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 :
Jan '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Stuart Creque
Methinks it is a sign that you would personally be very, very uncomfortable -- embarrassed, even -- to defend him as the Republican candidate to your friends and neighbors.
Which, in my estimation, is NOT an argument against Santorum's candidacy, but an argument in favor of us Republicans -- even us Jewish Republicans -- to toughen up.
It's not like if Romney's the nominee we're going to be spared endless "magic underwear" slurs. · 10 minutes ago
Stuart, have you met Rick Santorum? I have -- twice. As I've said from the beginning, I think he is a good man. Please don't presume to know what would embarrass me.
Aug '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Tristan Abbey
"These people"?" I was never in favor of Santorum.
Follow the links. That's what they're for.
Here's another link that will make things clearer.
Edited on Feb 21 at 4:00pmNov '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
R. Craigen
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.
See, and that's the thing. I don't follow the day by day soap opera. So all I got was Santorum-Islam-Obama-Retraction.
How's that gonna play in the general with people who pay less attention than I do?
Well, people are entitled to their opinion. So far all I see is a gaffe prone Not-Romney-of-the-Week.
Gas is four bucks per gallon! Why is the word Santorum and the word Bible appearing in headlines!
Jan '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Stuart Creque
Tristan Abbey
Fact of the matter is that his views will be perceived and portrayed as supremely bizarre to most national voters and, I would wager, most Republican primary voters.
That's not a "fact of the matter": it is your opinion. As katievs pointed out, most Americans do believe in God, and a Gallup poll from just a few years ago indicated that 70% - seventy percent! - of Americans believe in the existence of Satan.
As Bill McGurn pointed out in the Wall Street Journal today, Obama can talk about religion to his base because they know he doesn't believe what he says, whereas Santorum causes panic when he talks about religion because everyone knows he believes what he says.
A President who believes what he says and says what he believes would be a major departure from the current Administration. I, for one, would welcome his election. · 2 minutes ago
Your comment here presumes that everyone who believes in Satan will agree with and welcome Santorum's comments here.
Nov '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Tristan Abbey
Fact of the matter is that his views will be perceived and portrayed as supremely bizarre to most national voters and, I would wager, most Republican primary voters.
If you're right about how most Republican primary voters will perceive him, then you need not worry about Santorum getting the nomination.
But if you needn't to have worried about Santorum getting the nomination, then you would not have strained your mental faculties to construct a post based on such a contorted logic: Santorum has violated the Ricochet CofC and is therefore unfit to be president. (Don't you see how funny that is!?!? Or were you intending to be funny?)
So, Tristan, my good man, there's something not quite perfectly "who me, innocent" in the way you've gone about your attack on Santorum . . . starting approximately with the words "Santorum is a good man, but . . . "
(BTW: If you ever accuse me of being a good man, I shall have to report you for violating the CofC prohibition against personal attacks.)
Edited on Feb 21 at 4:01pmJan '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
DrewInWisconsin
Tristan Abbey
"These people"?" I was never in favor of Santorum.
Follow the links. That's what they're for. · 3 minutes ago
Oh, silly me for actually following the discussion thread. Your comment was in reply to Katievs' question, which was asked of me.
Dec '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Tristan Abbey
Stuart Creque
Methinks it is a sign that you would personally be very, very uncomfortable -- embarrassed, even -- to defend him as the Republican candidate to your friends and neighbors.
Which, in my estimation, is NOT an argument against Santorum's candidacy, but an argument in favor of us Republicans -- even us Jewish Republicans -- to toughen up.
It's not like if Romney's the nominee we're going to be spared endless "magic underwear" slurs. · 10 minutes ago
Stuart, have you met Rick Santorum? I have -- twice. As I've said from the beginning, I think he is a good man. Please don't presume to know what would embarrass me. · 3 minutes ago
Oh, FORGIVE me. How could I POSSIBLY have mistaken "Anything that makes the Ricochet Community look like a bunch of radical fruitcakes" as a sign of embarrassment?
Edited on Feb 21 at 4:02pmAnd I have your word the wetness down my leg is rain?
Jan '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Astonishing But if you needn't to have worried about Santorum getting the nomination, then you would not have strained your mental faculties to construct a post based on such a contorted logic:Santorum has violated the Ricochet CofC and is therefore unfit to be president. (Don't you see how funny that is!?!? Or were you intending to be funny?)
So, Tristan, my good man, there's something not quite perfectly "who me, innocent" in the way you've gone about your attack on Santorum . . . starting approximately with the words "Santorum is a good man, but . . . "
The fact that people don't realize I was both making a point against Santorum and trying to be funny is Astonishing to me.
May '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
DrewInWisconsin
katievs:
If you think he's a good man, why not defend him, instead of piling on?
Because the goal here, I'm sure you understand, is to destroy everyone who threatens Mitt Romney's rightful ascendance to the nomination.
If we want to defeat Obama, we had better get used to answering slurs and smears and misrepresentations with facts and level-headed common sense, not freak-outs. Romney's religious views are no less open to ridicule than Santorum's.
Belief that the more effective a force for good a person or a nation is, the more he will find himself contending with "powers and principalities" is standard issue Christianity.
Presidential candidates don't normally mention Satan. True. But these excerpts are from a speech he gave more than three years ago at a very religious institution, when he was neither in office nor running for office.
Our response should be, "So he's a Christian. What does he propose to do in office?"
Jan '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
And I have your word the wetness down my leg is rain?
I take it you haven't met Santorum, which was my question.
Edited on Feb 21 at 4:05pmDec '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Tristan Abbey
Stuart Creque
Tristan Abbey
Fact of the matter is that his views will be perceived and portrayed as supremely bizarre to most national voters and, I would wager, most Republican primary voters.
That's not a "fact of the matter": it is your opinion. As katievs pointed out, most Americans do believe in God, and a Gallup poll from just a few years ago indicated that 70% - seventy percent! - of Americans believe in the existence of Satan.
As Bill McGurn pointed out in the Wall Street Journal today, Obama can talk about religion to his base because they know he doesn't believe what he says, whereas Santorum causes panic when he talks about religion because everyone knows he believes what he says.
A President who believes what he says and says what he believes would be a major departure from the current Administration. I, for one, would welcome his election. · 2 minutes ago
Your comment here presumes that everyone who believes in Satan will agree with and welcome Santorum's comments here. · 4 minutes ago
My comment presumes nothing. My comment presents a fact about Americans, in response to your opinion dressed up as "fact."
May '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Therefore, all the more strange that you think he is stupid enough to actually think much less say the things you have attributed to him.
Again I ask, do you really believe he meant that Satan is at work ONLY in the United States? Really? He's that naive? And yet he's a good man?
Something doesn't jive, and I still think it's an intentional misinterpretation on your part.
I certainly won't presume to know what embarrasses you. I'd be embarrassed to make the above line of attack, though.
Aug '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Tristan Abbey
Astonishing But if you needn't to have worried about Santorum getting the nomination, then you would not have strained your mental faculties to construct a post based on such a contorted logic:Santorum has violated the Ricochet CofC and is therefore unfit to be president. (Don't you see how funny that is!?!? Or were you intending to be funny?)
So, Tristan, my good man, there's something not quite perfectly "who me, innocent" in the way you've gone about your attack on Santorum . . . starting approximately with the words "Santorum is a good man, but . . . "
The fact that people don't realize I was both making a point against Santorum andtrying to be funny is Astonishing to me. · 2 minutes ago
Oh, there are a few touchy ABRs on this site, believe me! (Katievs is not one of them, BTW)
Aug '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
EDIT.
Edited on Feb 21 at 4:10pmDec '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Tristan Abbey
And I have your word the wetness down my leg is rain?
I take it you haven't met Santorum, which was my question. · 2 minutes ago
Edited 1 minute ago
If you were asking that seriously and not rhetorically, it qualifies for the Top Five Non-Sequiturs in Ricochet history (possibly in the entire Right blogosphere's history).
I did not base my assessment of your potential for embarrassment on whether you met Sen. Santorum at any time in the past, but only on a plain reading of the words in your post.
"Anything that makes the Ricochet Community look like a bunch of radical fruitcakes:"
"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?"
Did you write these words? Did you mean them when you wrote them? Do you mean them now?
If Santorum is our nominee, how will YOU handle yourself at dinner parties when they call him a fruitcake?
Jan '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Those quotations are from the Code of Conduct, Stuart. Unbelievable.
Nov '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Tristan, this line of attack against Santorum carelessly supports an unpleasant precedent for an exploration of Romney's theology:
Question by Obnoxious Debate Moderator: The Latter Day Saints theology says X about Y. Do you, Mitt Romney, approve that [fruitcake] dogma of your church or do you reject it?
Please, let's not go there, neither against Santorum nor against Romney.
Dec '10
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Yes - you quoted them and applied them to Rick Santorum's comments. YOU quoted them and YOU made the association.
Did you believe that those words applied to Santorum's comments? Do you believe that they apply?
Or do you now disclaim ownership of the words and their association to Santorum's comments? Are you... embarrassed... to have made that association, to have chosen those excerpts of the CoC and tried to argue that they apply to Santorum's comments?
Nov '11
Re: Santorum Talks Satan
Tristan Abbey
Astonishing But if you needn't to have worried about Santorum getting the nomination, then you would not have strained your mental faculties to construct a post based on such a contorted logic:Santorum has violated the Ricochet CofC and is therefore unfit to be president. (Don't you see how funny that is!?!? Or were you intending to be funny?)
So, Tristan, my good man, there's something not quite perfectly "who me, innocent" in the way you've gone about your attack on Santorum . . . starting approximately with the words "Santorum is a good man, but . . . "
The fact that people don't realize I was both making a point against Santorum andtrying to be funny is Astonishing to me. · 18 minutes ago
Well, then, you are too easily Astonished, because one should never be Astonished by what people don't realize.
[In light of Diane's admonition in the very next post, if it was directed at me, let me say I was trying to be funny, to lighten the mood, but perhaps (as my wife has told me more than once), when I try to be funny, I usually succeed in being obnoxious. Sorry.]
Edited on Feb 21 at 5:11pmRe: Santorum Talks Satan
The exchanges in this thread have gotten out of hand. Unfortunately it's hard to enforce any sort of rule that Members should be charitable and gracious with one another, but I'd urge all of you to try to be collegiate and respectful even concerning topics that evoke such passionate response.