Santorum: an unpleasant reversal.
March 4, 2012 4:31 PM Subscribe
Santorum comes out in favour of dissolving existing LGBT marriages.
"Santorum, who once practiced law, hasn't said how he would draft a constitutional amendment - or how he could get one passed even while opinion polls suggest increasing public acceptance of same-sex marriage.
"Just because public opinion says something doesn't mean it's right," he said in the NBC interview. "I'm sure there were times in areas of this country when people said blacks were less than human.""
"Santorum, who once practiced law, hasn't said how he would draft a constitutional amendment - or how he could get one passed even while opinion polls suggest increasing public acceptance of same-sex marriage.
"Just because public opinion says something doesn't mean it's right," he said in the NBC interview. "I'm sure there were times in areas of this country when people said blacks were less than human.""
This post was deleted for the following reason: "Look at the latest horrible thing this politician said" is not a great basis for a post here. -- restless_nomad
Darn it .. when I read "Santorum comes out", I thought "Finally! He's acknowledged that his hatred for homosexuals is only covering a deep longing .."
But no. Not yet.
posted by dotgirl at 4:35 PM on March 4, 2012 [5 favorites]
But no. Not yet.
posted by dotgirl at 4:35 PM on March 4, 2012 [5 favorites]
There is no floor for this asshole.
posted by HighTechUnderpants at 4:36 PM on March 4, 2012
posted by HighTechUnderpants at 4:36 PM on March 4, 2012
He loves marriage so much that he wants to force people who want to be married to be unmarried.
posted by rtha at 4:38 PM on March 4, 2012 [8 favorites]
posted by rtha at 4:38 PM on March 4, 2012 [8 favorites]
It's really a bummer that we can't get any major party candidates who are willing to say they support gay marriage. Santorum is correct that the public isn't always right, but on this more of them are on the right side than among politicians.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 4:38 PM on March 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by furiousxgeorge at 4:38 PM on March 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
Arguing public opinion as a right to do something is a slippery slope and people of all political stripes fall victim to doing so (that is the drive behind the idiotic public referendums on marriage equality after all) , and likewise say the same things when public opinion is against them.
Santorum is an ass and horribly wrong on so so many things; This "Just because public opinion says something doesn't mean it's right," however, is correct, just not in the way he might intend as I'm sure he would be just fine relying on public opinion to justify horrendous things. Nor was the wrong during the last debate when he was talking about the legislative process. For just a microsecond during the debate, despite the booing, he was the only adult on the stage.
posted by edgeways at 4:39 PM on March 4, 2012
Santorum is an ass and horribly wrong on so so many things; This "Just because public opinion says something doesn't mean it's right," however, is correct, just not in the way he might intend as I'm sure he would be just fine relying on public opinion to justify horrendous things. Nor was the wrong during the last debate when he was talking about the legislative process. For just a microsecond during the debate, despite the booing, he was the only adult on the stage.
posted by edgeways at 4:39 PM on March 4, 2012
Limited government! The Federal Government has no legitimate role to play in telling the States how to govern! The Tenth Amendment reserves sovereignty in the States!
...except when it comes to bedroom activities that make Rick Santorum feel shamed, yet weirdly excited.
posted by T.D. Strange at 4:40 PM on March 4, 2012 [3 favorites]
...except when it comes to bedroom activities that make Rick Santorum feel shamed, yet weirdly excited.
posted by T.D. Strange at 4:40 PM on March 4, 2012 [3 favorites]
Wow, I had no idea that Santorum was an idiotic asshole.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:41 PM on March 4, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:41 PM on March 4, 2012 [2 favorites]
"I'm sure there were times in areas of this country when people said blacks were less than human."
Wow! What an amazing sentence. I mean, seriously. I can count at least 5 things insanely wrong-headed about it and that's just after a brief skim.
posted by ORthey at 4:44 PM on March 4, 2012
Wow! What an amazing sentence. I mean, seriously. I can count at least 5 things insanely wrong-headed about it and that's just after a brief skim.
posted by ORthey at 4:44 PM on March 4, 2012
don't feed the troll
That's my reaction to this guy, too. I know this month or so is His Moment and all, but Santorum doesn't have a chance in hell of getting the nomination, let alone being elected. Me, I'm more interested in what Americans Elect - "the first-ever privatized online presidential nomination" - is planning [previously on the blue]. They're "already well on the way to putting the first directly-nominated nonpartisan ticket on the 2012 ballot in all 50 states" and nobody has the slightest clue what that means for this year's election.
posted by mediareport at 4:45 PM on March 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
That's my reaction to this guy, too. I know this month or so is His Moment and all, but Santorum doesn't have a chance in hell of getting the nomination, let alone being elected. Me, I'm more interested in what Americans Elect - "the first-ever privatized online presidential nomination" - is planning [previously on the blue]. They're "already well on the way to putting the first directly-nominated nonpartisan ticket on the 2012 ballot in all 50 states" and nobody has the slightest clue what that means for this year's election.
posted by mediareport at 4:45 PM on March 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
There is no floor for this asshole.
Santorum hasn't hit the bottom, yet?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:45 PM on March 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
Santorum hasn't hit the bottom, yet?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:45 PM on March 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
"We can't have 50 different marriage laws in this country," he said. "You have to have one marriage law."
Driver's licenses and marriages are the two areas where states' reciprocal recognition has historically worked stunningly well. If we're to have absolute uniformity of law, then we must abolish federalism altogether in this country. That's fine by me, but I'm not sure the Republican electorate sees it that way.
posted by Nahum Tate at 4:45 PM on March 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
Driver's licenses and marriages are the two areas where states' reciprocal recognition has historically worked stunningly well. If we're to have absolute uniformity of law, then we must abolish federalism altogether in this country. That's fine by me, but I'm not sure the Republican electorate sees it that way.
posted by Nahum Tate at 4:45 PM on March 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
And you expect something different? Seriously, can we please stop posting every crazy thing this frothy asshole does or says?
posted by photoslob at 4:45 PM on March 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by photoslob at 4:45 PM on March 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
"Just because public opinion says something doesn't mean it's right," he said in the NBC interview. "I'm sure there were times in areas of this country when people said blacks were less than human."
Translation: the wrongness of denying human beings their civil rights in the past is precisely what makes it right to deny other human beings their civil rights in the present.
posted by scody at 4:46 PM on March 4, 2012 [2 favorites]
Translation: the wrongness of denying human beings their civil rights in the past is precisely what makes it right to deny other human beings their civil rights in the present.
posted by scody at 4:46 PM on March 4, 2012 [2 favorites]
"I'm sure there were times in areas of this country when people said blacks were less than human."
He's right that we don't leave human rights up to popularity polls. Because there are people like him who would deny them to others.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 4:47 PM on March 4, 2012 [3 favorites]
He's right that we don't leave human rights up to popularity polls. Because there are people like him who would deny them to others.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 4:47 PM on March 4, 2012 [3 favorites]
I can only assume that Rick Santorum's intent is to spark a nothing less than a civil war.
posted by crunchland at 4:47 PM on March 4, 2012
posted by crunchland at 4:47 PM on March 4, 2012
Out of curiosity, who was the last major-party candidate to speak out against interracial marriage?
posted by ricochet biscuit at 4:51 PM on March 4, 2012
posted by ricochet biscuit at 4:51 PM on March 4, 2012
"Just because public opinion says something doesn't mean it's right."
Sounds like the Right may be shifting tactics again. Folks on the Left, watch out.
posted by jiawen at 4:55 PM on March 4, 2012
Sounds like the Right may be shifting tactics again. Folks on the Left, watch out.
posted by jiawen at 4:55 PM on March 4, 2012
When Ginsberg's Howl was published, it was declared obscene. Interest and sales exploded. (Likewise for Ulysses.)
While these people's pernicious idiocy is galling, the natural inclination to react by publicizing their ideas works for them. News about "So-andso said this" is free publicity. O'Reilly, Lintbomb & ilk know this and literally capitalize on it continually. Consider the wisdom.
posted by Twang at 4:55 PM on March 4, 2012
While these people's pernicious idiocy is galling, the natural inclination to react by publicizing their ideas works for them. News about "So-andso said this" is free publicity. O'Reilly, Lintbomb & ilk know this and literally capitalize on it continually. Consider the wisdom.
posted by Twang at 4:55 PM on March 4, 2012
They're "already well on the way to putting the first directly-nominated nonpartisan ticket on the 2012 ballot in all 50 states" and nobody has the slightest clue what that means for this year's election.
Looks like a Ron Paul front, he's the leading candidate on the page. Or is this a "third way" / "elect the richest guy around!" / "draft Bloomberg!" movement? What this country really needs is for a few billionaires to step up and tell these Washington insiders to "stop all the bullshit".
posted by T.D. Strange at 4:55 PM on March 4, 2012
Looks like a Ron Paul front, he's the leading candidate on the page. Or is this a "third way" / "elect the richest guy around!" / "draft Bloomberg!" movement? What this country really needs is for a few billionaires to step up and tell these Washington insiders to "stop all the bullshit".
posted by T.D. Strange at 4:55 PM on March 4, 2012
oh, that poor, small-minded, pitiable man.
posted by fingers_of_fire at 4:57 PM on March 4, 2012
posted by fingers_of_fire at 4:57 PM on March 4, 2012
Santorum probably has no idea how hateful this makes him sound. Even other conservatives are going to be allergic to him.
Earlier today on the evening news, I saw a very amusing infographic about which Republican members of Congress were supporting which Republican candidates. I was surprised to see that almost no one supports Santorum. I mean, he had even been their co-worker for a number of years, and still, they hate the guy. Even Republicans in Congress realize that he's absolutely radioactive.
posted by Sticherbeast at 4:59 PM on March 4, 2012
Earlier today on the evening news, I saw a very amusing infographic about which Republican members of Congress were supporting which Republican candidates. I was surprised to see that almost no one supports Santorum. I mean, he had even been their co-worker for a number of years, and still, they hate the guy. Even Republicans in Congress realize that he's absolutely radioactive.
posted by Sticherbeast at 4:59 PM on March 4, 2012
This is just another part of the right-wing conspiracy to make the heads of decent, reasonable Americans explode before November.
posted by usonian at 5:00 PM on March 4, 2012
posted by usonian at 5:00 PM on March 4, 2012
You know, I agree. Gay marriage is poisoning our air and water, causing us to rely on foreign production for domestic consumption, and moving American jobs overseas. Gay marriage is running up the costs of education and healthcare and creating a permanent American underclass. Gay marriage is supporting a bloated military that kills innocents and pursues wars of opportunity that run counter to the geopolitical interests of the nation and its allies. Down with gay marriage!
Oh wait.
Gay marriage just means my gay friends can get married and have the same rights as I do.
Never mind.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 5:01 PM on March 4, 2012 [4 favorites]
Oh wait.
Gay marriage just means my gay friends can get married and have the same rights as I do.
Never mind.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 5:01 PM on March 4, 2012 [4 favorites]
If only this post and the one about 8 the play had been right next to one another on the Blue. That would be much better.
posted by hippybear at 5:06 PM on March 4, 2012
posted by hippybear at 5:06 PM on March 4, 2012
It's worth reading more about Americans Elect, T.D. Strange; they're not a Ron Paul front. My bet's on the "elect the richest guy" but no one can know anything at this point except they keep on changing their own rules and process to make it harder to question the board's decisions, while claiming to be all democratic and shit:
In 2012, courtesy of a group called Americans Elect, some lucky independent candidate will have the chance to enter the race all but guaranteed nationwide ballot access. And as that fact — or threat — has begun to dawn on the Democratic and Republican establishments, it is setting off new chatter about the prospect for a high-profile unity ticket, or at least about someone emerging to play the role of national gadfly and potential spoiler for one party or the other.
“I think what is clear is they’ll be on the ballot in most of these states, and it’s going to be something we have to deal with,” Jim Messina, President Obama’s campaign manager, said of Americans Elect at a briefing this week on the White House’s re-election strategy.
The Irregular Times blog has been wonderfully dogged in its examination of the group's bizarre behavior: this is a good one-paragraph summary:
Americans Elect is a 501c4 corporation that doesn’t disclose the sources of its funding, that wants to run the nation’s first-ever privatized online presidential nomination, and that wants to bump aside impartial boards of election to count its own votes. Americans Elect has a set of official rules (most recent version here) and corporate bylaws (most recent version here) that use words of democracy but that harshly restrict the participation of its grassroots delegates and instead hand most decisions over to a self-appointed corporate board.
....yesterday — February 29, 2012 — Americans Elect took another step away from democracy in its presidential nomination, another step toward arbitrary corporate control. It posted a set of decisions made by its corporate board and shut down all possibility for its own delegates to dissent from them — in direct violation of its own bylaws and rules.
I understand this is a derail from the discussion of Santorum's latest bigotry, so I'll stop now, but every fucking time someone posts ordinary horse-race stuff about the 2012 election, I think of Irregular Times and its coverage of Americans Elect and laugh a little bit. This race isn't going to go the way anyone thinks it's going to go. We're in new territory, folks. Enjoy it.
posted by mediareport at 5:07 PM on March 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
In 2012, courtesy of a group called Americans Elect, some lucky independent candidate will have the chance to enter the race all but guaranteed nationwide ballot access. And as that fact — or threat — has begun to dawn on the Democratic and Republican establishments, it is setting off new chatter about the prospect for a high-profile unity ticket, or at least about someone emerging to play the role of national gadfly and potential spoiler for one party or the other.
“I think what is clear is they’ll be on the ballot in most of these states, and it’s going to be something we have to deal with,” Jim Messina, President Obama’s campaign manager, said of Americans Elect at a briefing this week on the White House’s re-election strategy.
The Irregular Times blog has been wonderfully dogged in its examination of the group's bizarre behavior: this is a good one-paragraph summary:
Americans Elect is a 501c4 corporation that doesn’t disclose the sources of its funding, that wants to run the nation’s first-ever privatized online presidential nomination, and that wants to bump aside impartial boards of election to count its own votes. Americans Elect has a set of official rules (most recent version here) and corporate bylaws (most recent version here) that use words of democracy but that harshly restrict the participation of its grassroots delegates and instead hand most decisions over to a self-appointed corporate board.
....yesterday — February 29, 2012 — Americans Elect took another step away from democracy in its presidential nomination, another step toward arbitrary corporate control. It posted a set of decisions made by its corporate board and shut down all possibility for its own delegates to dissent from them — in direct violation of its own bylaws and rules.
I understand this is a derail from the discussion of Santorum's latest bigotry, so I'll stop now, but every fucking time someone posts ordinary horse-race stuff about the 2012 election, I think of Irregular Times and its coverage of Americans Elect and laugh a little bit. This race isn't going to go the way anyone thinks it's going to go. We're in new territory, folks. Enjoy it.
posted by mediareport at 5:07 PM on March 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
The Just Society will be one in which the rights of minorities will be safe from the whims of intolerant majorities.
- Pierre Elliott Trudeau, 1968
posted by ceribus peribus at 5:07 PM on March 4, 2012
- Pierre Elliott Trudeau, 1968
posted by ceribus peribus at 5:07 PM on March 4, 2012
WHAT
THE
FUCK
RICK?
Oh, right, you've always been a hate-mongering, civil-rights denying, motherfucking douchebag of a human being. At least he's consistent.
posted by Aizkolari at 5:08 PM on March 4, 2012
THE
FUCK
RICK?
Oh, right, you've always been a hate-mongering, civil-rights denying, motherfucking douchebag of a human being. At least he's consistent.
posted by Aizkolari at 5:08 PM on March 4, 2012
« Older Want to bro down and crush code? | Do I Do Visions? Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
IN MEDEAS RAGE.
posted by Slackermagee at 4:33 PM on March 4, 2012 [4 favorites]