Support NeoGAF

[Bluecondor]

Oh man - look at the guy's latest statement (Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum) on people who chose to stay behind during Hurricane Katrina:

"You have people who don't heed those warnings and then put people at risk as a result of not heeding those warnings. There may be a need to look at tougher penalties on those who decide to ride it out and understand that there are consequences to not leaving."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050907..._9TYwuWwvIE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OXIzMDMzBHNlYwM3MDM-

Now - to be fair - is there a grain of truth in what he is trying say? Sure - why not....

But - as usual - is this even close to being an appropriate time to make a remark like this? No - of course not. It iis like he is implying that individuals unwillingness to leave is an important factor in this disaster, right up there with the category four hurricane and the levee failure.

This reminds me of a few years ago when he decided to start voicing his opinions against gay marriage, when there was no reason whatsoever to touch this issue, and he went off about how homosexuality was a threat to the family and not part of the Constitution, etc.

Of course, if you've ever read the newspaper column, Savage Love, Dan Savage got him by "re-christening" Santorum's name to cover a whole new meaning.... :lol

 

[Triumph]

Santorum is the same guy who lumped consensual sodomy(code for [whisper]butt sex[/whisper]) in with incest and rape. He's a winner!

 

[Ecrofirt]

Santorum sucks.

 

[Ristamar]

Santorum sucks.

Yes, he does. And I sure as fuck didn't vote for him.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

"You have people who don't heed those warnings and then put people at risk as a result of not heeding those warnings. There may be a need to look at tougher penalties on those who decide to ride it out and understand that there are consequences to not leaving."

i don't think tougher penalties and consequences are neccesary, as i think it really drove the point home for these people, when they, uhhm, how do you say it...DIED!

 

[reggieandTFE]

He currently has the lowest approval ratings of any US senator and with a strong candidate in Casey, the dems in PA are gonna take this hypocritical, close-minded piece of dung.

 

[Triumph]

He currently has the lowest approval ratings of any US senator and with a strong candidate in Casey, the dems in PA are gonna take this hypocritical, close-minded piece of dung.

You know what that means if it happens? In 2007 we'll get to say hello to Supreme Court Justice Santorum!

 

[Drensch]

You act as if he won't get his congressional medal of freedom.

 

[JackFrost2012]

Santorum is a frothy mixture of

Spoiler

google for the rest of the sentence

!

 

[Zensetsu]

Anyone else read the thread title as "Pennsylvania = Where Saruman Rules" ?

 

[Bluecondor]

He currently has the lowest approval ratings of any US senator and with a strong candidate in Casey, the dems in PA are gonna take this hypocritical, close-minded piece of dung.

Man - I would love to see this happen. The problem is - I think he can be beaten in Philly and in Pittsburgh, but, the problem is that we have "Alabama" in-between these two urban areas - i.e., incredibly conservative, very much in the religious right, who are enamored with Santorum's outrageous statements against homosexuality and his contant pro-family blathering (even though, he, himself, does not live with his family in our state). I am optimistic that he could be beaten, but i will only believe it when it happens.

As for him becoming a Supreme Court justice - I agree - this is a harrowing thought. I don't know all of his background, but I do know that he has an MBA (from my school, Pitt, for that matter). So - hopefully for our sake - the man isn't even a lawyer.

But - if he does lose - don't be surprised if he is our next Director of Homeland Security. He is pratcially the poster child for this job. He is 100% domestic, prone to sensationalized appeals to safety and the preservation of American ideals, and he would be all over the media.

He may lose, but he definitely won't be going away any time soon. I just pray that he never ends up being competitive for the presidency, because it would be so painful and nerve wracking if he won.

 

[FoneBone]

Man - I would love to see this happen. The problem is - I think he can be beaten in Philly and in Pittsburgh, but, the problem is that we have "Alabama" in-between these two urban areas

I like the term "Pennsyltucky".

 

[Bluecondor]

I like the term "Pennsyltucky".

I haven't heard that one for awhile... :lol

 

[Ristamar]

Man - I would love to see this happen. The problem is - I think he can be beaten in Philly and in Pittsburgh, but, the problem is that we have "Alabama" in-between these two urban areas ...

Hey, the York/Harrisburg area isn't that bad. There are quite a few conservatives around, though.

I like the term "Pennsyltucky".

:lol

The last time I heard that was from a gentleman in Ohio. Nice, but coming from a guy living in Ohio.... yeah, sure pal.

 

[Bluecondor]

Oh - I agree - Harrisburg is a really nice area (although women from Harrisburg have made it habit of tearing my heart out and leaving me for dead), it is a great place....

Still though, rural PA = a huge block of voters who vote for religion first, and a conservative agenda a close second.

 

[videogamer]

Santorum is the same guy who lumped consensual sodomy(code for [whisper]butt sex[/whisper]) in with incest and rape. He's a winner!

Why would sodomy be a code word for anal sex? The term sodomy is tinged by really negative connotations from religious literature. On the other hand, anal just sounds dirty. "Homosexual acts" sounds much more vague and might make a better code word.

 

[Excess Poo Flakes]

Dude's talking about people who are staying behind.

 

[Traumahound]

Why would sodomy be a code word for anal sex? The term sodomy is tinged by really negative connotations from religious literature. On the other hand, anal just sounds dirty. "Homosexual acts" sounds much more vague and might make a better code word.

Butt sex: not just for gays anymore.

Also, sodomy refers to any "deviant" sex act, not just anal. It usually refers to anal and oral. Yes, oral sex is technically illegal in several states.

 

[videogamer]

Butt sex: not just for gays anymore.

Also, sodomy refers to any "deviant" sex act, not just anal. It usually refers to anal and oral. Yes, oral sex is technically illegal in several states.

Yes, I was aware that sodomy had a broader meaning... but from what I've read about Santorum, he has often used the word sodomy along with comments about issues tied closely to the homosexual agenda. So yeah, by definition sodomy doesn't equal "butt sex" or "gay sex", but taking into Santorum's past remarks, it can work.

 

[Diablos]

Oh - I agree - Harrisburg is a really nice area (although women from Harrisburg have made it habit of tearing my heart out and leaving me for dead), it is a great place....

Still though, rural PA = a huge block of voters who vote for religion first, and a conservative agenda a close second.

Girls from central PA are evil :lol

I dunno. If Kerry could take Pennsylvania, then Bob Casey can. Let's hope. With Santorum's approval rating tanking I can't see him winning. This isn't like Bush vs. Kerry. Bob Casey should be well beyond whatever Santorum has right now.

Take a look at the 2004 election results yourself: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/

 

[Ecrofirt]

I'm a registered republican living in Pennsylvania.

I want Santorum to lose. The man is a big fucking moron and he does nothing buy piss me off.

 

[Diablos]

I'm a registered republican living in Pennsylvania.

I want Santorum to lose. The man is a big fucking moron and he does nothing buy piss me off.

Hey now.

So you voted for Bush, but you won't vote for Santorum?

 

[Ecrofirt]

Hey now.

So you voted for Bush, but you won't vote for Santorum?

He's too much of a damn crazy for me. The sodomy comments last year lost anything the man had going for him with me.

 

[Diablos]

http://www.surveyusa.com/100USSenators0805SortedbyNetApprovalScore.htm

Damn, that has to hurt for Santorum. :lol

 

[Ecrofirt]

http://www.surveyusa.com/100USSenators0805SortedbyNetApprovalScore.htm

Damn, that has to hurt for Santorum. :lol

:lol :lol :lol

 

[Diablos]

It's most interesting to note that all of the senators with negative net approval are Republicans.

97 	OH 	DeWine, Mike 	R 	SR 	42% 	43% 	-1%
97 	FL 	Martinez, Mel 	R 	JR 	41% 	42% 	-1%
99 	OK 	Coburn, Tom 	R 	JR 	42% 	44% 	-2%	
100 	PA 	Santorum, Rick 	R 	JR 	42% 	46% 	-4%

And net approval up to 5% is Republican as well:

95 	AK 	Murkowski, Lisa 	R 	JR 	48% 	43% 	5% 		
96 	OH 	Voinovich, George 	R 	JR 	45% 	44% 	1%

 

[Incognito]

I know this might sound kooky, but I really believe Santorum is personally sabotaging his Senate race on purpose.

 

[Diablos]

I know this might sound kooky, but I really believe Santorum is personally sabotaging his Senate race on purpose.

...so he can run for President. Far from kooky, Janus. In a world where Dubya got elected twice, anything can happen.

 

[WrathOfOtaibah]

Santorum, Frist, and Martinez's approval ratings make me laugh. I guess the biggest Bush backers have Bush-like approval ratings. Well done.

 

[krypt0nian]

Santorum sucks.

But that would be sodomy! :lol

 

[Bluecondor]

I would like to believe that Bob Casey has a chance to beat Santorum. But - the reality is that he will probably take a few mis-steps in his campaign, Santorum will stand firm on an agenda based on the eradication of sodomy and the promotion of the family, they will debate two or three times - with Santorum not saying much of anything, and then on Election Day, Santorum's machine will be out in full force, garnering him 65% of the vote.

Call me cynical, but I've watched him to do this over and over again during the past 15 years or so. I'd love to believe that Bob Casey will be different, but seeing is believing...

 

[Diablos]

If that's the case why didn't Bush take Pennsylvania?

I think the question is, how many people will take 2006 as seriously as 2004? IF there are more simply more Republicans interested in the 2006 election and there are more willing to vote, then Bob Casey could be in trouble.

Kerry was able to take PA because enough people voted for him. I expect to see the same with Bob Casey, esepcailly considering how warped Santorum's point of view is on so many things. I will be very disappointed if there are not enough people that vote for Casey. They were there for Kerry.

In fact I'm starting to think you might be right. How many young people do you think are going to take this one seriously? Most young people are democrats. If their turnout is greatly reduced while more Republicans of all ages vote for Santorum, he's won.