If Santorum Were President

In addition to more robust spam filtering and moderation, new features include the ability to rate other comments, sort how they are displayed and respond directly via e-mail or in a thread.

Unfortunately, commenters will lose their existing Truthdig identities. It's a pain, we know, but on the plus side you will now be able to log in with a plethora of options, including Google, Twitter, Facebook and Disqus accounts.

Before launching this system we spent months in discussion with our top commenters. We listened to the feedback and we hope you like what we've come up with.

By Gilbert Cantlin, September 25, 2011 at 5:28 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It is unbelievable that Rick Santorum was ever elected to any public office much
less made it to this Republican presidential primary marathon. He embarrasses
himself and his party, to say nothing of Pennsylvania voters who ever checked
off his name on a ballot in the past. He’s as illiterate as our electorate in
general, that’s the only explanation, but that’s true of almost every wannabe in
this Republican presidential primary. Santorum knows nothing more about
human sexuality than to pursue his own urges. Yet, he thinks others should
not do that! He’s biologically ignorant, pretending that there isn’t just as much
sex going on in the military as in any other category of humankind. Does he
pretend to have only made all his babies for God or did his own seeking and
satisfaction of pleasure have something to do with it? Santorum is also messed
up regarding our government. The president’s only constitutional role in
making laws is proposing and accepting or rejecting. Other than that, it is his
obligation only to enforce the bills presented to him by the legislature and
accepted with his signature. Someone should remind Santorum that he is
seeking the presidency of the United States, not the kingship of a kingdom.
Our president is the executor of laws passed by the legislature that have been
accepted with his signature. He is not to be king-in-chief!

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 25, 2011 at 4:32 am Link to this comment

Does anyone think Santorum has a snowball’s chance in Hell? If so they are full of “santorum”!

So why waste bandwidth on him? If Michelle Bachmann was a lot stupider, a down-right idiot, and an ugly man, she’d be Rick Santorum.

Report this

By Jimnp72, September 25, 2011 at 4:25 am Link to this comment

He has always been a total moron. that is why he was so popular here in Pa.

Report this

By John Poole, September 24, 2011 at 5:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I remember being clearly annoyed that gays could have a sexual roommate while I
was in a dorm at USC but I was not allowed to have a girlfriend be with me, It was
same sex dorms of course but I was at a disadvantage. Lesbians could room with
their sex partner as could gay males. It just didn’t seem right. I had to have any
trysts under the steps leading to the music room at 11 pm at night with randy
females. Wouldn’t this also apply to military duty?

Report this

By Marian Griffith, September 24, 2011 at 2:11 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

@Lillith
—-What an idiot, DADT only applies to one group of people, NOT everyone, especially not to heterosexuals. AND heterosexuals do not get kicked out for revealing that they are heterosexuals. DADT was a “special privilege” for homosexuals, just in a harmful rather than a positive way. AND the audience, moderator, and media so—-

Welcome to the wonderful world of ‘newspeak’ where peace means war, truth means lie and where special priveledge actually means a modern variant of a Jim Crow law.

I always thought the UK would be the first country to reach the state described by Orwell in 1984, but it seems that the USA is still leading the charge to the abyss.

Report this

By Marian Griffith, September 24, 2011 at 5:42 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

@gstoddard
—-We are a better people than this.—-

Sadly, we are not :(

Also Sanatorum, like most to the people who would vote for (the likes) him have an exceedingly narrow view of the world. It certainly must have escaped his mind that already large numbers of gay and lesbian men and women serve in the army today, and that other countries have long have a policy of not caring at all about who their soldiers would prefer to share a bed with without anybody being able to notice a difference.
But what can you expect from politicians and voters who are genuinely unable to comprehend that the world is bigger and vastly more diverse than their little suburb?

Report this

By gstoddard, September 23, 2011 at 7:20 pm Link to this comment

My previous post did not address the ignorance and bigotry demonstrated by Rick
Santorum when he stumbled through an answer that was unrelated to the issues
raised by DADT. I have heard some commentators report that he did well in this
debate. How can they ignore his outrageous willingness to deny equal rights to
any service member solely based on his or her sexual orientation?

Report this

By gstoddard, September 23, 2011 at 7:13 pm Link to this comment

Have the Republicans no decency? These are the same folks who are so quick to
go to war and who flaunt their patriotism shamelessly. None of those vying to lead
our nation dares criticize the audience members who boo a soldier stationed in
Iraq risking all in the defense of this nation. Disgusting.

And this is the third recent instance of such egregious meekness and cowardice by
all of these candidates. None objected when the audience applauded Governor
Perry’s record in executing prisoners or when audience members cheered the
prospect that an uninsured young man should be allowed to die because he chose
not to pay for insurance.

We are a better people than this.

Report this

By Lilith, September 23, 2011 at 6:50 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

What an idiot, DADT only applies to one group of people, NOT everyone, especially not to heterosexuals. AND heterosexuals do not get kicked out for revealing that they are heterosexuals. DADT was a “special privilege” for homosexuals, just in a harmful rather than a positive way. AND the audience, moderator, and media so far have bought the blatant fallacy. Now that is just depressing ......

Report this

By rend it, September 23, 2011 at 6:14 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

so if we took his argument to its extreme, there would be no women or people of color in the
general population?

Report this

The Populist Vision

They Only Look Dead: Why Progressives Will Dominate the Next Political Era

Baseball Cap

If Santorum Were President

Posted on Sep 23, 2011

TAGS: don't ask don't tell gay gay soldier homosexual military republican debate rick santorum santorum sex social policy soldier

Related Entries

Memorial Day: Honor the Dead, Heal the Wounded, Stop the Wars

North Carolina Pastor Advocates Putting Gays and Lesbians in Electrified Pen

Dispatches From Cairo: Testing Democracy

Every Year Russia Beats the Nazis One More Time

New and Improved Comments

		<a href='http://ads.truthdig.com/banners/www/delivery/ck.php?n=a9cd87eb&cb=69537879' target='_blank'><img src='http://ads.truthdig.com/banners/www/delivery/avw.php?zoneid=1&cb=69537879&n=a9cd87eb' border='0' alt='' /></a>	May 26, 2012 Log in / Register
			Text Size