Santorum: Vote For Me . . . Or Die?

It is good to see Rick Santorum latching on to a positive theme after attacking educators, gays, and other candidates. Now he appears quite positive that we will all die if we do not elect him.

In speaking before the Colorado Christian University, Santorum referred to the sirens of disaster and warned “Go back and read what the sirens did once you arrived on that island. They devour you. They destroy you. They consume you.” In other words, if you want to avoid being devoured, vote Santorum.

The problem is that the description by Homer would appear to give an edge to Gingrich in his experience dealing with three sirens:

“He will not see his lady nor his children
in joy, crowding about him, home from sea;
the Sirens will sing his mind away
on their sweet meadow lolling”

Fortunately, with his other call to “Just Say No To Education,” it is doubtful that anyone would be in a position to challenge the reference. Indeed, Santorum appears to be fashioning himself as Odysseus who notably stuffed his followers ears with beeswax. That fits.

That frees the faithful to act on the warning: “Ladies and gentleman we cannot listen to the siren song. We cannot listen to President Obama and we can’t listen to those in our party who want to be just a little bit less than what the Democrats and the left is doing to our country.”

Source: CBS

46 thoughts on “Santorum: Vote For Me . . . Or Die?

  1. his other call to “Just Say No To Education”

    This was a mystifying plank in the right wing platform until I read a paper in Psychological Science Journal entitled “Bright Minds and Dark Attitudes: Lower Cognitive Ability Predicts Greater Prejudice Through Right-Wing Ideology and Low Intergroup Contact” (free PDF is available for download)…

    It should give liberals and moderates serious concern. Especially when you see teens being interviewed in the U.S.eh? who cannot answer the most fundamental of questions.

    The study shows that these young people will tend to become right wingers driving by prejudice upon very little exposure to Santorum type right wing propaganda.

    That is why the right-wing pumps out the words from another world and why many do not detect it.

  2. Elaine, I think you are taking these politicians too seriously! Not that the consequences of their brand isn’t devastating. But the world doesn’t need fewer rational individuals, though it’s hard to make a convincing case for that sometimes it seems. Now “I’d rather die than live under the consequences of a Santorum”, now that might be defensible.

  3. Santorum cannot wait to bomb people . In my view he is too unstable even to run a burger king . We all will need Valium under him . The self righteousness is simply nauseating!

  4. Obama = NDAA= Romney = Gingrich= patriot Act
    Santorum = anti gay , antimuslim by his own mouth, not thru guilt by association or he said she said.

    These are the 4/5 options for 2012 .

  5. NO candidate or the President has spoken about or endorsed the current ERA bills SJ Res 21 and HR Res 69. These simple bills cannot get out of committee and the media and others are oblivious to the ERA issue. It is time that all people demand politicians pass the ERA and endorse it now. if they do not the women voters must vote all these men out of office.

  6. Down here in South Carolina this Rickyboy Santorum didnt get much traction. Partly because Newt is next door from Georgia and knew how to push the Southern Strategy buttons. Ricky was not good at pushing the code words around like States Rights and Welfare Cheats. But what got me about him is the fact that he has life time medical insurance by virtue of having been in Congress for a few years. Then in the debate down in Floriday a woman got up and asked all four of them squids a question posed like this: I am ill, I lost my job and my insurance and what do I do to survive? Well all four did a great floor dance but none addressed her question. Ricky boy runs back home to take care of one of his kids on the government’s dime (dime is like States Rights– a misnomer) and does not think or blink that the rest of us know that he is living off socialized medicine. The kind where they privatize the gains and socialize the losses. Only in America would socialized medicine cover only the few, the proud, the brainless and the ugly. Excuse the rant I live in South Carolina and tend to go off on tangents. We had some tentheads from the Klan parading around the other night and fussed up all the chickens and the sqauwk twenty four seven now.

  7. Let us not forget that when Santorum’s wife needed an abortion to save her life, she got it. He would do everything he could to keep anyone else doing the same.. Maybe only women married to super Christians like him are to be considered more important that a fetus.

  8. He’s just doing his bit to appeal to the crazies.

    Romney can’t do it because he has to appear “presidential” if they have any hope of attracting independents come November.

  9. Santorum Tells Sick Kid Not To Complain About $1 Million Drug Costs Because People Pay $900 For An IPad
    By Marie Diamond on Feb 3, 2012
    http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/02/03/417657/santorum-tells-sick-kid-not-to-complain-about-1-million-drug-costs-because-people-pay-900-for-an-ipad/

    While campaigning yesterday in Woodland Park, Colorado, GOP contender Rick Santorum told a sick child and his mother that they shouldn’t complain about the exorbitant cost of his medication because some people spend $900 on iPads. He appeared unmoved by the plight of the family, staunchly defending drug companies’ right to charge whatever they want.

    The candidate also said that the parent and child unjustly felt entitled to get life-saving care at an affordable rate:

    GOP contender Rick Santorum had a heated exchange with a mother and her sick young son Wednesday, arguing that drug companies were entitled to charge whatever the market demanded for life-saving therapies.[…]

    “People have no problem paying $900 for an iPad,” Santorum said, “but paying $900 for a drug they have a problem with — it keeps you alive. Why? Because you’ve been conditioned to think health care is something you can get without having to pay for it.”

    The mother said the boy was on the drug Abilify, used to treat schizophrenia, and that, on paper, its costs would exceed $1 million each year.

    Santorum said drugs take years to develop and cost millions of dollars to produce, and manufacturers need to turn a profit or they would stop developing new drugs.

    Santorum proceeded to lecture the mother and suggest she should be grateful to the drug companies for saving her son’s life. “He’s alive today because drug companies provide care,” Santorum said. “And if they didn’t think they could make money providing that drug, that drug wouldn’t be here.” He also claimed it would “freeze innovation” if pharmaceutical companies were required to offer their drugs at a reasonable price.

    Although Santorum has been a vocal opponent of health care reform, his callous reaction is somewhat surprising given that he himself is the father of a daughter with a rare genetic disorder. But if the Colorado mother thought Santorum might be sympathetic to families in similar situations who happen to be less wealthy, she was sadly mistaken.

  10. Carol,
    I forgot about the abortion for Santorum’s wife. Between that and Elaine’s link to the news that the government paying for prescriptions would freeze innovation according to Santorum just provides additional evidence that Jesus was a liberal and Rick just can’t handle that fact.

  11. Karen Santorum’s Impure Youth
    By Amanda Marcotte | Posted Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2012
    http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/01/17/the_anti_fornication_anti_abortion_wife_of_rick_santorum_lived_very_differently_in_her_20s_.html

    Excerpt;
    Rick and Karen Santorum really take the cake in the “do as I say, not as I do” department. Building on earlier revelations that the Santorums themselves considered abortion for health reasons while Rick Santorum worked diligently to deny that right to others is the new revelation that Karen Santorum spent most of her 20s living with her much-older boyfriend out of wedlock. Oh yeah, and that boyfriend was an outspoken abortion provider, the kind of person her husband would very much like to throw in jail.

    The detail in this story that seems to be grossing people out the most is that Karen, whose last name was Garver when she was living openly as the kind of fornicator she and her husband now claim is so sinful the government should work against you, was actually delivered by her boyfriend Tom Allen when she was born in 1960. I’m from a small town, so that probably doesn’t have the effect on me that it does on people who aren’t used to some of the uncomfortably close romantic entanglements people can get in. That this detail captures people’s attention suggests that we’ve become a little too inured to the hypocrisy of right wingers who carry on—and Rick Santorum is the worst—about how the government should restrict contraception access and teach abstinence-only because sex outside of marriage is sinful and how abortion providers should be subject to criminal penalties. It’s worth noting that when it comes to the black markets of the sort that conservatives wish to create around abortion, girlfriends and partners often get caught up in police stings, so if the laws the Santorums want were in place back then, it may not just have been Dr. Allen in danger but also a young Karen Garver. But even if not, since she lived with him for so long, she basically benefitted materially from “abortion money” he earned providing abortions, money that helped pay for her housing, if nothing else.

  12. Before Karen Met Rick
    Jan 16, 2012 12:00 AM EST
    The GOP contender’s hard-core pro-life wife once dated an abortion provider.
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/01/15/mrs-santorum-s-abortion-doctor-boyfriend.html

    Excerpt:
    Karen Santorum, the ultra-pro-life wife and mother of seven home-schooled children, has been the perfect complement to her husband, Rick, as he chases the Republican presidential nomination. On the campaign trail, the candidate often refers to her book, Letters to Gabriel, the story of the devoutly Catholic couple’s traumatic late-term 1997 miscarriage (the 20-week-old fetus lived two hours outside the womb). The couple opposes birth control as well as abortion, even in cases of rape.

    But Mrs. Santorum, 51, apparently wasn’t always committed to the cause. In fact, her live-in partner through most of her 20s was Tom Allen, a Pittsburgh obstetrician and abortion provider 40 years older than she, who remains an outspoken crusader for reproductive rights and liberal ideals. Dr. Allen has known Mrs. Santorum, born Karen Garver, her entire life: he delivered her in 1960.

    “Karen was a lovely girl, very intelligent and sweet,” says Allen, who at 92 uses a walker but retains a sly smile. A wine aficionado who frequented the Pittsburgh Symphony and was active in the local chapter of the ACLU, he lives with his wife of 16 years, Judi—they started dating in 1989, soon after he and Garver split—in the same large detached row house where he lived with the woman who would become Santorum’s wife. He and Garver also lived for several years in another house a few blocks away. “Karen had no problems with what I did for a living,” says Allen, who helped start one of the first hospital-sanctioned abortion clinics in Pennsylvania. “We never really discussed it.” (The Santorum campaign did not return repeated requests for comment on the relationship.)

  13. Santorum: “People have no problem paying $900 for an iPad,” Santorum said, “but paying $900 for a drug they have a problem with — it keeps you alive. Why?”
    ===

    Ummm, people don’t have to buy multiple IPads a month/year or die, maybe that’s it Rick.

  14. Lotta,

    Why is it that so many of the overtly and overly religious folks often appear heartless about the life situations of people with problems? They appear to care more about the wealth of corporations than the health and welfare of human beings.

  15. Elaine, having everything boil down to the will of a god and some form of immortality (spiritual if not corporeal) kinda’ lets you off the hook for any short term problem solving. Religion is the ultimate rationale for procrastination and it’s probably the best reason I have for hating- just plain hating- religion.

  16. Blouise and Gene, Hi guys! Dan Savage was sooooooo right….. :-)

    I’m embarrassed in advance for the way history will look back on this period in our political evolution. Shaming us (U. S.) forward?

  17. Elaine,

    The question you posed to Lotta is a deeply philosophical one and I’ve asked myself that same question many times.

    I think it has to do with the nature of religion and the personality of the individual.

    In Christianity we have a progression of revelation starting with The Word (recognition of the I AM as revealed to Abraham), The Law (codified in the Ten Commandments to Moses), The Love (based on the teachings of Jesus) … {reference The (so called) Bible LXX Greek translation by a group of 70 Hebrew scholars in the third century BC upon which New Testament writers relied when creating the Christian Bible and “Summa theologica” of St. Thomas Aquinas}

    Integrating The Word, The Law, and The Love has long been the challenge individual Christians and those raised in a Christian culture face. I have found that certain aspects of the three (The Word, The Law, The Love) appeal more strongly to certain personalities. The “overtly and overly religious” usually find great personality comfort in The Law.

  18. “I’m embarrassed in advance for the way history will look back on this period in our political evolution. Shaming us (U. S.) forward?” (lotta)

    Lots of that in our history starting with the Slave Trade and steadily moving forward to Manifest Destiny to Torture Works …

  19. Elaine, just another example of the perversion of religious thought- or an example of perverse religious thought.

    “Alabama Sen. Shadrack McGill: Bible justifies poor teacher pay”

    “McGill said that by paying legislators more, they’re less susceptible to taking bribes.”

    “He needs to make enough that he can say no, in regards to temptation. … Teachers need to make the money that they need to make. There needs to be a balance there. If you double what you’re paying education, you know what’s going to happen? I’ve heard the comment many times, ‘Well, the quality of education’s going to go up.’ That’s never proven to happen, guys.

    “It’s a Biblical principle. If you double a teacher’s pay scale, you’ll attract people who aren’t called to teach.

    http://educatingsouthcarolina.blogspot.com/2012/02/alabama-sen-shadrack-mcgill-bible.html

  20. This is a bit OT for this thread, but the last Orly Taitz story had over 1,600 comments and I did not want to drag that up out of respect for those on dial up.

    Orly Taitz and the birthers just lost their most recent case to an empty table. To refresh memories, you may recall the judge in Georgia ordered President Obama to appear in person regarding his eligibility to be on the Georgia ballot in November, given the plaintiff’s position that he is a foreigner. The President’s counsel wrote to the judge declining to appear, telling the judge that his court had no business or jurisdiction even hearing the case and therefore the defense would not be in attendance.

    Orly gave it her best shot with an empty table where counsel opposite would have sat with defendant Obama. The verdict is now in. Orly Taitz lost her case to an empty table. Here is the decision as rendered by the Honorable Michael M. Malihi, Judge.

    I can hear it now. That judge has a furrin soundin’ name hisself and is probably one of THEM people too.

  21. Not much of that stuff mentioned above came out in the campaign down here in South Carolina. So, his wife was delivered by some doctor guy and then years later lives with the coot? And the guy was an abortionist? Ya know Sainted Rum is a product in Italy (Santo Rum) and I wonder why he is not made fun of because of his name. All of these people who support him are so prudy.

  22. @Santorum (via Elaine’s comment): Santorum said drugs take years to develop and cost millions of dollars to produce, and manufacturers need to turn a profit or they would stop developing new drugs.

    For what its worth, that last bit is completely untrue. 99% of the people working in drug research, from sweeping up the labs to devising the experiments and all in-between, are working for a modest fixed rate, either hourly or salaried. The 99% at the bottom do not earn more if their drug succeeds or less if it fails, so obviously they are not working for a profit motive.

    There are many thousands of tenured university research professors trained and willing to manage and conduct drug research essentially at cost, with salaries in the neighborhood of $100K. Again, they earn the same whether they succeed or fail, but we researchers are not typically motivated by profits, we are motivated by the discovery of new knowledge, contributing to science, and knowing that we can make the world a better place, sometimes by saving lives and relieving misery.

    The 99% of employees that work at somebody else’s direction do not need a profit motive to work, and the 1% at the top that might be operating on a profit motive can be replaced in a heartbeat with people that would be happy to work for $100K with no bonuses and no profit and the standard modest university retirement plan, and use the millions or billions in profits to reduce the cost of drugs or fund more research, because that would make the world a better place, save lives, and relieve misery.

    And then, on top of all that, I guarantee there are plenty of us that believe in opening the books, both financial and formulaic, that eschew patents and believe in publication to share the fruits of research, to accelerate the science and minimize the roadblocks to drug improvements.

    It is incredibly narrow-minded to believe that profit is the only thing capable of motivating biologists, theorists, doctors, nurses, and technicians to save lives.

  23. Some Santorisms: Chirst would be turning in his grave (oif he was in one depending on your point of view ((*_*))

    “Objecting to secular (state-operated) education, he and his wife began home schooling–and took $70,000 from the State of Pennsylvania and the Penn Hills School District as required by local and state law. The School District requested most of the money be returned after Rick reported while electioneering that he spent only approximately 30 days in his district and had bought a house in Virginia, Santorum objected. When the Pittsburgh Gazette-Post protested this abuse of state money, Santorum declared, without substantiation, that he had attempted to have his home owners exemption nullified.

    “When she moved out to go be with Rick, she told me I’d like him, that he was pro-choice and a humanist,” said Allen, an elderly but vibrant man, during a brief conversation on the porch of his Pittsburgh row home. “But I don’t think there’s a humanist bone in that man’s body.”

    “The notion that college education is a cost-effective way to help poor, low-skill, unmarried mothers with high school diplomas or GEDs move up the economic ladder is just wrong.”

    “It’s amazing that so many kids turn out to be fairly normal, considering the weird socialization they get in public schools.”

    http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/01/12/rick-and-karen-santorum-are-strangers-to-truth

    His self perception:
    “People tell me that I’m funny, that I have a good sense of humor, that I’m a pleasant guy. That’s not how the media presents me. They present me as this real tough, mean-spirited, angry guy. I don’t think that anyone who knows me or works with me would say any of those things. They’d say I’m hard-charging and passionate and that I take my job seriously… but I try not to take myself seriously. I understand that I’m here to do a job and I think you could do it with a good spirit and a civil tongue.”

    But what about all the things that you have said that have been so hurtful to so many people? I ask.

    “Look,” he says, with an annoyed laugh and a shake of the head. “People have to remember that politics isn’t personal. It’s just not personal.”

    http://archives.citypaper.net/articles/2005-09-29/cover.shtml

  24. Yeah, Ricky. Two people loving and caring for one another is so detrimental to society. Imagine how terrible a society would be where people are allowed to fully care for their loved ones, provide for them the financial and societal benefits marriage allows. Imagine how terrible a society would be where loved ones could speak for the ones they love when they themselves are incapacitated. Imagine how terrible a society would be where loved ones are guaranteed access to visit the ill and not be stymied by bigoted family members. Imagine how terrible a society would be where love is encouraged, nurtured and supported. How very intolerant and unloving such a comment. Last time I checked, love and tolerance were real big with Jesus.

    What’s your excuse?

    If you don’t like homosexuals, Rick? Don’t be one. But they aren’t interferring with your relationship with your loved one. You shouldn’t interfere with their relationships with loved ones. Do unto other as you would have them do unto you. That Golden Rule is a fundamental truth found in Christianity as well as other religions traditions; a shared fundamental truth arrived at by different paths.

    Maybe that should be a clue to you that you may have read the Bible, but you sure didn’t understand it.

  25. Diary of a Gay man that likes Straight Sex, How to take the Blows in Politics……Could be a Rick Santorum memoir…Just saying…

  26. I agree with Gene, but also, rationally speaking, it seems to me homosexual couples (male or female) obviously do benefit society.

    Although both types of couples can raise their own children (male homosexuals sometimes have had children by a separate marriage, female homosexuals can also, and sometimes choose artificial or natural impregnation), homosexual couples are far more likely than heterosexual couples to adopt and care for orphaned children, which benefits the orphan enormously and relieves society of the burden of care.

    Other than the difference in the genetic makeup of their children, I have never heard any reason to suspect a homosexual couple is any different than a sterile heterosexual couple. Women past child-bearing age get married to men of the same age. That is not a burden on society, for the two of them life is easier: They have companionship, enjoy a 33% reduction in living expenses by sharing space and their non-duplication of other resources (rent, utilities, services like cable, less food waste, less total time spent on shopping, bill paying, etc), plus all the benefits Gene has outlined.

    My wife is past child-bearing age, our child is out of the house and on her own. Does Rick think my marriage has become a burden on society?

Comments are closed.