Rick Santorum: Will Anti-Romney Voters Embrace Anti-Privacy Values?

The close second place victory of Rick Santorum in Iowa has elevated the latest choice of Republican for the anti-Romney candidate. Civil libertarians, of course, are well acquainted with Santorum who lost his Pennsylvania seat due to his extremist views. Santorum has outdone his opponents in appealing to evangelical voters by not just virtually promising to go to war upon being elected but is opposed to the Griswold decision.


Santorum believes that the states have a right to criminalize private conduct considered immoral, including the right to use contraceptives. He allows a strong view of states rights to negate the protections of the bill of rights — allowing the 10th Amendment to wipe out the first eight amendment that precede it.

Santorum insists that “[t]he state has a right to do that, I have never questioned that the state has a right to do that. It is not a constitutional right, the state has the right to pass whatever statues they have. That is the thing I have said about the activism of the supreme court, they are creating right, and they should be left up to the people to decide. You shouldn’t create constitutional rights when states do dumb things. . . Let the people decide if the states are doing dumb things get rid of the legislature and replace them as opposed to creating constitutional laws that have consequences that were before them.” But, of course, that is a virtual invitation to majoritarian terror. What is the majority likes such “dumb things” as prejudice against those with alternative lifestyles or moral viewpoints.

Santorum’s greatest threat to civil liberties is found in the area of privacy. He is an advocate of morality codes and laws that cannot be enforced without shredding principles of privacy. Santorum believes that political power means the right to impose a moral agenda: “One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country…. It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.”

It is the very view rejected in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), where the Court struck down a law criminalizing the sale of contraceptives to married couples. In Griswold, Justice William O. Douglas wrote:

We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights – older than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions.

He appears to embrace the view of Potter Stewart that a law (as Stewart) can be “uncommonly silly” but still constitutional. However, that law denied the right of couples to control their own conception. It is a bit more than “silly” for most civil libertarians and libertarians.

Santorum’s views present a clear and present danger to privacy in this country. While he has not raised the image of federal judges being frog marched to Capitol Hill, his legal vision appears frozen in the amber of 1950s jurisprudence, if not the 1850s.

75 thoughts on “Rick Santorum: Will Anti-Romney Voters Embrace Anti-Privacy Values?

  1. Santorum can only be successful in a place like Iowa where the religious right is very strong. It is funny how the Republicans can be all in favor of personal rights except where it comes to women and sex. Could they be hiding something?

  2. Rick Santorum’s Top 10 Most Outrageous Campaign Statements
    http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/01/04/397355/rick-santorums-top-10-most-outrageous-campaign-statements/

    Excerpt:
    1) ANNUL ALL SAME-SEX MARRIAGES: Arguing that gay relationships “destabilize” society, Santorum wouldn’t offer any legal protections to gay relationships and has pledged to annul all same-sex marriages if elected president. During his 99-country tour of Iowa, Santorum frequently compared same-sex relationships to inanimate objects like trees, basketballs, beer, and paper towels and even tried to blame the economic crisis on gay people. As Santorum explained back in August, religious people have a constitutional right to discriminate against gays: “We have a right the Constitution of religious liberty but now the courts have created a super-right that’s above a right that’s actually in the Constitution, and that’s of sexual liberty. And I think that’s a wrong, that’s a destructive element.”

    3) CONTRACEPTION IS ‘A LICENSE TO DO THINGS’: Santorum has pledged to repeal all federal funding for contraception and allow the states to outlaw birth control, insisting that “it’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.”

    4) GAY SOLDIERS ‘CAUSE PROBLEMS FOR PEOPLE LIVING IN CLOSE QUARTERS’: During an appearance on Fox News Sunday in October, Santorum defended his support for Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell by arguing that gay soldiers would disrupt the military because “they’re in close quarters, they live with people, they obviously shower with people.” He also suggested that “there are people who were gay and lived the gay lifestyle and aren’t anymore.”

    5) OBAMA SHOULD OPPOSE ABORTION BECAUSE HE’S BLACK: During an appearance on Christian television in January, Santorum said he was surprised that President Obama didn’t know when life began — given his skin color. “I find it almost remarkable for a black man to say ‘now we are going to decide who are people and who are not people,” he explained.

    6) WE DON’T NEED FOOD STAMPS BECAUSE OBESITY RATES ARE SO HIGH: Speaking in Le Mars, Iowa in December, Santorum promised to significantly reduce federal funding for food stamps, arguing that the nation’s increasing obesity rates render the program unnecessary.

    7) ABORTION EXCEPTIONS TO PROTECT WOMEN’S HEALTH ARE ‘PHONY’: While discussing his track record as a champion of the partial birth abortion ban in June, Santorum dismissed exceptions other senators wanted to carve out to protect the life and health of mothers, calling such exceptions “phony.” “They wanted a health exception, which of course is a phony exception which would make the ban ineffective,” he said.

  3. rafflaw, You’re right. Santorum grabbed 18 or 19 percent of the evangelical vote in Iowa, I believe… Paul got the lion’s share… It was his final push, with the “one nation under God” line that helped him surge in the end, IMO.

  4. My guess at this point is that Romney will be the anointed candidate since he has now been endorsed by GHW Bush. However, in the insane world of
    Republican politics, who knows and Santorum could be the choice. My question for those who find Obama so distasteful is whether they deem Obama and Santorum equally as bad, or if sometimes hard choices must be made?

  5. I don’t think they’re hiding anything, really, rafflaw. It’s an age old question of men taking power through religion and religious ideals. Mankind (literally man, here) wrote most religious texts in the image than man is superior to woman and we should control them.

    I wouldn’t call that hiding anything. It’s pretty obvious.

    (though I imagine you could be hinting at something else…)

  6. :That is the thing I have said about the activism of the supreme court, they are creating right, and they should be left up to the people to decide.”

    “It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.”

    The Supreme Court should not decide b/c Santorum already has? The people should decide but Santorum has already decided for them? Sounds like sex with Santorum would be boooring or non-existent.

  7. This kind of argument always turns out to mean ‘the states have the right to make laws prohibiting anything I consider immoral’. If someone really meant that the constitution does not apply to the states, then my home state of South Carolina could re-institute chattel slavery. Should any state have majority Muslim population, they could institute Sharia law. Of course, this is not what Santorum means, since he does support federal overrides when a state makes something he personally considers immoral legal.

  8. “Sounds like sex with Santorum would be boooring or non-existent.” (bettykath)

    lol … booooring … and I never vote for anyone who promotes boring sex.

  9. “Mike S., There is no one worse than “O”.”

    SwM,

    The Devil Incarnate. Ron Paul will make everything better, Rick can’t win and Mitt can do no worse as President. Won’t we all be so much better off when we get that devil our of the White House and if we’re don’t feel better, who cares? We will have kept our purity.

  10. @Swarthmore Mom,

    Say it ain’t so! Santorum promises to bomb Iran – would allow states to legislate what goes on in our bedrooms – enthusiastically supports Israel policies, trade war with China – would keep troops in Iraq. Is he better than Obama? . (I’m praying for a recess appointment for Consumer Protection)

  11. Curious,

    SwM and I were both making snarky comments on those who think Obama the incarnation of evil, which he is’t despite his disappointing performance.

  12. “This kind of argument always turns out to mean ‘the states have the right to make laws prohibiting anything I consider immoral’.”

    Pat H.,

    Thank you for concisely stating the problem with the “States Rights” formulation. The thing is too that those who proclaim it know damn well that they’re talking about re-instituting “Jim Crow” and religious tyranny. The hypocrisy of it angers me.

  13. While keeping an occasional eye on the caucus last night one exchange caught my ear: someone on stage (MSNBC) mentioned Bachman and that it was odd that she wasn’t doing better, another commentator said that she appeals to the fundis but the pastors won’t endorse her because she’s a woman. He said that at one time she was the most radical of the bunch so she appealed to them but now ‘they’ have Santorum and Perry- they don’t need her anymore, she’ll be asked to drop out soon.

    That sounded plausible to me knowing the fundi mind-set. The one person that has been their standard bearer all along and even preaches the ‘submissive wife’ mantra is the person they won’t endorse because of her sex. The irony is matched by only the horror of how well Santorum did.

    Does anybody remember the scene in Blade Runner when Pris is killed? She (an android) gets shot and goes into a mechanical (and grotesque, shocking) fit. That’s what the republican field and the aspirations of the Republican base is like to me this year, I can’t shake that image when I think about them.

    This is really an epic political battle of ideas. It is truly a battle between the future and the past. This year the Republican party has morphed into (been revealed as?) a dangerous, inhumane creature flailing mindlessly. Every pre-intellectual, hate-filled, vicious impulse unleashed and displayed. The republicans have catered to and cultivated the base for 30 years and now it’s ascendant in the states and it’s destroying the party from within. I just hope it can be killed off before it gets (any more) control of the country.

  14. JT said that as he moved around the country people were disgusted with both major parties. I hope that is true because they are both being eaten from the inside. All the R and D candidates which people consider to have a chance at winning are bad people with terrible agendas for the people of this nation and the world.

    I fear that the election cycle will be the mental equivalent of 9/11–the basis of fear that will keep people’s minds shut to what is happening and what their actual choices may be.

    To S.M. and Mike S. (as they joke above) the idea that a person could actually think of voting for a good candidate is impossible. They believe this choice is simply ridiculous. They believe they must reelect a man who has already destroyed important parts of our nation. They must burn the nation to save it! This is indicative of fear based thought.

    They and others, both left and right, fail to consider that not one of the elite’s candidates will save the nation. It is not their job, it’s not what they are hired to do. They forget that people do have power and people can use that power should they so choose. The very idea that people could band together to oppose a candidate like Santorum or Obama because we believe in freedom and justice is to people like them, absurd and laughable.

    I’m am simply not that cynical. It is a shame to see older people so cynical and dismissive of the things which can occur as people work together for a common good.

  15. Mike S.,
    good response to the so-called states right arguments. Jim Crow would still be in business in the South if we allowed states to decide. Which states would not even allow contraception if they were allowed to? At some point, the health and welfare of us all requires reasonable federal action.

  16. Some of us old people are battle scarred. I find it hard to be optimistic about changing the way things are here…at least in the near future. The system is rigged against the majority of us. The Citizens United decision made a bad situation much worse. I was happy to see the Occupy Wall Street movement take root in this country and other parts of the world. I hope some changes come because of it–but that remains to be seen. We still haven’t seen any real financial reform in this country. On Wall Street, It’s still business as usual.

    I think what some of us fear is having a Presidency, the House and Senate, and the Supreme Court all under the control of a Republican party that doesn’t seem to care about the plight of the middle class/working people of this country.

    This is not the Republican party of my youth and early adulthood.

  17. Elaine,

    The only way what you fear happening won’t happen is to vote for a good candidate and to support with time, money and spirit, if not body, the people’s movement for justice.

    You are people who have seen the “impossible” happen. Rights were taken due not to the munificence of elite leaders but to the hard work of people who weren’t ready to settle for injustice for some and a little bit of possible justice for the few.

    Older people who have seen this struggle should speak of it and help lead the way in being for justice.

  18. You know? it occurs to me that it might be in our interests if Obama loses the election. (HEY! somebody get those smelling salts over to Mike will ya’?)

    Seriously; maybe a taste of real Down Home Fascist Theocrat like Santorum is what it will take to move people. Obama keeps shining his Jackboots and people keep saying he cares about the people. Well I don’t see the evidence of it.

    I see a man paid to betray America.

    Paid to run on the promise to undo the damage Bush did.

    To win and then to halfheartedly attempt to do good; secure in the knowledge that Congress would stop him; villainize him; openly disrespect him; make him ineffective and leave America waiting with open arms for someone who will take action.

    Paid to allow the passage of legislation that takes the rights of the people away and to do it in such a way that it looks like this is Obama’s fault as well.

    All the Republicans say, “We wanted to make an exception for American Citizens but that Big, Scary President (whom they have been running roughshod over for three years) made us include American Citizens. He was so Domineering and Forceful that us poor little Senators and Representatives just caved in under the pressure of his emaciated stare.”

    They probably don’t even care if they win the election or not. they can play this game for another four years I am sure. That may even be the plan. Let Obama do all the dirty work of destroying the Constitution then when the Republicans do take over as they must; because really they won’t trust the real power to a Democrat no matter how compliant he is or how much he says, “Yes’ah Mass’ah” when they order him to dry-rape the people again and again.

    I have never in my life presumed to call a black man “Uncle Tom” feeling that it was a designation rightfully left to the black community to assign. I still feel that way.

    But all rules have an exception and Uncle Tom Obama it turns out; is mine.

    He has betrayed his race as he has betrayed all of America. But perhaps the pain of that betrayal is worse in the community that was so rightfully proud of him for becoming our First Black President.

    Perhaps they more than most; will feel the sting of his betrayal because he has shamed the Black Community.

    Don’t believe it?

    Where are all those Black ministers and young politicians who were so optimistic and vocal in there support of Obama?

    Gone; that’s where. They tried and tried to defend his actions. But to no avail since Obama was determined to act to the detriment of the Black community and everyone elses community.

    So; the Black community shouldn’t feel that Obama’s feelings toward them have changed.

    They haven’t. He feels the same disdain and indifference to them now that he always has. The same disdain he apparently feels toward anyone who can’t pay that Big Corporate Dough.

    And remember; it’s not about his trying to pass the “Jobs Bill” or the “Obama Care Bill” which was just a clone of a lame ass “Romney Care Plan” used in Massachusetts and chosen as a compromise to mollify the people so Obama could have some creds to operate with for the rest of his term. It was chosen (and will probably be undone as soon as it is deemed safe to do so.) because the people have been screaming for Health Care for so long and have been Consistantly Denied Health Care for so long that they knew it was an emotional subject that would have a positive effect; sort of a false sign of hope that someone out there might actually do something to help them.

    And; as I think back. I can’t remember one piece of Legislation that had such a positive effect on the condition of the people as this did; even as lack lustre and weak as it is.

    But it was after all; just a carrott for us to chase. Another in a long line of very entertaining distractions enacted to keep our attention from the really big things Obama; under orders from the Corporate Structure was doing to erode the Foundations of our Liberty.

    You must look beyond the Grand Illusion to the Dirty deeds done out of the publics view. The things that end in Obama signing the NDAA

    Sorry . That’s it. And too many people still don’t see his Complicity so maybe a nice young; good looking Republican to take away their food and let their daughters die in childbirth because the blood running out of her a such a predigious rate; the blood that could be stopped by aborting the baby she is trying so bravely to bring into this world; that blood is just a “PHONEY EXCUSE” used by girls who wanted to have sex when they shouldn’t.

    Maybe then the people will wake up and smell the dead flesh of their neighbors and maybe; just maybe; do something other than worry about which Corporate Employee gets to be called President for the next four years.

    That’s all I’m saying.

  19. “The republicans have catered to and cultivated the base for 30 years and now it’s ascendant in the states and it’s destroying the party from within. I just hope it can be killed off before it gets (any more) control of the country.” (lotta)

    What comes to mind is a Woodrow Wilson quote that he spun from one of Napoleon’s maxims: Never murder a man who is committing suicide.

    (Napoleon’s was: Never interfere with the enemy when he is in the process of destroying himself.)

  20. “[t] the infamous Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (Haia) will be . . . meeting in Brenham, TX this weekend to try to get together and support one anti-Romney religious conservative.”

  21. “To S.M. and Mike S. (as they joke above) the idea that a person could actually think of voting for a good candidate is impossible.”

    Jill,

    I’m not joking I’m deadly serious. Just how many districts is the “Green Party” active in countrywide for instance? How many have won any kind of public office? Your idea of a “good” candidate is someone like Nader, who helped GW Bush to the White house in 2000, with all the misery that entailed. However, I can just imagine the smug certitude the Nader voters had that they were voting for the “right” candidate. you are the one who is actually telling a very bad joke when you urge voting for a “good” candidate.
    I believe that we are hanging by a thread over the abyss of a complete feudal fascist state. We’re not there yet but if we follow your prescription we will be there when the Republicans control all three branches of government. This is serious stuff going on here and you are the one playing around and being self-congratulatory for your purity. You probably helped elect GW Bush twice and now will work on it yet again with a clone.

  22. Angryman:

    I dont think many in America will care. Apparently about 83% of us are religious and I would imagine there are at least 30% plus evangelicals.

    The economy will be pretty good under a Santorum administration and he will probably cut spending. Most people are not libertarian on social issues and if they have a job and are making money, they arent really going to care about gay marriage (which effects somewhere around 4 million people according to an article in the Huffington Post) and only 2% of women in the US in any year have an abortion. It also seems abortion isnt the hot button issue it used to be 10, 15, 20 years ago.

    So it is conceivable Santorum could be elected and do what he wants. Most people dont believe the MSM anymore and they have ruined their reputation further by their coverage of Obama.

    So imo Santorum has a good chance of being elected. Only about 20-25% of people in this country identify as liberal. And I would guess a few of them are not economic liberals. Obama’s numbers are in the tank at this point, barring any unforeseen occurrences he is a lame duck.

    We only care about fascism/socialism when the economy isnt good, when it is good who cares. Most people are going to yawn if he strikes down gay marriage and abortion is the law of the land.

  23. “Seriously; maybe a taste of real Down Home Fascist Theocrat like Santorum is what it will take to move people”

    AMS,

    As I’ve written before many on the Left believed that in 1968 and look how many lives were ruined afterwards. This time around, 43 years later, with all the “Big Brother” technological changes, even if the people rise up they will be crushed. This doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t rise up, only that we have to be smart about it and organize. OWS is a start but there’s a lot more work to be done before a viable movement can exist. In the mean time I want to ensure the final takeover doesn’t happen and that the 99%’s precarious position doesn’t become worse, or irretrievable. I’m still the radical I always was, if you consider a rule by the people and equal justice under the law radical, as many now do. However, I’m a lot smarter now through experience and I know that the revolutionary giddiness we felt in the 60’s, was just a pipe dream of fighting an enemy that needed more than “angry words” to overcome it. That so many “radicals” were shocked by Kent State was evidence of their naivete. They kept using the word fascist, but somehow didn’t emotionally accept it. If they had the we might have really been the generation that changed things. Instead some of us bought suits, got married and turned their efforts towards making a living. I wasn’t one of them even though I’ve always been self supporting. I worked with people who were downtrodden and yet were mostly good people. I am loath to see further pain punishing their children and grandchildren. I’m in there as I’ve always been, that’s one of the reasons I use my real name.

  24. Obama 2012

    My beefs with the President have been when he’s been too conservative, acted like a Republican–even if a moderate one. Electing a conservative is not an option for me and shouldn’t be for any American. What, in the name of Vick’s VapoRub have Republicans done that was positive for America or American citizens since Nixon (giving him credit for opening trade with China and the EPA)? Nothing. Absolutely nothing good.

  25. Mike S.,
    I agree that there are no viable 3rd party options for Americans. At least not until we get full runoff elections and get rid of the electoral college.

  26. Jill,

    “The only way what you fear happening won’t happen is to vote for a good candidate and to support with time, money and spirit, if not body, the people’s movement for justice.”

    My husband and I have and do support candidates that we have faith in.

    I don’t think there IS a good presidential candidate. The only political candidate I know I’ll vote for in 2012 is Elizabeth Warren for Senator of my state.

    In 2000, some people voted for Ralph Nader, the person they thought was the best candidate. How did that work out for this country?

    I wish I could be more idealistic and optimistic. I’m short on hope these days.

  27. Elaine, Check out the Green Party and the Justice Party. You might also like Buddy Roemer, I don’t know. At any rate the presidential race is the least of our worries at this point. We are in serious problems right now and the only way out is a citizen’s movement. I don’t have a lot of hope either, but the outcome is assured if we do nothing.

  28. Mike S.

    I’m going to tell you something you’ll really hate. You have been completely and utterly WRONG about Obama since he began running. At every single point, you have been wrong. Your track record is spotlessly in the toilet. So for once, listen to the person who has been right, every freaking time.

    This is not about purity. If I thought Obama was the right person to vote for, I would scream it from every roof top. I wouldn’t let any person get in my way, I would say it a thousand times over. But he isn’t. He is the worst person to vote for because people like you and a host of other liberals can’t see through him. He takes advantage of your inability to see through him to do all sorts of things you would never have allowed had it been another candidate. You wouldn’t even allow Clinton to do the horrible shit he’s done.

    Please recognize you have a serious blind spot in this particular area. You cannot see the truth about Obama. I don’t know why, but you and others like you, don’t have that ability. So rely on people who do have that capacity. Rely on people who have been correct, who have told you the truth despite you ridiculing and being hateful to them. Those of us who haven’t been wrong and who have been strong enough to stand up to people like you who treated us like shit for telling the truth.

    You are wrong about Obama now, just as you have been wrong all along. Look at your track record and look at the track record of those of us who have been right. This is not a pissing contest. This is something I’m saying because it’s a life or death situation. It is time to admit when you have a blind spot about Obama and rely on those who do not. I am telling you that Obama is this nation’s worst nightmare and there is no freaking way in hell that you should vote for him.

    Take it however you like. I know what I’m saying is true and I also know that I’m going to fight back. Wish you’d join up but if you won’t, you won’t.

  29. Jill,

    Buddy Roemer doesn’t have a seat at the Republican table. They won’t even include him in their debates.

    Can you answer the following question that I posed in an earlier comment on this thread: “In 2000, some people voted for Ralph Nader, the person they thought was the best candidate. How did that work out for this country?”

  30. “I’m going to tell you something you’ll really hate. You have been completely and utterly WRONG about Obama since he began running. At every single point, you have been wrong. Your track record is spotlessly in the toilet. So for once, listen to the person who has been right, every freaking time.”

    Jill,

    It is true that you’ve hated Obama since before he became President and your views haven’t changed since, have they. When I make a mistake I admit it and I did with Obama in believing he was different, you not so much. Obama has been a terrible disappointment to me, yet I don’t regret my vote. Why? Simple. Had John McCain become President it is possible you and I wouldn’t be having this discussion, because the Internet would have become complete a corporate affair. We would have invaded Iran already as in “Bomb, Bomb, bomb, Iran”. The torture would have continued and the detainment would have continued. SCOTUS would be irretrievably conservative for the next thirty years and the 99% would have been even more miserable.

    “This is not a pissing contest. This is something I’m saying because it’s a life or death situation.”

    Yes it is Jill and I’ve been saying that in comments and in guest blogs. your solutions, however, be it Buddy Roehmer, Ron Paul, or anybody but Obama won’t save us right now.

    “Take it however you like. I know what I’m saying is true and I also know that I’m going to fight back. Wish you’d join up but if you won’t, you won’t.”

    I am fighting back Jill but you are too busy in your Obama hatred to even grasp that. My problem with you Jill is not about your Obama hatred, that’s your right. My problem is you offer no viable short term solution to the fact that if we get this group of Republicans controlling all three branches of government in 2012 it very well might be game over.

    Now let’s get to the underlying issue here and that is Barack Obama as President. He is definitely a centrist, which is not my particular cup of tea. However, he has been a better President than Bill Clinton, who was also not my cup of tea. Both Clinton and Obama have been far better in office than the alternatives. In truth the last decent President we had was LBJ and he was hung up in a bad war pushed on him by the same Right Wing you will help put in office in 2012. You view the world through your outrage and waste your intelligence by particularizing your anger onto individuals, like Obama.

    I’m probably more outraged than you simply because I’ve lived much longer. The difference is I understand the fact that this country has never lived up to the lofty aims of its founders. We have seen violations of civil rights and savagery throughout our history, remember the Native Americans. However, if your only view of the world is shaped by disappointments with the reality of our society’s faults, you miss the fact that we are no worse than the rest of the country’s in the world and ins some respects better. There lies your hope for meaningful change.

    By the same token with Obama you see him only in terms of your preconceived notions and so unsurprisingly he’s the personification of evil. The truth is much more nuanced than that. As I said before this reminds me so much of the 60’s. On everyone’s lips on the Left was that LBJ was a fascist and the government was fascist.

    The Movement, of which I was a part managed to get the ball of fascism rolling against them in Chicago. They went there with the intent to stir up trouble. How do I know this? Trust me I do. So then when the Chicago Police under Daley acted like pigs, they were “shocked” with outrage.
    The “fascists” actually were fascists, what a surprise.

    Obama is hardly the fascist you make him out to be, but the whole Republican troupe are. I haven’t been wrong Jill, in the sense I made the far better choice on who to vote for. That he hasn’t been as much of a change agent as I expected, has been a disappointment not a mistake.
    Do you really think that McCain/Palin wouldn’t have been significantly worse?

    You really want to change things Jill I’m with you, but you have no clear idea of how to do it, so I would be following you at my peril. Criticism is easy, real change is harder than wishful thinking. To be honest, as you have been, critics are a dime a dozen, but problem solvers are a rarity. You Jill, are quite simply only a critic, with no viable solutions to offer.

  31. @Jill

    What an odd argument on this blog. Forcefully stated, but without a single example. I’ll note an opposing argument…ACA. Yes, it is only a first-step and flawed, but it was DONE and Obama paid a heavy price for it. Now go tell those couple of million kids who are covered on their parent’s policies that Obama is their worst nightmare. And then movel on to someone with a pre-existing condition. And then talk to that sailor who kissed her girlfriend as she returned from Iraq. Your purity will f**k us up BIG TIME.

  32. Curious,

    I’ve given many examples. I’m glad that people have been brought home from Iraq. It’s interesting that you forgot to mention all the soldiers staying there as advisers. And then there’s those military contractors, the ones who don’t take an oath to anything, the ones who far outnumber our troops in just about everywhere the regular army is. And the drones and space weapons, those didn’t leave anymore than the base that larger than Vatican City did.

    Call me all the silly names you wish. People who can see reality will understand what is going on. People who cannot, won’t.

  33. Curious,

    To Jill, Obama is and has been the personification of all recent evil. I her view he can do nothing right and her complaints have been more or less a self-fulfilling prophecy. The only problem is she has not ever offered a viable alternative, unless you count Buddy Roehmer/Ralph Nader as viable.

  34. Weighing the success of the Obama administration has much less to do with where we are now compared with where we had hoped to be, and almost everything to do compared with where we would be now if McCain/Palin had been in office. [Goodness, I just made myself shiver.]

  35. angryman

    i could almost agree with you except i’m not sure if america could recover from a theofacist right now.

    besides we don’t know if rupert murdoch has ok’d santorum yet.

  36. “You really want to change things Jill I’m with you, but you have no clear idea of how to do it, so I would be following you at my peril.”

    An interesting exchange. I, as a basic ‘drop in’ without knowing the history of either poster, am impressed but not surprised how well they represent two pretty fundamental poles stemming from the disaster of our corporately owned government (there, now my prejudice is showing).

    Let me opine, FWIW, neither is ‘right’, and part of the frustration with our currently being screwed over by politicians, is that it doesn’t seem to me like we’re going to be able to ‘get it right’ for a long time, if ever. A humane, responsive, and responsible politics doesn’t seem to be in the cards. The way forward from that sad probability is, obviously, fertile ground for debate.

    I expect the openness with which Jill and Mike reveal their seemingly zero sum opinions has to do with knowing each other and the history here. I think that’s great.

    And if anyone has THE answer, please post it here!

  37. Angry man
    What happens when a theocrat like Santorum gets elected and then appoints theocratic Supreme Court justices? Our country could not afford that scenario in my opinion. Not to mention what would happen to women’s rights!

  38. I had errands so I couldn’t keep up with this discussion which is a shame – for me – because I have a whole host of thoughts on the matters raised here but I’m not going to belabor us all with a 2K word reply to about 13 posts. It’s a great thread.

    I don’t think Santorum can win because he’s crazy as is every Republican candidate but Romney. Romney is evil and a liar/whore. Everybody knows that. Romney is the only current Republican candidate that may be able to attract mainstream Republicans and the Republicans that label themselves Independents. I don’t think that’s enough to win against an incumbent though.

    This thought keeps popping into my mind though; will the Republican party allow itself to run Mitt Romney (the only candidate that isn’t bat-shit crazy and proud of it) and probably lose in a year that could see them win? A lot of people are unhappy with Obama and his re-election isn’t a lock against a palatable (R) candidate if one were available.

    If I were the GOP I would offer a palatable candidate anything to enter the race in a few months. Or arrange a draft if possible. Can the GOP actually be going to be led to defeat by the losers and loonies? If so, the GOP as an organization is dead and I just missed the headline. It’s just …inconceivable… to me even though they are obviously eating themselves from the inside. Is there no dark horse they can trot out to save themselves?

    I have no respect for the Democratic Party, they are their own worst enemy, but I expect better from the GOP because they just love that lock-step mentality, they are masters of developing a message and keeping all of their politicians focused on it. That they would be overtaken by a Neanderthal-like internal revolution and piss away a good opportunity is amazing to me. (Not to cast aspersion on our brother species, the Neanderthal.)

    Am I just plain deluding myself? This whole election cycle is just short-circuiting my brain. I just can’t believe what I’m watching happen.

  39. LK,

    “A lot of people are unhappy with Obama and his re-election isn’t a lock against a palatable (R) candidate if one were available.”

    And there is the rub, isn’t it? As you note, Santorum is flat out crazy and Romney is just whore, er, more of the same old same old. As to the GOP being dead as a party and just not knowing it yet? That is a strong possibility. As a party, they show every sign of fractiousness. What’s worse is that none of the factions as they’ve developed leave a place for moderate or traditional conservatives to go. Either their theocratic bent is too strong and/or their economic policies are disastrous and/or they are open war mongers. But as you say, the DNC is not a whit better. That’s what happens when money is allowed to pick candidates instead of the marketplace of ideas. A pox upon both their houses of ill-repute.

    I shouldn’t say things like that.

    It gives a bad name to hookers.

  40. pete,

    Please. Jeb gives a bad name to pimps. He wouldn’t just be running against other R’s and D’s, he’d be running against his treasonous idiot brother too.

  41. Oro Lee, I think you’re right about our dissatisfaction, we wanted a complete change and go Democratic social policy and John McCain foreign/security policies on steroids. That really po’s me.

    *******

    Rafflaw, I wouldn’t presume to speak for AM but the ‘berserker’ model of strategic voting is something I have thought about. The end of the road if you are going to work against both your and your opposers best interest specifically to stir up dissent by increasing the harm to the citizenry is IMO, that cities burn. The greatest virtue to a social safety net is that it gives people a stake in maintaining society, take that away and vex them enough and they start setting fires and rioting. I can see a Republican presidency doing that.

    I’ve seen it a couple of times. 10 seconds after the Rodney King verdict the better half said (beating me to the punch) “If LA isn’t in flames by supper I just don’t know what this country is coming too.” It was. One of the things I was quick to notice after great and destructive unrest is that the government actually responded with some real reforms. It was scared and didn’t want that stuff, it’s bad for business and the governments business is to stay in business.

    I see 3 possibilities for voting: 1. Obama (hold your nose and do it), 2.vote your soul- a write in or whatever, or 3. go full-tilt berserker. I really don’t know what I’m going to do.

    Yes, there would be blood, people would be killed, all those new ‘toys’ that will deafen you or blind you or cook you like a hot-dog in a microwave would be used. I gives me pause but history shows that all great movements were bought with blood. I’m still considering all options. Srsly, almost 50 years of politics and playing the game and THIS is what I get for coloring inside the lines? Fascism-lite or the abyss as a choice? ‘Berserk’ is on my radar for the first time.

  42. lets face it , they are scraping the bottom of the barrel.
    that and foxnews has been rewriting history to make almost all of w’s screwups into obamas fault.

    jeb riding in on a white horse with palin beside him to wrest the republican convention from the godless morman romney.

    Yeah, i know it won’t happen, but it’s fun to post it at freerepublic or foxnation just to watch them drool.

  43. Raf, see Pete’s answer- Jeb’s name comes up. That he gives a bad name to hookers and would have to run against his brother as Gene rightly observes might not bother him or the GOP. Maybe someone that isn’t on the radar now.

    I suspect that Gene is telling me in the most gentle way possible (you ARE a sweety) is that I’m just going to a happy place mentally to lessen the complete horror of this year’s political reality.

    But here’s a strange thought: if the Republicans are irreparably broken wouldn’t it be a real possibility that that could be a vehicle for a real third party? The mainstream GOP can just become the party of madness or reconstitute itself as a new (old) party by divorcing the base. I don’t think the base would take that and not nucleate around their own ‘new’ party and slate of candidates. The Republicans are in a pickle.

    Dog save the Republic.

  44. Pete: “…Yeah, i know it won’t happen, but it’s fun to post it at freerepublic or foxnation just to watch them drool.” (Jeb and Palin)
    —–

    You wicked man, you :-)

    I’m so glad you post on TurleyBlawg. And AngryMan too.

  45. Lotta,
    Jeb doesn’t have a prayer or the stomach for the fight. I don’t think a 3rd party can happen unless the voting system is changed. And I know nothing like that will ever happen while Citizens United is still around.

  46. Gene, :-) OK, but you know, the mind still recoils in self defense. :-)

    Rafflaw, never say never. Who in the GOP would have thought their creature would have turn on them and carry off their bride. :-)

  47. I would like to have such a fine log also, in case I had the opportunity to meet a couple of candidates. Think of presenting a corsage, only different.

  48. Santo Rum is a product in Sicily. When Rick’s grandaddy worked his way through Ellis Island they changed his name to Santorum from Sanitarium.

  49. The Framers of the Bill of Rights ordinated the ten propositions and some would say that there is an order of importance and an order or sequence such that one stands on the previous statements. That the Tenth Amendment follows the Ninth has no consequence to the dim witted who hold the Tenth Amendment on a mighty pedestal. “States Rights!” these fellows have proclaimed with reverence since the days of Jim Crow. What on Earth is the Federal Government doing intruding on the right of a mob to lynch a negro? That, they proclaimed is a matter for States Rights. Nowdays the rednecks and bigots dont rattle the States Rights sword in support of lynchings.

    Here is the text of the Ninth Amendment followed by the Tenth:

    Amendment IX [ Annotations ]
    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

    Amendment X [ Annotations ]
    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    Thus it is a simple proposition understood by most Fifth Graders in this nation that there are rights retained by the people which are not specifically enumerated in the Constitution by which can not be denied The Constitution speaks to Powers and Rights. By reading the 9th and 19th together it is a slam dunk, state rights are not state powers and state rights do not trump individual rights retained by the people. State “rights” are not referenced in the Tenth Amendment. Consider that Santorum.

    We will say it again Rick. There is no enumerated Power set forth in the Constitution allowing a state or the federal government to deny people the right to marry, have sex, read a book or a blog, cover their private parts, hide their diary, fart in public, or engage in sex with a condom. The Tenth Amendment, Mister Santorum, speaks to state powers not delegated to the United States. The words states rights are not found therein.

    So get it straight–Santo Rum: The Ninth Amendment speaks of RIGHTS either enumerated in the Constitution or retained by the people. The Tenth Amendment does not speak to RIGHTS of people. It speaks to Powers not delegated to the feds which are reserved to the states.

    Powers are not rights schmucko. You could not run for Class President of the Fifth Grade on your dumb reading of the Tenth Amendment.

  50. All hopes of averting certain calamity is already gone. We’re in the suffering stages now and, as it picks up speed and ever more people are affected we’ll see just how poorly the corporate agenda has helped mankind. We’re polluting our planet beyond habitability and killing ourselves in the process. No leadership in our country is doing the entire world a disservice and condemning us all to a dismal future.

  51. Angry Man – in 2000 Nader used that same logic to suggest we would all be better off if Boy Blunder won. 4 years under his rule would convince the nation that we needed a different direction. How did that work out for us?

    While I am disappointed in Obama and the entire Democratic party I don’t see any choice but to fight for them in election years and with them while they are in office. We have gotten so far off track that Obama is to the right of Reagan on many issues yet he is labeled a socialist. It will take a generation to get back to sanity (if ever). Past my time left but maybe I can save my grandchildren’s world.

  52. Seating grand juries to probe matters of war crimes and grand theft would be a good start.

    The pardon pen of Gerald Ford told little Cheneys and Rummies and Wolfies exactly what the consequences would be for the subversion of government: nothing, nothing at all.

    The resulting nightmare continues apace. Only perp-walks can solve this at this point.

  53. About a year ago, once it was clear that Obama was exceeding my most dire predictions, I told myself I’d vote for anyone but him. As the election gets closer, I’m starting to waver. But sadly, I do believe that in order for meaningful change to happen in this country, there will need to be blood. And the quickest way of bringing things to a head is to put someone like a Bachman and now a Santorum in there. To those worried about disappearing women’s rights, do you really think American women would take that lying down? The only way to open people’s eyes to the road we’re heading down is to give republicans the chance to make it happen. Then, sooner or later, they’ll cross a few too many lines, and the people will bite back, hard, like Wisconsin times 10. Undoubtedly, the government will bite back even harder, but I truly believe that that’s the only way things will change. I feel kind of selfish for saying this because I’m relatively young with no kids. I do have a niece, and that gives me pause, but if we allow this corporatocracy to perpetuate itself, we’re not doing our descendants any favors.
    Uggg, I don’t know.

Comments are closed.