the subject.

He's a terribly divisive candidate.

 

[hornadylnl]

Because Paul or Santorum would follow the Constitution while Obama s**ts on it.

Oh, and if Obama is ****ting on the constitution, why aren't the spineless wonder repubs in the house and senate bringing him up on impeachment charges? Are they spinless or complicit?

 

[firehawk1]

Oh, and if Obama is ****ting on the constitution, why aren't the spineless wonder repubs in the house and senate bringing him up on impeachment charges? Are they spinless or complicit?

IMO, 50%-50%. Exactly how the Senate was with the Clinton Impeachment.

 

[hornadylnl]

IMO, 50%-50%. Exactly how the Senate was with the Clinton Impeachment.

Rather than focusing all the blame on Obama, why aren't repubs holding their party's feet to the fire? Just easier to pin all the blame on one man?

 

[steveh_131]

Ok, folks. I'm going to post this ONCE AGAIN.

Santorum pointed to the landmark case, Lawrence v. Texas, where the U.S. Supreme Court overturned sodomy laws that were used to imprison gays and lesbians.

“And I stood up from the very beginning back in 2003 when the Supreme Court was going create a constitutional right to sodomy and said this is wrong we can’t do this,” Santorum said. ”And so I stood up when no one else did and got hammered for it. I stood up and I continue to stand up.”

This ruling struck down a law that made it a crime for homosexuals to engage in sexual activity even in private.

And Santorum stood up against it.

And here is another quote, this one from CNN:

"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything." and "Whether it's polygamy, whether it's adultery, whether it's sodomy, all of those things, are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family."
Jordan produced a recording of the interview, after allegations of bias were leveled against her because she is married to a Democratic strategist.

So how about it, SemperFi? Care to spin that one? Good luck.

 

[steveh_131]

Actually, I already know what you're going to say.

"But...but..what can he actually DO as president??"

"Those are just his opinions!"

He thought the Supreme Court was wrong to rule that way. We can safely assume that given the opportunity, he will appoint justices who feel the same way about it.

It matters.

 

[level.eleven]

If my wife and I, after our marriage, found out through science that we were physically unable to procreate without the help of doctors, would Rick have me punished for eternity? How can I be sure he would not take advantage of terrestrial devices to exact punishment?

The leader of the most important organization in his life thinks this way. Oh, and he, never a she mind you, is infallible and the direct voice of the celestial kingdom.

It is shameful to mankind that Rick is even a candidate in 2012, let alone in the supposed land of the free. I have one finger for you and it isn't representative of your placement in a foot race.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Yeah, but what if you get assigned to the Retirement Community Division?

Good point, I was hoping more for patrolling Sorority houses.