You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 06, 2016, 08:20:02 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Santorum  (Read 11925 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Iniquitous

Re: Santorum
« Reply #100 on: March 03, 2012, 12:50:28 PM »
Weeeeeell.... if you need an incentive to write your own name in there is always the fact that those who serve as president get paid $191,000.00 for the rest of their life.

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: Santorum
« Reply #101 on: March 03, 2012, 12:54:42 PM »
That's a nice pension plan, but you have to survive four years in the slot first. I'd be a basket case after two.


This is a little off-topic (not that being on-topic is any better, considering who the topic is). Does this warrant a split-off thread, something along the lines of 'would you want to be president'?

Offline Samael

  • † My heart is dead, it's way past beating †
  • Lord
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2008
  • Location: ¥ At the edge of the city of forever ¥
  • Gender: Male
  • ‡ Hündlekätzle Jäger ‡
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Santorum backs nullifying existing gay marriages
« Reply #102 on: March 04, 2012, 12:43:48 AM »
Quote
There are 18,000 married gay and lesbian couples in California and at least 131,000 nationwide according to the 2010 census, conducted before New York state legalized same-sex marriage in July.

Rick Santorum says he'll try to unmarry all of them if he's elected president.

Once the U.S. Constitution is amended to prohibit same-gender marriages, "their marriage would be invalid," the former Pennsylvania senator said Dec. 30 in an NBC News interview.

"We can't have 50 different marriage laws in this country," he said. "You have to have one marriage law."

The comments didn't attract nearly as much attention as Santorum's recent invocation of his Catholic faith to denounce government support for birth control, prenatal testing and resource conservation - which, in the last case, he attributed to President Obama's "phony theology."
Quote
Santorum, who once practiced law, hasn't said how he would draft a constitutional amendment - or how he could get one passed even while opinion polls suggest increasing public acceptance of same-sex marriage.

"Just because public opinion says something doesn't mean it's right," he said in the NBC interview. "I'm sure there were times in areas of this country when people said blacks were less than human."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/03/MN3Q1N9EV9.DTL

I'm at a loss of words.
No, wait, I have a few words, but I think they would be too strong for even E.

What the hell is wrong with this guy?

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: Santorum backs nullifying existing gay marriages
« Reply #103 on: March 04, 2012, 01:13:42 AM »


What the hell is wrong with this guy?

I think the correct phrasing is 'what the heaven is wrong with this guy'.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Santorum backs nullifying existing gay marriages
« Reply #104 on: March 04, 2012, 05:55:38 AM »
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/03/MN3Q1N9EV9.DTL

I'm at a loss of words.
No, wait, I have a few words, but I think they would be too strong for even E.

What the hell is wrong with this guy?

The phrase that comes to mind, pardoning my crude sailor vocabulary, is 'crazy as a shit house rat'.

He is totally trapped in the fifties. If he's on the ticket, the GOP has lost California, maybe New York, and he will only continue to alienate the moderates. I hope the president sends the GOP a thank you card if this idiot gets on the ticket. Cause if he does there is no way in hell the GOP will win the white house this time around.

Offline vtboy

Re: Santorum backs nullifying existing gay marriages
« Reply #105 on: March 04, 2012, 04:24:20 PM »
He is totally trapped in the fifties.

I assume you mean the 1250s.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Santorum
« Reply #106 on: March 04, 2012, 06:07:04 PM »
It occurs to me.. if Santorum pushes this on the Federal Level, he's opening a MASSIVE precedent battle. I mean.. Federal vs States.. he's going to alienate a LOT of conservatives in ofice.

Offline Trieste

  • Faerie Queen; Her Imperial Lubemajesty; Willing Victim
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: In the middle of Happily Ever After with a dark Prince Charming.
  • Gender: Female
  • I am many things - dull is not one of them.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 4
Re: Santorum
« Reply #107 on: March 04, 2012, 06:12:55 PM »
I imagine he would get a hell of a battle, and I think that most of Congress would not back him up. My first response is along the lines of, "You want to come into MY state and enforce YOUR religion on MY fellow citizens without OUR consent? Fuck you, buddy, and your white horse, too."

If that's my response and my state's same-sex marriage laws are the result of a judicial ruling, I can only imagine the states that legalized it by referendum would have a stronger response.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Santorum
« Reply #108 on: March 04, 2012, 06:33:21 PM »
Yeah.. a lot of the more conservative libertarians won't like the Feds interferring that closely..and the states rights advocates will come crawling out of the wood work at the implications. I mean.. if you force something..that far out there as a federal mandate..there are a LOT of state legislated things that will be challenged.

Lets see.. Medicinal Marijuana for one. I'm sure that other things will come up if I think about it.

Offline Trieste

  • Faerie Queen; Her Imperial Lubemajesty; Willing Victim
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: In the middle of Happily Ever After with a dark Prince Charming.
  • Gender: Female
  • I am many things - dull is not one of them.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 4
Re: Santorum
« Reply #109 on: March 04, 2012, 06:45:10 PM »
Well, not only that but it's extremely difficult to get a law applied ex post facto like that. For example, if there is no law against breaking and entering where you are, and you break into a house and steal some shit, then the local government passes a law against breaking and entering, they can't then come and arrest you for it. You can't commit a crime before it's a crime. The case with marriage gets murkier, especially if there are no penalties proposed, because it would be a civil matter that didn't intend to cause measurable harm to the subjects (although having your marriage suddenly dissolved because some jackass got elected into the White House on the basis of a crusade against you could be construed as harm).

Marriage is a civil matter, so it wouldn't be unconstitutional to pass one, but it would still be damned hard.

Online Serephino

Re: Santorum
« Reply #110 on: March 04, 2012, 10:50:30 PM »
It occurs to me.. if Santorum pushes this on the Federal Level, he's opening a MASSIVE precedent battle. I mean.. Federal vs States.. he's going to alienate a LOT of conservatives in ofice.


Probably what would happen is the same thing that happened when Bush tried.  The states gave him the middle finger, and a few of them even made same sex marriage legal right after that.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Santorum
« Reply #111 on: March 05, 2012, 12:23:29 PM »

Probably what would happen is the same thing that happened when Bush tried.  The states gave him the middle finger, and a few of them even made same sex marriage legal right after that.

Thing is.. the idiot isn't looking at the precedent he's setting. There is a LOT of things that are legal in one side that are questionable/illegal on the other. Like medicinal marijuana. You are going to have a LOT of state's Governors and Attorney Generals screaming at this one.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Santorum
« Reply #112 on: March 15, 2012, 06:56:17 PM »
I've been listening and trying to see the appeal this guy has. He reminds me of Dan Quayle, all flash no substance. And what comes out of his mouth scares me. He's promising the world, and I can't see anyway he can pull off even 1/4 he promises.

Of course, I've also been thinking about 4 years down the line.. I fail to see ANYONE remotely rational will step up to the plate. The media has scared away anyone who seems rational.

Offline SabbyTopic starter

Re: Santorum
« Reply #113 on: March 17, 2012, 03:43:00 PM »
Santorum's War on Porn

The perfect way to absolutely skullfuck your chances.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Santorum
« Reply #114 on: March 17, 2012, 03:58:07 PM »
In a time of economic crisis, global warfare and social upheaval....he chooses porn as his place to make a stand. 

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Santorum
« Reply #115 on: March 17, 2012, 04:28:47 PM »
Santorum's War on Porn

The perfect way to absolutely skullfuck your chances.

Not to mention that if he bans all that rampant disgusting porn, think of the hit to the economy. Something like 400 films a year are made by Hollywood, and something like 11,000 pornos are made a year.

Offline vtboy

Re: Santorum
« Reply #116 on: March 17, 2012, 04:39:21 PM »
A few more i.q. points and this guy could be a hockey score.

By the way, has anyone figured out what time warp this guy came out of?  The thinking is clearly pre-15th century, but the clothes are strictly Ozzie & Harriet (1950s, for all you kids out there).

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Santorum
« Reply #117 on: March 17, 2012, 05:22:46 PM »
A few more i.q. points and this guy could be a hockey score.

By the way, has anyone figured out what time warp this guy came out of?  The thinking is clearly pre-15th century, but the clothes are strictly Ozzie & Harriet (1950s, for all you kids out there).
[sarcasm]
Yeah.. he's a good  man of faith though..
[/sarcasm]
no birth control, no porn, I'm sure he'll be  a fun president. (FYI.. it gives me gut a twist to listen to him speak now..he really scares me.

Online Lilias

Re: Santorum
« Reply #118 on: March 17, 2012, 05:43:44 PM »

Offline ShadowFox89

Re: Santorum
« Reply #119 on: March 18, 2012, 05:46:23 AM »
 Just thought I'd throw this tidbit out here....

 http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/16/10721342-porn-industry-to-rick-santorum-butt-out

 
Quote
"Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator who is trying to woo social conservatives, says on his presidential campaign website that if elected he will hire an attorney general who will “vigorously” enforce federal obscenity laws curtailing distribution of hardcore porn.
He also says that studies have shown porn causes brain changes in adults and children, and that every family should be concerned about its harmful effects."

 I like this suggestion

Quote
Hirsch suggests making a deal with Santorum: “We will stay out of his church, and he will stay out of our bedrooms."

Offline Vodka

Re: Santorum
« Reply #120 on: March 18, 2012, 07:45:09 AM »
Santorum actually won the primary in my state. As a cynical liberal living in the South, I put up with a lot of stupidity, but the notion that my fellow statesmen would actually vote for this guy fills me with rage, fury, and all sorts of loathing.

Needless to say, every person I meet, I now secretly question in the back of my head as to whether or not they're a Santorum supporter. Disgusting.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Santorum
« Reply #121 on: March 18, 2012, 08:40:51 AM »
Santorum actually won the primary in my state. As a cynical liberal living in the South, I put up with a lot of stupidity, but the notion that my fellow statesmen would actually vote for this guy fills me with rage, fury, and all sorts of loathing.

Needless to say, every person I meet, I now secretly question in the back of my head as to whether or not they're a Santorum supporter. Disgusting.

Try being a moderate republican in the south. We are regarded by the party with even less respect than you. If you don't toe the party line, you're something JUST above what one would scrape off a shoe. God forbid you back increasing taxes and mention that Ronnie Reagan did just that.  For some reason, even those who don't benefit have drunk the kook aid on capital gains and estate taxes despite a decade of proof to the contrary. 


Online Serephino

Re: Santorum
« Reply #122 on: March 19, 2012, 02:55:03 AM »
I got an email a month or so ago from some organization wanting to know what I remember of Santorum being my representative.  I honestly don't remember much since I think he hasn't been in office for a while.  Still, May is about a month and a half a way, and knowing PA politics as I do, there's some reason he isn't our Senator anymore.  I just can't remember what it is.  I don't know if it's apathy, or loyalty, or what... but most representatives, governors, what have you, keep their seats until they retire, or piss a lot of people off in this state.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Santorum
« Reply #123 on: March 19, 2012, 03:08:04 AM »
The campaign was apparently juicy enough to merit its own Wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_United_States_Senate_election,_2006#Campaign

Among other things, Santorum had spent barely a month living in his home district, and enrolled his children in a Pennsylvania-based online school that the Penn Hills School district had to pay tuition for, while they resided in Virginia.

Offline vtboy

Re: Santorum
« Reply #124 on: March 19, 2012, 05:37:52 AM »
I got an email a month or so ago from some organization wanting to know what I remember of Santorum being my representative.  I honestly don't remember much since I think he hasn't been in office for a while.  Still, May is about a month and a half a way, and knowing PA politics as I do, there's some reason he isn't our Senator anymore.  I just can't remember what it is.  I don't know if it's apathy, or loyalty, or what... but most representatives, governors, what have you, keep their seats until they retire, or piss a lot of people off in this state.


He must have been too progressive for PA voters.