Rick Santorum's candidacy

[WhoWee]

Why don't you summarize this fairly -to be fair?

You'd like me to summarize his voting record?

 

[turbo]

You'd like me to summarize his voting record?

Yes, and his opinions, too. Please don't omit right-wing stuff.

 

[Jasongreat]

It seems that the same groups that are arguing that money in planned parenthood can be specifically allocated, were adament that the chamber of commerce could not keep its foreign funds separated from domestic funds, during the last election. That statement also works if you switch the chamber and PP.

I think it is semantics, if the chamber uses foreign funds to pay domestic bills, it frees up domestic money that would not have otherwise been available. So even though the foreign money did not specifically go to the campaign adds, more funds were available because of foreign money. The same can be said for planned parenthood, all money going to planned parenthood pay for abortions, might not be direct funding, but it makes the amount spent on abortions available for use.

 

[Evo]

Challenged by whom? FC suggested 10%. PP has been under investigation by the a Congressional Oversight and Investigations subcommittee since Sept 15, "relating to its use of federal funding and its compliance with federal restrictions on the funding of abortion".

The investigation is nothing more than a bogus witch hunt, IMO which was brought about by an anti-abortion religious activist group with such insane accusations as PP is involved in sex trafficking!

Planned Parenthood Investigation Is An Abuse Of Government Resources

WASHINGTON -- Ranking Democrats on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce sharply criticized Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) on Tuesday over his call for a far-reaching investigation into Planned Parenthood and its handling of federal funding.

After Republican lawmakers tried and failed to defund Planned Parenthood during federal budget negotiations in February, the anti-abortion activist group Americans United for Life released a 30-page report that accused the family planning provider of misusing federal funds, failing to report child sex abuse, assisting sex traffickers and a host of other illegal activities, though similar accusations were made against Planned Parenthood and debunked earlier this year. The purpose of AUL's report was to convince Congress to investigate Planned Parenthood and revoke its taxpayer funds.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...estigation-government-resources_n_984002.html

 

[WhoWee]

Yes, and his opinions, too. Please don't omit right-wing stuff.

This is a log of his key votes - according to the Washington Post.
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/S000059/key-votes/page1/

He typically voted with Republicans.

 

[Char. Limit]

It seems that the same groups that are arguing that money in planned parenthood can be specifically allocated, were adament that the chamber of commerce could not keep its foreign funds separated from domestic funds, during the last election. That statement also works if you switch the chamber and PP.

I think it is semantics, if the chamber uses foreign funds to pay domestic bills, it frees up domestic money that would not have otherwise been available. So even though the foreign money did not specifically go to the campaign adds, more funds were available because of foreign money. The same can be said for planned parenthood, all money going to planned parenthood pay for abortions, might not be direct funding, but it makes the amount spent on abortions available for use.

So, let me get this straight, cause I want to make sure I have you correctly. Even though PP uses only 3% of its money on abortions, ALL money going to planned parenthood is paying for abortions? And for the record, I've never made the argument that the CoC couldn't keep foreign and domestic funds separate. I think as long as you're careful, of course you can. And I don't see the difference here.

 

[ThomasT]

I wonder if Santorum has heard about the new Abortionplex. I can't link to it because it's in The Onion and they sometimes use bad words.

 

[Jasongreat]

So, let me get this straight, cause I want to make sure I have you correctly. Even though PP uses only 3% of its money on abortions, ALL money going to planned parenthood is paying for abortions? And for the record, I've never made the argument that the CoC couldn't keep foreign and domestic funds separate. I think as long as you're careful, of course you can. And I don't see the difference here.

Not that ALL money going to PP is paying for abortions, but that ALL the money going to PP makes paying for abortions easier.

 

[Char. Limit]

Not that ALL money going to PP is paying for abortions, but that ALL the money going to PP makes paying for abortions easier.

But you can't make that argument unless you make the claim that it's impossible to segregate money within an organization, a claim that I disagree with.

 

[Jasongreat]

But you can't make that argument unless you make the claim that it's impossible to segregate money within an organization, a claim that I disagree with.

I think I can make that argument. :) You may disagree, which you have a right to do so, and I hope you do. Without dissent how can we come to truth?

I agree that corporations can segregate monies. However, there is no need to, so why would they? I can put 30% federal money into my charity, I can use it to pay overhead, advertising and any number of things. Then I can take the money that I don't have to use for those purposes, and invest in abortions. I can still claim with immunity as far as abortion funding goes that not one cent of the 30% federal funding goes to abortions. It is even easier to prove that only 3% of that funding goes to abortion.

 

[AlephZero]

But you can't make that argument unless you make the claim that it's impossible to segregate money within an organization.

It might be possible to do that in theory, but the main point of "money" is that it is fungible. When you give somebody or some organization a dollar bill, you can't attach a label to it saying "it's illegal to spend this particaular dollar bill on anything except XYZ".

 

[WhoWee]

From the posts in this thread I have to wonder if a race between Santorum vs Obama wouldn't become the pro-religion candidate Santorum vs the anti-religion candidate Obama - given the current controversy with the Catholic madate - seems to be shaping up that way - doesn't it?

 

[daveb]

From the posts in this thread I have to wonder if a race between Santorum vs Obama wouldn't become the pro-religion candidate Santorum vs the anti-religion candidate Obama - given the current controversy with the Catholic madate - seems to be shaping up that way - doesn't it?

I find it ironic that Obama is now being labeled anti-religion by some on the right when he was labeled a radical Christian back in the Reverend Wright days, then a Muslim. I wonder what's next.

 

[WhoWee]

I find it ironic that Obama is now being labeled anti-religion by some on the right when he was labeled a radical Christian back in the Reverend Wright days, then a Muslim. I wonder what's next.

There's an old saying - 'you are what you eat' - if he joins another church like Rev Wright's, or makes more speeches about the US not being a Christian country/one of the largest Muslim countries, or it becomes known he attended another school similar to the Muslim one, or if his participation at a prayer breakfast is dismissed as insincere, or he squares off with the Catholics or another group again - then the new thing might become an issue - IMO of course.

 

[lisab]

I find it ironic that Obama is now being labeled anti-religion by some on the right when he was labeled a radical Christian back in the Reverend Wright days, then a Muslim. I wonder what's next.

:rofl: Well to some on the fringe who see a boogie man behind every blade of grass, Obama seems to be the embodiment of their apparitions, and whatever it is they're afraid of changes all the time: Obama is a Muslim/socialist/foreign/fear-of-the-week-goes-here! Really interesting...it says a whole lot about the collective psyche of those who are on the fringe. Be afraid! Be very afraid!

IMveryHO, of course .

 

[WhoWee]

:rofl: Well to some on the fringe who see a boogie man behind every blade of grass, Obama seems to be the embodiment of their apparitions, and whatever it is they're afraid of changes all the time: Obama is a Muslim/socialist/foreign/fear-of-the-week-goes-here! Really interesting...it says a whole lot about the collective psyche of those who are on the fringe. Be afraid! Be very afraid!

IMveryHO, of course .

How fitting in a Santorum thread - IMO of course. Does anyone want to talk about Santorum's experience in Congress or his depth of knowledge regarding foreign affairs or peraps his debate skills - or are we only concerned with his stand on social issues?

 

[Char. Limit]

How fitting in a Santorum thread - IMO of course. Does anyone want to talk about Santorum's experience in Congress or his depth of knowledge regarding foreign affairs or peraps his debate skills - or are we only concerned with his stand on social issues?

I for one would never vote for the man, solely BECAUSE of his stance on social issues. The man's anti-science, after all.

 

[WhoWee]

I for one would never vote for the man, solely BECAUSE of his stance on social issues. The man's anti-science, after all.

Are you referring to post 8?

 

[Char. Limit]

Are you referring to post 8?

Just looked, and no. I'm referring to his stances on global warming and creationism, both of which I consider to be anti-science stances (although the latter considerably more so).

 

[WhoWee]

Just looked, and no. I'm referring to his stances on global warming and creationism, both of which I consider to be anti-science stances (although the latter considerably more so).

What is his stance on global warming? I seem to recall he's against Cap and Trade?

 

[Char. Limit]

What is his stance on global warming? I seem to recall he's against Cap and Trade?

Yes, and a little bit more - he seems to believe that global warming itself is a hoax, apparently (and this is opinion) believing that scientists have nothing better to do than to craft stories about climate to make the population spend money.

Source: http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns...ever-believed-global-warming-hoax-113739.html

"Speaker Gingrich has supported cap and trade for more than a dozen years. Now, he wants business incentives to go along with cap and trade, but he supported cap and trade, and sat on the couch with Nancy Pelosi and said that global warming had to be addressed by Congress," Santorum said. "Who is he or who's Governor Romney to be able to go after President Obama? I've never supported even the hoax of global warming."

 

[WhoWee]

Yes, and a little bit more - he seems to believe that global warming itself is a hoax, apparently (and this is opinion) believing that scientists have nothing better to do than to craft stories about climate to make the population spend money.

Source: http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns...ever-believed-global-warming-hoax-113739.html

Are we permitted to discuss this topic?

 

[Char. Limit]

Are we permitted to discuss this topic?

I'm not sure. It might be better to let it slide... I don't want to get banned after all!

I will still categorically refuse to support any candidate who endorses creationism, though, no matter how much he agrees with my view otherwise. Such a stance is indefensible.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Santorum scared of women's emotions in combat. I personally know a few outdoorish hunter women who are just as "tough" as any man.
http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#/video/us/2012/02/10/sot-santorum-women-in-combat.cnn

 

[turbo]

Santorum scared of women's emotions in combat. I personally know a few outdoorish hunter women who are just as "tough" as any man.
http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#/video/us/2012/02/10/sot-santorum-women-in-combat.cnn

Me, too Greg. One of my wife's closest friends calls herself one-shot Shaw, because she prides herself on shooting deer with a kill-shot and not blazing away at them. I'm the same way, and only hunt with a Ruger Model 1 (single-shot) unless it is wet outside. Then I'll take one of my antique Winchester .30-30s out of the safe and hunt with that. I'd gladly have "one-shot Shaw" watching my back.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Yes, and a little bit more - he seems to believe that global warming itself is a hoax

Are we permitted to discuss this topic?

I'm not sure. It might be better to let it slide... I don't want to get banned after all!

Rules are rules and apply to all the forum.

 

[SHISHKABOB]

is santorum worried about women in the army for the same reason why some people were worried about gay people in the army? Fear that they'd be "distractions"? If so I think that's fairly insulting to the armed forces.

 

[Char. Limit]

is santorum worried about women in the army for the same reason why some people were worried about gay people in the army? Fear that they'd be "distractions"? If so I think that's fairly insulting to the armed forces.

From what I get, he's worried because women are apparently too emotional to serve on the front line. Which is of course a crock, but that's what he believes.

 

[Oltz]

is santorum worried about women in the army for the same reason why some people were worried about gay people in the army? Fear that they'd be "distractions"? If so I think that's fairly insulting to the armed forces.

You are taking Distraction the wrong way. Having been in the army and having fought in Iraq please let me explain.

Women in combat are a distraction because the men are morried about protecting the women then they are about themselves or the mission. Right or not it leads to more mistakes and more bad choices. I have seen it. Women are fine in the military and are fine in non combat MOS's ie medic, supply, intel whatever.

Sorry for OT

 

[turbo]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/10/rick-santorum-women-military-combat-roles_n_1267851.html

Santorum has walked that back and said that it's the men who could emotional if they see a woman in harm's way. He should be managing a Waffle House.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Santorum claims that without faith the US is heading towards a French Revolution

Women in combat are a distraction because the men are morried about protecting the women then they are about themselves or the mission. Right or not it leads to more mistakes and more bad choices. I have seen it. Women are fine in the military and are fine in non combat MOS's ie medic, supply, intel whatever.

Sorry but I don't buy that this is a necessary thing that can't be removed without proper training. Whilst I've never been in the army I did Judo at university with a mixed class and let me tell you if we were ever out and in trouble I wouldn't worry about protecting the women especially. In fact I would probably rely on many of those women to help stop the fight and take care of those less able to defend themselves.

 

[Jasongreat]

Here is Santorums CPAC speech, there was quite abit of fawning over it going on, on a certain channel today, but I haven't had a chance to watch it yet.

 

[MarcoD]

I always forget the US is such a religious place.

 

[WhoWee]

I always forget the US is such a religious place.

In the industrial northern cities - it seems there's a church on every corner - the south is known as the biblebelt - like it or not religion is part of our culture.

 

[SHISHKABOB]

In the industrial northern cities - it seems there's a church on every corner - the south is known as the biblebelt - like it or not religion is part of our culture.

maybe yours, not mine : /