[Ninong]

Scratch "Pursuit of Happiness." I guess that just leaves Life and Liberty.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Little Ricky says "pursuit of happiness" is harming America. I guess Ricky never made it to the second sentence of the Declaration of Independence.

Rick Santorum says that the "liberal" view of freedom is "not the kind of freedom our founders envisioned." Elaborating, he says "It is an entire culture that focus (sic) on immediate gratification and the pursuit of happiness and personal pleasure. And it is harming America."

Oh, and of course he blames our country's divorce rate on "the left." Even though the divorce rate in America is actually highest in the "Bible Belt"--hardly a bastion of liberalism.

This is a sitting United States Senator arguing that our founders were wrong in their belief that we are all entitled to the "pursuit of happiness." In the same breath, he says he knows what those same founders envisioned for this country.

http://santorumexposed.com/serendipi...s-America.html

[Ninong]

Ricky's not all that big on the "pursuit of happiness" hippy crap in the Declaration of Independence, but he's obviously a big fan of Chairman Mao.

"Home-schooling, he said, is not for everyone but 'is one viable option among many that will open up as we eliminate the heavy hand of the village elders' top-down control of education and allow a thousand parent-nutured flowers to bloom.'"

The "heavy hand of the village elders" is an obvious dig at Hillary's It Takes a Village but the rest of it is pure Mao. It was Mao Tse-Tung who said "Let a hundred flowers bloom: let a hundred schools of thought contend."

Who knew?

[Ninong]

Poor Ricky, he's not bright enough to know that you can't go around saying one thing to one audience and exactly the opposite to another audience. With internet search engines, it's too easy for people to catch your contradictory statements. Unless, of course, little Ricky has truly had a change of heart and now disagrees with Dubya on "creation science?"

In an NPR interview Thursday, Aug. 4, 2005, Ricky made this statement:

"I'm not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom."

In an article he wrote that was published in the Washington Times on March 14, 2002, Ricky made this statement:

"Intelligent design is a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes."

Has Ricky done a 180 or is he just tailoring his comments for his audience? Would he say one thing for an NPR audience and exactly the opposite for the Moonie Times audience?

Inquiring minds want to know. Has he sincerely changed his mind or is he insincere by design.

[gqsmoothster]

Dude, everytime I check the unanswered topics list, there's undoubtedly a list of odd, contentious postings that have this angry, super-left message in them. I usually just skip over them, and if you need a place to vent and storm, then I respect that. Just wondering what's behind it all?

I mean, sure, we all have some political ideas, that's all good, but most people just don't go that extra mile of opponent-bashing consistently. Just wondering what makes you tick. And, no, I'm not a psychiatrist

Respectfully....

[Ninong]

Originally Posted by gqsmoothster

Dude, everytime I check the unanswered topics list, there's undoubtedly a list of odd, contentious postings that have this angry, super-left message in them.

Isn't that Ben Franklin's definition of insanity -- doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results.

And, no, I'm not a psychiatrist

Respectfully....

Bill Frist is not a board-certified neurologist either but that didn't stop him from making eye contact with a blind woman and contradicting the diagnosis of competent neurologists who had actually examined her, so feel free to give us the benefit of your professional medical opinion as a non-psychiatrist.

Respectfully...




P.S. -- I see from your website that you're doing your CFM residency in the great state of New York. You must be proud that your state has two excellent, progressive U.S. Senators.

[almostdiva]

Originally Posted by Ninong

Ricky's not all that big on the "pursuit of happiness" hippy crap in the Declaration of Independence, but he's obviously a big fan of Chairman Mao.

"Home-schooling, he said, is not for everyone but 'is one viable option amony many that will open up as we eliminate the heavy hand of the village elders' top-down control of education and allow a thousand parent-nutured flowers to bloom.'"

Who knew?

Ninong,

There has also been a big kerfuffle recently regarding a payment the school district he claims to reside in must make because his kids are home schooled:
www.post-gazette.com/pg/05193/536563.stm

Since becoming a Senator, he has rented out his house in Penn Hills, lives in Leesburg, VA and stays with his relatives when he returns to the state. His children attend a cyber home school, but the district in Penn Hills is required to pay tuition, because that is his residence of record. The district is disputing that he ever lives there.

[Ninong]

Rebecca,

Your link doesn't seem to be working but I am familiar with the gist of that story already. Some folks are upset that he's a United States Senator representing the state of Pennsylvania but he doesn't actually live in Pennsylvania -- not even part-time. Also, he has this thing about public schools. He's against them. Considering his own Catholic school education, I'm surprised he doesn't send his kids to parochial school but maybe he can't afford that?

Ricky says his parents help out a lot because he has a hard time making ends meet on his salary as a U.S. Senator, which I believe is approximately $160,000/yr.

P.S. -- Last time I checked, Casey was leading him by double digits in the polls, so I think little Ricky is on the way out.

[Ninong]

Rebecca,

Here's the link you wanted to post: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05193/536563.stm

[gqsmoothster]

Originally Posted by Ninong

P.S. -- I see from your website that you're doing your CFM residency in the great state of New York. You must be proud that your state has two excellent, progressive U.S. Senators.

You're telling me! HC barely counts though... she's NOT a New Yorker!

I do believe in representation, and since NY is a pretty left state, it's sorta fitting. I definitely don't agree with their politics, but that's not their "fault" that they're in office, so I don't blame them.

And even though I don't agree with them, I try not to speak badly of them.

Anyway, carry on with your discussion, don't mean to interupt. I may have some good retorts every now and again, hope you don't mind. Just wish I had more time to write.

BTW, You've got so much to say, I would think you would have a blog of your own by now. Got one?

[Ninong]

Originally Posted by gqsmoothster

You're telling me! HC barely counts though... she's NOT a New Yorker!

Neither was Bobby Kennedy.

At least she lives in the state she represents, unlike Rick Santorum.

Anyway, carry on with your discussion, don't mean to interupt. I may have some good retorts every now and again, hope you don't mind.

Not at all. Please feel free to present an opposing view.

BTW, You've got so much to say, I would think you would have a blog of your own by now. Got one?

No.

[Ninong]

Rebecca,

Since you live in Pennsylvania, unlike the junior senator from Pennsylvania, I was wondering if you have an opinion on his chances of being reelected next year? I have a feeling that if the Democrats nominate Casey, then little Ricky is toast. Both are anti-abortion Catholics, only Casey is not as nutty as Santorum and not as two-faced.

I was reading where Santorum's wife, Karen, filed a lawsuit seeking $500,000 for pain and suffering from her chiropracter. This was back in 1999. Ricky authored a tort reform bill back in 1994 that would have set a limit of $250,000 for pain and suffering. That's the bill that the Republicans continue to support and one that they may get through Congress this year, but probably with a higher limit on pain and suffering.

So... After Karen Santorum filed her $500,000 lawsuit (her actual costs were $18,000), Ricky started backpedaling on the $250,000 limit part of his bill and even suggested that that limit might be too low. Recently he's back in line with the Republican position that the $250,000 limit is the way to go.

Anyway, getting back to the lawsuit against the chiropracter. Ricky said that his wife did not talk to him about the lawsuit. If you believe that, you'll believe anything. He said it was a personal matter between his wife, her attorney and her chiropracter. He had nothing to do with it and wasn't even consulted. The matter went to trial and the jury awarded her $350,000. The judge found the award excessive and cut it in half to $175,000.

The truly incredible part of this story is Santorum's statement that his wife NEVER discussed her lawsuit with him. Ever. Not even once. It's her personal matter and he's not involved in it in any way, shape or form.

I'm sure the $175,000 came in handy since Ricky says they have to rely on help from their parents because they can't make ends meet on his salary as a United States Senator.

P.S. -- Did you see where Ricky was asked about his views on contraception in a TV interview a couple of days ago? Ricky said contraception is harmful to America. Any form of contraception is harmful because it allows people to do things without having to face the consequences. His words. I guess that means he thinks condoms and birth control pills should be banned. This probably ties in with Ricky's belief that the pursuit of happiness is harmful to America.

[almostdiva]

Originally Posted by Ninong

Rebecca,

Since you live in Pennsylvania, unlike the junior senator from Pennsylvania, I was wondering if you have an opinion on his chances of being re-elected next year? I have a feeling that if the Democrats nominate Casey, then little Ricky is toast. Both are anti-abortion Catholics, only Casey is not as nutty as Santorum and not as two-faced.

.

Almost EVERYONE in PA LOVES Casey, because he is Casey Sr.'s son. None of the other dems will even run against him. He's gonna be the nominee. And he has TONS of money. Everyone in-state is polling him at like 10 pts ahead. All the people in Central PA swoon over him (and that's a big chunk of the electorate). Most of the liberal dems here in SE PA can deal with him, even though he's anti-abortion. He is, on the whole, much more popular than Santorum, and the religious conservatives can't bash him about anything, so they have no ammo in that area. His record as Auditor General (his most recent office) is pretty solid -- he went after waste and excess and fiscal irresponsibility fairly agressively, so there isn't much to tag him with in the area of "tax and spend liberal" either. I don't agree with his social/religious views, and he's pretty anti-woman, but I'll vote for him because he's not Santorum. It's going to be a VERY iteresting election. I expect the campaign adds to be brutal and incessant.

[almostdiva]

Oh, and I missed the Santorum interview. He's generally not at all in favor of anything having to do with women's reproductive rights, in any way, shape or form. So I'm not surprised.

Remember, he has all those kids to support (I think they have 5 or 6...) an of COURSE his wife doesn't work, that would be dangerous to the family. And where they live in VA is REALLY expensive, even if it is the bastion of religious conservatism. So of COURSE the in-laws have to help out

[Ninong]

Originally Posted by almostdiva

Oh, and I missed the Santorum interview. He's generally not at all in favor of anything having to do with women's reproductive rights, in any way, shape or form. So I'm not surprised.

Remember, he has all those kids to support (I think they have 5 or 6...) an of COURSE his wife doesn't work, that would be dangerous to the family. And where they live in VA is REALLY expensive, even if it is the bastion of religious conservatism. So of COURSE the in-laws have to help out

Rebecca,

Santorum has been on virtually all of the TV shows lately pushing his latest book. He even went on Jon Stewart. Ricky says that all Pennsylvanians should read his book because "he is mainstream." He claims that "80% of Pennsylvanians would agree with 90% of what he has written" in his new book.

Here are a couple of things he talks about in his book that I don't believe I have mentioned yet in this thread (maybe I have, but what the heck):

Ricky believes the state of Connecticut had the right to regulate birth control among married couples. He thinks the law was wrong but he believes that the state nonetheless has that right because he believes there is no right to privacy in the U.S. Constitution. He doesn't think the Connecticut Supreme Court should have overturned that law, he thinks it should have remained on the books until the state legislators themselves changed their minds and decided to repeal it. Assuming they would have had a change of heart, or mind, whatever.

So Ricky thinks there is no right to privacy. Ricky says the Constitution protects us against unreasonable search and seizure but we have no right to privacy per se. Scalia and Thomas agree with that position. There are a whole bunch of individual rights that are based on the right to privacy. If the U.S. Supreme Court should shift in the direction of no right to privacy, decades of law would be overturned.

Ricky believes all forms of contraception are harmful to America. I know I've mentioned this one before but I can't help repeating it because I just don't think this is a mainstream position. Maybe this falls somewhere in the 10% of stuff in his book that no one in his right mind would agree with???

Ricky said that the reason he mentioned in his book that the liberal culture in Boston was responsible for the Catholic Church's sexual abuse scandal there was because back in 2002 he was unaware that there was a problem anywhere else in the country (or world). Now that he knows that the problem was not confined to Boston, he would have written that it was caused by the liberal culture nationally and not just in Boston. The liberals are responsible.

Ricky mentioned that he has no current plans to run for president in 2008 but that one should "never say never because you can't predict what might happen 3-1/2 years from now." Being such a popular, "mainstream" politician, he believes his chances would be excellent but he will wait until the opportunity is right. His modesty is impressive.

One of the hosts asked Ricky to name all these feminists who are responsible for giving stay-at-home moms a bad rep. He named Gloria Steinem. He couldn't think of anyone else. Is she still alive? He was asked his opinion of stay-at-home dads and his answer was revealing. He practically concluded with "not that there's anything wrong with that."

Naturally he won't discuss his wife's lawsuit because that's her personal matter and he had nothing whatsoever to do with her decision.

BTW, I believe they have six children. I'm not sure how long they've been married but I would assume that his goal is probably one child per year during her reproductive years. What with contraception being harmful to America and everything, they will probably end up with at least 12-14 kids. Maybe more? It's nice that they have no health problems that would prevent them from having as many children as they want because Ricky believes in vitro fertilization clinics are harmful to America.

As far as the controversy over Pennsylvania paying tens of thousands of dollars a year for his children's home-schooling even though they reside full-time in Virginia, he says that was a politically motivated attack by a Democrat on the school board.

If we're lucky, the Republicans will ask Ricky to be the keynote speaker at the 2008 Republican National Convention, assuming Casey doesn't trounce him in 2006. I have a feeling little Ricky will be history before 2008. I guess they'll have to make do with Pat Buchanan again.

[Ninong]

Rebecca,

An interesting aspect to a potential Casey vs. Santorum race would be the Catholic vote. As you probably know, Pennsylvania is one of the most heavily Catholic states in the country. Looking at their resumes, it seems that both Casey and Santorum attended Catholic schools through high school but only Casey attended only Catholic universities. It may prove difficult for Santorum to try to out-Catholic Casey with Catholic voters.

Bush managed to receive a majority of the Catholic vote in the last election, which was a switch from the usual pattern of Catholics favoring Democratic candidates.

We had a Catholic vs. Catholic match-up down here in Louisiana when Mary Landrieu ran for reelection to the Senate. Her female Republican opponent was a Catholic from the same part of the state as Landrieu -- the Greater New Orleans area. So we didn't have the usual northern Louisiana vs. southern Louisiana aspect or even Protestant vs. Catholic. Both candidates were women, both were Catholic, and both were from the same part of the state. The Republican candidate decided to make an issue of the fact that the Archbishop of New Orleans was permitting Mary Landrieu to receive Holy Communion. She thought that it was disgraceful that Landrieu should show up for communion considering her position accepting a woman's right to choose to terminate a pregnancy during the early months. It was sort of an "I'm a better Catholic than you" argument. It didn't work. Landrieu was reelected.

[Ninong]

I know you live in Philly, so here's a funny exchange I found on a Philly board: http://philadelphia.metblogs.com/arc...epublica.phtml

Young Republicans at the Phillies

Got plans on Aug. 16?
Want plans?
Join the Young Republicans at the Phillies game that night!

The Phils will be playing the Washington Nationals starting at 7.05p (as usual).
Happy Hour at McFadden's beforehand (6p - 7p)! As an added bonus, the National
Anthem will be sung by University City's St. Francis deSales Choir.

A good excuse to see a ball game!

Posted by suzanne from Philadelphia at August 11, 2005 06:48 PM
Send to a Friend | IM to a friend


http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com...00&u_java=true

Comments
I understand all of the Young Republicans will be signing up to fight in Iraq that night, so even if you are a Democrat or Independent, go to the Phillies game that night and cheer them on in their "noble cause."

Posted by: SpinDentist at August 11, 2005 09:17 PM

Gee, I sure hope that someone has called the local recruiting offices. They may need to call in extra support to handle all the young patriots...

Posted by: Gregory at August 12, 2005 12:31 AM

first thing I'm doing in the AM is calling the recruiters and letting them know some YR's are ready to enlist!

Posted by: frenchy lamour at August 12, 2005 01:49 AM

[almostdiva]

An interesting aspect to a potential Casey vs. Santorum race would be the Catholic vote. As you probably know, Pennsylvania is one of the most heavily Catholic states in the country. Looking at their resumes, it seems that both Casey and Santorum attended Catholic schools through high school but only Casey attended only Catholic universities. It may prove difficult for Santorum to try to out-Catholic Casey with Catholic voters

The PA catholics LUUUV Casey... he gets all kinds of bonus points b/c his dad passed PA's reproductive rights law (VERY STRICT) , of which only portions were overturned by the Supreme Court. Rick can't "out-Catholic" Bob. No way. Rich will have to find other rows to hoe than the Catholic one.

And that bb notice is HYSTERICAL...

[Ninong]

Why does Ricky Santorum lie so much? Why would someone make a false statement about facts that can easily be disproven by simply checking the record? I don't think Ricky can tell the difference between truth and fiction. He's been making stuff up for so long he has forgotten which is which.

For example, last week on Ed Gordon's NPR radio program Ricky made the claim that "more Republicans, by the way, voted for the Voting Rights Act, voted for the Civil Rights Act than Democrats did."

That's not true. Here are the figures:

Voting Rights Act of 1965

U.S. House Vote Total = 328-74
217 Dems - 111 Repubs for passage

U.S. Senate Vote Total = 79-18
49 Dems - 30 Repubs for passage

Civil Rights Act of 1964

U.S. House Vote Total = 290-130
152 Dems - 138 Repubs for passage

U.S. Senate Vote Total = 73-27
46 Dems - 27 Repubs for passage

I'm beginning to think that Ricky is just plain stupid!

[Ninong]

This is hilarious. New poll figures for August show that the more Pennsylvanians get to know about little Ricky's "mainstream" ideas, the less they approve of him: http://www.surveyusa.com/100USSenato...rovalScore.htm

Keep going. Scroll down some more. A little more. All the way down to dead last, number 100 out of 100 senators: Senator Rick Santorum (R-17th. Century).

Some of little Ricky's advisors warned him that putting his ideas in a book could be harmful to his political health but he did it anyway. Those same advisors pleaded with him not to go on this national book-promotion tour, showing up on TV more than Law & Order reruns, but Ricky wouldn't listen to them. No, siree, Ricky wanted to make sure that everyone in America got to see just how "mainstream" he really is.




P.S. -- As recently as May, 45% of Pennsylvanians approved of Ricky's performance vs. 38% who disapproved. Now that Ricky has exposed himself on TV, only 42% approve and 46% disapprove. I guess a lot of the people who hadn't given it much thought before now realize that they really don't have all that much in common with this lunatic.

[almostdiva]

And we're still waiting for the dust to settle in a couple of state congressional races where incumbents may lose their seats because of the midnight payraise the legislature voted themselves... So far the top two dudes in the state Senate are OUT....

BUT, Little Ricky ran unoposed, so, surprise, he's on the ticket for November. Bob Casey, Jr. had two opponents, neither of whom was well-financed. He won hands down (nobody really thought he'd be challenged).

So NOW, the favored son of one of PA's most popular Governors is going after Little Ricky with both barrels loaded. Rick has a few problems: Bob Jr. is for gun ownership (he's from central PA -- everyone hunts); he's VERY religious (conservative Catholic); anti-abortion; strong on defense. These are all the issues Ricky has traditionally won on when he's been up against a PA Dem before. He doesn't really have anything to set himself apart from Casey in any of the areas where he's been able to pull votes in the past.

Bob is (and has been) up 20% in the polls for MONTHS.

It should be a fun campaigh!

Rebecca