1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. We've had very few donations over the year. I'm going to be short soon as some personal things are keeping me from putting up the money. If you have something small to contribute it's greatly appreciated. Please put your screen name as well so that I can give you credit. Click here: Donations
    Dismiss Notice

Rick Santorum (US Republican presidential candidate) trying to bring Jesus into the government

Discussion in 'Tilted Philosophy, Politics, and Economics' started by Mewmew, Jan 17, 2012.

  1. Mewmew

    Mewmew New Member



    youtube.com/watch?v=bgeu21Xu3Mc
    I can't believe anyone could support a person like this.

    this isn't f*ing Saudi Arabia. Or at least it wasn't.

    (not enough posts to make that a clickable link, just paste into your web browser and remove the space between the . and com if you want to watch)

    edit: edited to fix broken link
     
  2. the_jazz

    the_jazz Accused old lady puncher

    I can't get your link to work.
     
  3. Mewmew

    Mewmew New Member

    a mod or someone made it clickable but broke the link in the process. I just fixed, try now
     
  4. the_jazz

    the_jazz Accused old lady puncher

    Still not working. And by that I mean that when I cut-and-paste it into my browswer, it doesn't find anything.
     
  5. Mewmew

    Mewmew New Member

    I just tried it and it worked for me. I had to add a space between youtube. and com in order to actually post it in the thread because of my postcount. Did you remove the space in your browser?
     
  6. the_jazz

    the_jazz Accused old lady puncher

    Thanks, I was deleting the wrong thing. I embedded it for you.

    That said, this doesn't sound like anything new from Santorum. He's been saying the exact same thing for years. That's one of the reason that he has his "google problem".
     
  7. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    Santorum is a right-wing religious extremist who belongs on the fringe. That he's performed as he has in polling/voting so far is indicative of a couple of problems: 1) creeping fascism is coalescing in America among the Christian right, and 2) reactionary politics in response to the economy and perceived moral threats (e.g., Christian right vs. abortion, same-sex marriage, Islamic terrorism, etc.) is a real danger in this next election.
     
  8. roachboy

    roachboy Very Tilted

    american salafi. once you strip away the religious reactionary nonsense, however, he is a straight neo-fascist.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    This is the tricky thing, though, isn't it? The current American brand of neo-fascism is decidedly religious, particularly right-wing Christian.

    What makes it tricky is that fascism historically was anticlerical for the express purpose of ensuing the power rests in the state. This newer form of fascism (i.e. neo-fascism) uses religion as a vehicle for galvanizing political support for those other savoury characteristics of fascism, namely, unhealthy forms of nationalism, jingoism, undermining liberal democracy, and unhealthy forms of national identity (e.g., corrupt views on American exceptionalism).

    So while you must strip away the religious reactionary nonsense to see him as a straight neo-fascist, you can simply look at him now to see he is a specifically American brand of Christian neo-fascist.
     
  10. redux

    redux Very Tilted Donor

    Location:
    Foggy Bottom
    Santorum certainly represents the most radical religious social conservatives.

    He played well in Iowa, where nearly half of the Republican voters are evangelical. He didnt play so well in more libertarian conservative NH and not looking so good in SC.

    But radicalism on the right takes many forms.

    Today, Ron Paul played the "states' rights card" suggesting that states should be allowed to determine which federal laws they should be able to ignore.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap...8pwFww?docId=f1b9b0841e1949829bebe4a5a62c7775

    So, in effect, Paul is saying the states should have the right to determine the constitutionality of federal laws rather than the federal judiciary.

    If a state doesnt like the Voting Rights Act or the Clean Air Act or.... fuck it, just get the partisan state legislature/governor to declare it unconstitutional.
     
  11. roachboy

    roachboy Very Tilted

    on the santorum thing...i make the distinction in part because when i use the term neo-fascist i am comparing us political discourse to western european neo-fascist organizations like the front national in france

    http://www.frontnational.com/

    which is an icky bunch of people who are not tangled up as the santorum is in the discursive fog created by ultra-reactionary protestant evangelicals---and the fn remains a kind of benchmark for mainstreamed neo-fascism outside the united states, where it's called just part of that strange patchwork called "conservative". but it's useful to have some yardstick against which to measure, so something to appeal to when questions of definition arise. what i don't know is whether that icky website has a english translation functionality. it would surprise me if it doesn't, any more than it would surprise me to find asshats like westboro baptist with an english-only site.

    as for ron paul, that states rights thing should make the klan happy.
     
  12. Levite

    Levite Levitical Yet Funky

    Location:
    The Windy City
    I really don't think Americans understand how far to the right the whole political paradigm here has shifted. Back in the days of, say, Eisenhower, being a Democrat (outside the South) meant that you were somewhat liberal, friendly to labor, interested in social programs, etc., and being a Republican generally meant that you were in favor of more conservative economic policies, and were more concerned about stuff like Communism. But for the most part (outside the South), nobody was really crazy.

    It's bad enough that to be a Democrat today means that one is, at best, a moderate conservative willing to occasionally try and preserve some social programs. But these days, Republicans are increasingly drawing their leadership from frighteningly insane people. Rick Santorum is a religious fanatic and proto-fascist. The best thing he has going for him is that he's not Michele Bachmann, who appears to be not only a raging fascist but clinically delusional.

    Pretty much the only thing that keeps me voting Democratic, rather than voting for independents or Green Party candidates or suchlike, is the need to prevent these insane Republican hyperconservatives from getting into office. Better do-nothing, weak-assed Democratic moderates who are willing to bend the knee to corporate interests, like Obama and his congressional pals, than another round of hyperconservative warmongering, subversion of justice, war on the poor, and laissez-faire corporate purchase of legislation, like in the previous administration.

    If a guy like Santorum gets elected, I will seriously consider moving to another country.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. roachboy

    roachboy Very Tilted

    what's concerning, really, is the reach and power of the republican political machine. and the bits of cookie-cutter legislation that is getting advanced around the country making it more difficult for voter blocks the republicans don't like to vote. maybe they figure they don't need to present a serious candidate, that their machine, in tandem with the usual back-room corruption one associates with the republicans of the past couple decades, is enough, that they could elect a hat to the office of president if they chose. i'd really like to see them go too far and snap their brand. but i'd also like to see the fairness doctrine reimposed on corporate media.
     
  14. Joniemack

    Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

    Location:
    Reading, UK
    The states rights issue seems to be a very popular one these days. I do wonder if the proponents have really thought through the implications of true state independence from the federal government though. Probably not. Thinking in broad terms and poo-pooing the details seems to also be very popular these days.

    I can't help but continue to regard Rick Santorum as comic fodder. My rational mind refuses to believe that all but a few really take him seriously.

    I'm also well aware that I may have my head in the sand in this regard.
     
  15. Derwood

    Derwood Slightly Tilted

    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    It's only "states rights" on federal laws you disagree with. But it's "this needs to be a federal law" when the states do things they disagree with (i.e. Gay marriage).

    Hypocrites, the lot of them
     
  16. Freetofly

    Freetofly Diving deep into the abyss

    Its all to complicated. I use to keep up with all of it, constant news programs, 24hr watch on who is running. Then something broke. I don't watch any of it now.
    Maybe some day it will get fixed, but for now the TV stays off and I don't read about these folks online any longer. :eek:
     
  17. Hektore

    Hektore Slightly Tilted

    Lets not forget the old trope: Jesus always was the foundation of our government it's only those godless socialists that are trying to take him out. You can't say the man is totally unelectable, nor is his brand of conservatism, which is not unique to him. I think much of the rest of the field thinks in very much the same terms, and happily say so when they're not in front of the cameras. They're just better about realizing that those kinds of comments will make it tougher in the general election, though I think our elections are determined mostly by who decides to show up rather than by what everyone actually wants.

    Which is depressing.

    It's somewhat interesting to me that I have not yet heard a cohesive argument for why gay marriage will harm 'families' or a mechanism by which it could. It's merely asserted that it will and then folks move on as if it's self-evident. Perhaps none of the opponents have ever heard of the term non sequitur.

    You also don't have to be a crazy conservative to think there are some issues that need to be addressed regarding states' rights, but that's probably an issue best left for another thread.
     
  18. bobGandalf

    bobGandalf Vertical

    Location:
    United States
    Only thing to say.....he is very scary!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Aceventura

    Aceventura Slightly Tilted

    Location:
    North Carolina
    I remember expressing concerns about the risks Sharia Law in the US, I was mocked, told I was racist, and was being totally unrealistic. Why is the Santorum rhetoric the basis of legitimate fear and the risks of Sharia Law in the US not? I don't want anyone imposing religious view on me, and I am mindful of the rights of everyone to be free from forced morality when their actions do not harm or restrict the rights of others.
     
  20. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    One is real, while the other is a conspiracy theory. One says "creeping sharia," while the other is a creep running for the nation's highest political office.
     
    • Like Like x 1