Rick Santorum is an idiot, a bigot, and morally inconsistent...

[AvalonXQ]

We'll see how many more decisions Obama makes to bolster Santorum's campaign.

 

[A Laughing Baby]

I should note that the last instance of santorum being brought up in regards to Santorum, it was to correct someone's incorrect assessment of what Santorum means. In that case it's perfectly reasonable to bring it up.

Otherwise I mostly agree with A Laughing Baby's main point.

I didn't really have that much of a problem with Chaos's post. I actually had seen some typical joke on another forum and decided that talking about it in this audience would be more productive than doing so in that audience.

 

[cwalner]

If Bush could do it then so could Santorum. I'd like to think that the American people have gotten a bit smarter. We will see.

Based on the definition, I am not sure that santorum has anything to do with bush.

* Yes I am being juvenile and mean-spirited, but at least I am trying to be clever about it.

 

[A Laughing Baby]

Based on the definition, I am not sure that santorum has anything to do with bush.

* Yes I am being juvenile and mean-spirited, but at least I am trying to be clever about it.

This is the proper way to do it, though. It's simultaneously germane and clever. Thank you

 

[RandFan]

Dude, compared to what?

To a 30% increase in spending in two years?

I don't know if it was a 30% increase. Source?

Given the serious nature of where we were and were we are now and where we are headed I'm fine with Obama's spending. The problem was lowering taxes while prosecuting two wars. Hell yeah I'll take Obama's actions over Bush's and Santorums lack of any plan. Just because he claims he can turn things around doesn't mean he can. What the sam hell can he do? Lower taxes some more? Get rid of regulations? Come on. Obama passed a stimulus plan and we are moving in the right direction. Bush lowered taxes and the economy at best did 3% growth for a single year and over all sucked. Yeah, again, I'll take what Obama did over Santorum even if we are just talking economics. Throw in the superstition based desire to take away women's rights and there is simply no question.

 

[Olowkow]

I think I remember Savage mentioning that he was roommate with Santorum in college. The redefinition of the name started with a contest sometime around the time he got into the "It Gets Better" project, trying to get to kids who were being bullied and winding up dead.

Santorum is a buffoon, a very silly theist (not all theists are silly) and anyone who could take seriously him, Bachmann, Buchanan, Gingrich, Pat Robertson or Perry as a competitor for president of the United States is just not thinking clearly. Of course, I could say that about George W. Bush as well, but that's history.

Dan Savage is a character, true, but he understands what human sexuality is much better than Santorum does. I actually wonder if Santorum ever heard of anal or oral sex between heterosexuals.

Anyone who just refuses to study the issue of what it means to be homosexual, and just keeps yelling the same old platitudes, really does not deserve to be taken seriously when spouting nonsense points of view about "choosing to be gay".

Rather, Santorum deserves the redefinition of his name to reference filth every bit as much as the names John Wayne Gacy, or Jeffry Dahmer have become referenced to disgusting acts. Santorum has caused hurt.

 

[Spindrift]

I think I remember Savage mentioning that he was roommate with Santorum in college.

I don't think so. Savage went to Illinois-Urbana and Santorum went to Penn State.

 

[Olowkow]

I don't think so. Savage went to Illinois-Urbana and Santorum went to Penn State.

Thanks. I'm going to have to research this because I could swear I heard him say that on an interview. Someone even asked if he ever had sex with Santorum, and he said he would never answer this question. Was it on Bill Maher??

I stand corrected then until I can figure this out. Perhaps he was just joking?

ETA: I find quite a few references to "Santorum/Savage roommate" in forums and comments to various websites, but nothing that would suggest this is true.

For example, search for "roommate" on this page:
http://www.towleroad.com/2011/09/morgan_santorum.html
I wonder how this got started. Wiki says he referred to Ann Landers as his roommate, jokingly, so perhaps this was what he did with the Santorum reference.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Rather, Santorum deserves the redefinition of his name to reference filth every bit as much as the names John Wayne Gacy, or Jeffry Dahmer have become referenced to disgusting acts.

Wait, that's seriously where you're going with this? Rick Santorum is now every bit as bad as actual serial killers?

 

[Olowkow]

Not at all. He merely deserves to have his name associated with filth. This was what I clearly stated, and I suspect you know this.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/02/10/a-wild-jewelry-idea/#comments

And he is a liar. Or better perhaps, he creates strawmen to serve his political purpose. Can you defend him?

ETA: Santorum is no idiot, as the OP suggests. He is frankly very canny, and he knows how to manipulate his minions. I just happen to disagree with him, strongly.

 

[A Laughing Baby]

Not at all. He merely deserves to have his name associated with filth. This was what I clearly stated, and I suspect you know this.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/02/10/a-wild-jewelry-idea/#comments

And he is a liar. Or better perhaps, he creates strawmen to serve his political purpose. Can you defend him?

ETA: Santorum is no idiot, as the OP suggests. He is frankly very canny. I just happen to disagree with him, strongly.

No one is defending him. As many already have, I think you may be confusing disagreement with the current usage of the santorum joke--namely, as a careless way to handwave away x abhorrent thing that he has said within the past 24 hours--with defense of the man or his ideas. I cannot speak for AXQ, but I have no qualms with the joke existing.

I think, however, that if you are attacking his ideas (and rightfully so) in a discussion/debate setting, it's far better to at least include discussion of the idea with the joke, rather than saying "something something frothy something something" and leaving, as many do.

 

[Olowkow]

No one is defending him. As many already have, I think you may be confusing disagreement with the current usage of the santorum joke--namely, as a careless way to handwave away x abhorrent thing that he has said within the past 24 hours--with defense of the man or his ideas. I cannot speak for AXQ, but I have no qualms with the joke existing.

I think, however, that if you are attacking his ideas (and rightfully so) in a discussion/debate setting, it's far better to at least include discussion of the idea with the joke, rather than saying "something something frothy something something" and leaving, as many do.

I have no idea of what you just said. Could you elaborate please?

 

[A Laughing Baby]

I have no idea of what you just said. Could you elaborate please?

I spoke at length on it in my last few posts, which I'll just requote here for summary purposes, instead of rehashing it all. The TL;DR of it is that while the joke is fine to use/make, if you do nothing in response to his nonsense except make the joke, you are doing nothing to discredit his rhetoric/ideas and therefore not progressing the discussion. So in other words, if you're just making the joke to make the joke, that's great, but if you are actually trying to address his points or are discussing the man with someone unfamiliar with what a dick he is, then it may not be the best idea to simply make the joke:

Because, regardless of intent, reason, or any other factor, it immediately paints the joke-maker as a petty jerk. It's demeaning an ideological opponent with a personal attack simply because it's supposedly common knowledge that he's an awful human being. If your point is to make jokes about someone with a bunch of people that already agree with you, then it's going to work great.

However, if you want to be persuasive or actually have a message that you want to get out to the world about him being a bad person who should not be in power, then you (general you, not you in specific) need to move away from just saying "HA HA HE'S POOP SEX XD." It does nothing to actually further any message or cause beyond juvenile insult humor, and I cannot see how anyone would think anything otherwise.

As a hypothetical, imagine someone unused to the political process hearing someone call the first lady "Moochelle." This is roughly analogous in that it's a simple personal attack repeated over and over about one (in this case semi-) political individual with the intent of causing derision upon simple mention of the target's name. How do you think they would react?

Do you think they would say "Oh, of course I should disagree with any initiatives brought forward by Michelle Obama, or should I say Moochelle" or do you think they would go "Good lord, what the hell is wrong with you people?" To me, the Santorum joke does absolutely nothing to get people unfamiliar with Santorum's policies or ideas to become familiar with (and by extension, ostensibly go on to reject) those same policies. It just makes them go "that's gross."

There's no room for the "well he's a terrible person so I'm going to call him that" argument. That's just a flat refusal to confront what you are doing because you enjoy doing it. Trust me, I was there. I've denied it myself. I disagree with essentially everything Rick says and does, but I just don't think that playground humor is going to accomplish anything except a sense of self-satisfaction among those who already disagree with him.

Your thread title is another thing that is far, far better than just another Santorum joke. It explicitly details WHY you disagree with him.

The more I think about this, the more I think that it's just as easy to argue this from an information set perspective. If the goal is to broadcast a message regarding Santorum (the person), then how is making a poop joke out of his name helpful in that regard? To someone completely unfamiliar with the scenario/players, how is that going to help them come to the decision that maybe his policies and ideas aren't as good as he says they are?

For that matter, if they're really bad at Google (for example, many older people), how are they to know that he's not just unfortunately named, like the eminent Senator Gloryhole?

I get the feeling that this is going to get me accused of various fallacies, but this is the sort of justification that you will often see for calling people "faggot," for example. Or the sort of justification you'll hear from certain members of this forum for just calling everyone they disagree with drongos. It's a completely invalid and empty justification, as far as I'm concerned. It just strikes me (any time I see this justification) as simply refusing to stop doing something that one enjoys doing, regardless of its merit.

I understand I'm not making any friends saying this, but I really deeply feel that for any progress to be made--in discussion (on ANY topic), in politics, in America, really in anything--we have to be able to turn a critical eye on ourselves and say "wow, hey, maybe this thing I'm doing isn't necessarily the best idea." Sometimes that means being nice to people who really don't deserve it.

I know I'm being preachy, and I'm honestly sorry for that (I know it's annoying), but this is an example of a concept that really bothers me. It's a personal sticking point. I hope you'll forgive me for getting up on my soapbox about it, and if not, I understand that.

You are assigning a quote to me that misrepresents a very key point. I said policies or ideas (such as, oh, I don't know, bestiality being the same as homosexuality). I fully understand what Savage was trying to do, and the Quisling analogy is a perfect example--who really remembers who Quisling was (therefore fully accomplishing the intended goal)? However, it's been adopted as a simple way of dismissing anything and everything that Santorum says, which I feel is a very dangerous road to follow.

It's going to be far more productive in the long run if Santorum's terrible, terrible views are brought up all the time in public spaces (such as forums). Don't get me wrong, I think this forum is far, far better about it than others. It's a joy that the worst we usually see are posts like these:



In other forums, it's standard to just (and this is key) completely forget to talk about whatever it is that Santorum did/said that the thread is responding to and just race to make the most hilarious poop joke. That isn't productive. It goes toward Savage's intended goal, but if someone just makes a poop joke in response to Santorum saying something as inflammatory/ridiculous as this:

[that atheist guillotine quote went here originally]

What gets accomplished? One laughingly dismisses the man because lol poop, but the actual view goes without response.


ETA:

I'm not castigating the victim or sympathizing with the victim. Santorum's an idiot, and I'm not saying that we should remove the Santorum joke from existence. It's fine. It does what it needs to do. What I'm saying is we need to remove simply making the joke as a de facto response to the man. Make the joke while actually addressing his hateful or idiotic stances. Don't just go (for example, as a hypothetical response to the above Santorum quote in this post) "Man, Santorum's sure frothing mad about Obama! lol!!!"

 

[Olowkow]

I spoke at length on it in my last few posts, which I'll just requote here for summary purposes,

OK, I get it. Sorry, I've had two scotches before dinner. I still think Santorum deserves our disdain.

I have nothing against theists who love him...all my neighbors and family. I just want to hear an...shall we say...intelligent defense of this guy. It is just never forthcoming. OK, I get it, don't be a dick and all that stuff. But I refuse to apologize for my queaziness around guys like him. Presidential material? I think not.

 

[A Laughing Baby]

OK, I get it. Sorry, I've had two scotches before dinner. I still think Santorum deserves our disdain.

He does, don't worry.

I have nothing against theists who love him...all my neighbors and family. I just want to hear an...shall we say...intelligent defense of this guy. It is just never forthcoming. OK, I get it, don't be a dick and all that stuff. But I refuse to apologize for my queaziness around guys like him. Presidential material? I think not.

I don't think he is either. He has really ridiculous views on women's issues (among a myriad of other things), and that might help him in the primary, but it would kill him in the general. The main defense of him going around the talk show circuit right now is "he's conservative and he hasn't said anything stupid yet."

 

[Alareth]

Rick would rather die than allow gay marriage

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/21/santorum-ill-die-to-stop-same-sex-marriages/

 

[elbe]

Rick would rather die than allow gay marriage

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/21/santorum-ill-die-to-stop-same-sex-marriages/

While obviously hyperbole, he's clearly not doing a very good job of fighting to the death to stop gay marriage.

 

[Olowkow]

Rick would rather die than allow gay marriage

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/21/santorum-ill-die-to-stop-same-sex-marriages/

Could you please quote what you find interesting in this. I can't bear reading endless santorum dribble....drivel.

ETA: ok, I read it. I think he suffers from lack-a-nookie, to be perfectly candid. This dude just worries about what folks he doesn't know are doing with their sex organs a bit too much. People like to have sex, and they don't always do it the way you do, get over it. Be polite about it.

 

[cwalner]

Santorum went to Penn State.

Was he involved with the Football program at all? It might go a long way to explain his irrational hatred of homosexual acts.

 

[Peephole]

I would love it if just once people could talk about Santorum and how they disagree with his ideas without going HA HA GUYS CHECK OUT THIS JOKE THAT DAN SAVAGE MADE LITERALLY YEARS AGO I AM SO FUNNY AND CUTTING EDGE! SANTORUM! LOL! IT'S POOP! POOP!

Yeah.

At least make a song about it.