Santorum Talks Satan
Rick Santorum is a good man, but that doesn't mean he'd be a good candidate, much less a good president -- or even a member in good standing here at Ricochet.
Consider the following quotes from Drudge and the Spectator, pasted after relevant clauses from the Code of Conduct:
1. Anything that makes the Ricochet Community look like a bunch of radical fruitcakes: "Satan has his sights on the United States of America!"
2. Personal attacks on an individual, group, or class: "We look at the shape of mainline Protestantism in this country and it is in shambles, it is gone from the world of Christianity as I see it."
3. Imagine you're a guest at a dinner party with a group of seemingly nice people you don't know... how would you handle yourself?: "If you were Satan, who would you attack in this day and age. There is no one else to go after other than the United States..."
The nominee of the Republican Party?
- Comment (203)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments:
Nov '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Well I'd respond by saying that:
1) If there is a Satan, and as a Catholic (however lapsed) I believe there is, the United States would be my greatest target for all my machinations. I don't believe Satan is literally in Hell cackling with delight over Obamacare or any other policy I disagree with, any more than a left-wing believer might think he's the secret head of the NRA. But if you need to spread misery and despair across the world the US has been your greatest political opponent in the 20th century.
2) I was raised in the Episcopal Church and watched it slide from "Catholic Lite" to the embrace of "Our Mother Jesus" (http://tinyurl.com/7rmskb9) so I'm giving Santorum a second point on this one.
3) Theology rarely comes up at dinner parties, but you can bet I'd argue that Satan disliked the US more than Communist China if it did.
The thing that intrigues me most about many of the objections to Santorum isn't that people say he's wrong, it's that he's telling uncomfortable truths which is electoral poison according to the smart set.
May '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Tristan Abbey
katievs
When conservatives are more concerned with perceptions and portrayals than with truth and right, we're playing into the left's hands.
Don't give in to their tactics. Judge the man on his character, his governing philosophy and his policy proposals, not his religious beliefs (which are, again, totally normal Christianity.) · 11 minutes ago
I think we need a balance, Katievs! I'm a weekly churchgoer, too, but if Santorum's primary goal is to reverse cultural problems then shouldn't he be making movies instead of running for president?
His goal is to win the Presidency and use the office to start rolling back the depredations of the Obama administration and forty years of disastrous leftist policies.
Politics is his field.
What he wants to do is get the weight of government off families and cultural institutions so they can flourish again.
Nov '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
katievs
Maybe if we can stop panicking over the fact that an honest politician is also an honest Christian, we can move on to other issues. · 18 minutes ago
I don't panic and his Christianity is an irrelevancy to me.
But he gets sidetracked by irrelevancies. Gas is four bucks a gallon and Santorum has to retract statements about Obama and Islam.
He may be an "honest politician" (a concept whose dubiousness I will not address here), but he's clearly not ready to play in the big leagues.
Edited on February 21, 2012 at 10:54pmNov '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Hi Tristan. Hi Ricochet admins. Let me be clear:
Satan has his sights on the United States of America.
(not to mention, on my own country Canada, and the rest of the free world)
Dare I say it again?
Satan has his sights on the United States of America.
Though he is a Catholic and I'm an Evangelical my views are 100% in sync with your Santorum quotations 2 and 3 above. Not a shadow of a doubt in my mind.
If I'm thereby in violation of the CoC I turn myself in. I have no intention of making anyone else here look like a radical fruitcake. Do your worst; exorcize me if you must.
Jan '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Funny craigen! Although Santorum's phrase was that thr United Stars was Satan'a ONLY target. Still, you should be disciplined for the violation.
Nov '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Fred Cole
But he gets sidetracked by irrelevancies. Gas is four bucks a gallon and Santorum has to retract statements about Obama and Islam.
He may be an "honest politician" (a concept whose dubiousness I will not address here), but he's clearly not ready to play in the big leagues.
I think you're misreading his statements, in subsequent interviews, about Obama/Islam. I've not seen him "retract" anything on this subject. He has emphatically corrected those taking his statements out of context. That is not a retraction.
I'm not in Santorum's camp here, but I think your latter statement is ludicrous. He is playing in the big leagues, and he's whalloping the big guy this round. I happen to think that Newt's a better candidate. But Rick is no slouch and he is a more-than-adequate second best in my view. People habitually underestimate the guy, which may be one of his best assets.
Nov '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Really? I didn't catch the "only" part. But after I get the switch to my backside, Tristan, perhaps you'll get the ruler across the knuckles for the all-caps and bad spelling. :-)
If Rick said, or meant "only" the USA I'm afraid his theology is highly suspect and I have to differ.
May '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Tristan needs to provide a link documenting the part where Santorum said "only" the US is targeted by Satan, other than Drudge or the Spectator (which don't have it). Or else stop putting words into people's mouths. If you mean the part you quote where he says "There is no one else to go after" then you're misreading it. I'm sure he means there's no other country that has done as much good in the world that Satan could attack.
Second, by your point #2, Prof. Rahe should also be banned for his articles on the Catholic Church.
Finally, Tristan, discussion of religion and mainstream religious ideas is not fruitcakery. It happens all the time on Ricochet. If you think it's fruit-cake enough to be a violation of the CoC, it says more about your own prejudices than anything else.
I read the excerpt from the Spectator link you gave me, and it's the person who tries to make this look bad for Santorum (Alex Massie) that comes across as the bigot here.
Sure. Why not? Based on these statements? Find something more substantive.
Edited on February 21, 2012 at 11:53pmJan '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
"If you were Satan, who would you attack in this day and age. There is no one else to go after other than the United States and that has been the case now for almost two hundred years, once America's preeminence was sown by our great Founding Fathers." (Spectator)
Care to retract your rude suggestion I was concocting the quotation, Chris?
I mean, really, Santorum's claim here is preposterous. Satan wasn't at work in Nazi Germany? The Soviet Union? Pol Pot's Cambodia? Idi Amin's Uganda? Saddam Hussein's Iraq? Please.
Edited on February 21, 2012 at 11:52pmMay '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Tristan Abbey: "If you were Satan, who would you attack in this day and age. There is no one else to go after other than the United States and that has been the case now for almost two hundred years, once America's preeminence was sown by our great Founding Fathers." (Spectator)
Care to retract your rude suggestion I was concocting the quotation, Chris?
I already edited my comment above to take this into account. If this is what you base it on, you definitely misquoted him as saying Satan was "only" attacking the U.S. I read it as the U.S. has been the primary power for good, and thus Satan could not hope to win without attacking the U.S. In other words, Satan's full purposes could not be achieved in the world by attacking anyone else-- he would have to attack the U.S. This is just as reasonable an interpretation as yours.
So it is you who need to do the retracting. You put words in his mouth. Unless you are also a mind reader and know exactly how Santorum meant it.
Jan '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Chris, the third edit to your original comment notwithstanding -- after I responded with your evidence -- I think an apology is in order. This is a pretty ungentlemanly way to debate online.
May '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Wow, you really are putting words in his mouth. You arrived at the above, from this?
Again, he's saying Satan cannot help but attack the U.S.
It is a logical fallacy to say that if A is necessary, B is excluded. If Satan exists, Satan cannot help but attack America, but he certainly will attack everywhere else as well.
Feb '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
To quote Instapundit (who was quoting somebody else), I'll vote for a syphylitic camel before I vote for Obama. So, if Santorum is the Republican nominee, I'll vote for him, as I suspect will most if not all Ricochet-ers, including Tristan. But that's not the point. The point is who can defeat Obama? I greatly fear that if we nominate Santorum, Katievs will get a thrill voting for a true Christian believer and moral crusader, and Obama will cruise easily to a second term.
You commonly hear that this is a 50-50 country politically, but in reality it's more like 40-20-40, where that middle 20 swing back and forth between D and R and the occasional I. If you want to be President, you have to get a big chunk of that 20. A candidate who spends his time talking about Satan isn't going to do that.
Jan '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
I did not put words in his mouth. I summarized Santorum's statement as follows: "thr United Stars was Satan'a ONLY target." [Pardon the typos; I was walking.] What he actually said was: "There is no one else to go after other than the United States."
So your argument is that "only" does not mean "no one else."
From Merriam-Webster: " a : alone in a class or category : sole <the only one left> <the only known species>"
My quote is in context.
I reiterate my demand for an apology.
May '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
This is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, after you very intentionally misrepresented Santorum's words, took them out of context, and made a straw man out of them.
Jan '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Chris Deleon
Again, he's saying Satancannot help butattack the U.S.
It is a logical fallacy to say that if A is necessary, B is excluded. If Satan exists, Satan cannot help but attack America, but he certainly will attack everywhere else as well. · 0 minutes ago
Can you defend your "interpretation" (a charitable description) with Santorum's own words instead of your own? You have done nothing but explain away evidence and edit your comments after counterarguments have been made.
Jan '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Chris Deleon
This is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, after you very intentionally misrepresented Santorum's words, took them out of context, and made a straw man out of them. · 3 minutes ago
I did no such thing. Goodness gracious, it's like arguing with a liberal. Where is the intentional misrepresentation? He either said it or he didn't.
May '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Tristan Abbey
I did not put words in his mouth. I summarized Santorum's statement...
Often, a statement may have multiple interpretations.
When you "summarized" it, you collapsed it down to the least charitable, and frankly to my view, the least likely, of the possible intended interpretations.
Then you followed up implying that what Santorum really meant was that while Satan attacks America, Satan had nothing to do with the Nazis.
Do you really, really, think that is what Santorum meant?
Your outrage is manufactured. Nice try.
Jun '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Kind of just standard stuff...or used to be the standard.
Aug '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Not that I wish to question the wisdom of our esteemed Ricochet-Admins, but how is this thread worthy of the main feed?
Don't make me regret foregoing my lattés!