Santorum wants to impose 'Judeo-Christian Sharia'
 

WARNING OPINION PIECE AHEAD!

Few quotes:

LINK

Last updated 5 January 2012 at 2:30 PM EST

Fundamentalism always stinks and always is against reason and humanism - no matter whether it comes in the dress of Islam, Christian sectarians or Jewish orthdox. When I see what the ultras are trying in Israel currently, I only want to vomit all day long. Primitives.

He's puritanical. His views on birth control are frightening. They go back to some patriarchal Leave it to Beaver type 1950s time warp.

With nut jobs like that, Obama will be shoo-in come next election. The republican party really needs to weed out the circus clowns.

Obama is definitely not a shoo-in. People by the millions are impatiently waiting go to the voting booth for the sole purpose of kicking Obama straight to the curb. Despite what you think Rick Santorum believes, this article is merely someone's opinion. Sharia...really???LOL :haha:

He wants to stop using federal funding (read..my tax dollars) for birth control. Sounds good to me. :up: Pay for your own damn birth control pills.

And when people can't, you get to pay for all those new babies on welfare. Hooray for cutting off your nose to spite your face.

And he's for allowing states to ban birth control. That's absolutely idiotic. The guy's a fundie, and as Skybird said - fundies of all stripes in a position of power are scary.

[QUOTE=mookiemookie;1816596]And when people can't, you get to pay for all those new babies on welfare. Hooray for cutting off your nose to spite your face.

And he's for allowing states to ban birth control. That's absolutely idiotic. The guy's a fundie, and as Skybird said - fundies of all stripes in a position of power are scary.[/QUO

Ah religious fools are just about as bad as people like obama. Sad state of affairs my party and this country is in.

I'm impressed with Paul's showing precisely because Iowa is such a backwards place. To come in a respectable third there is no small feat.

I don't believe any of it. It's a made up projection of a future without federally funded birth control. It's a fraudulent argument. People can pay for their own birth control. A few people unwisely choose not to use birth control at all, and make babies they cannot afford. Federal funds won't change that. What liberals want is to create another entitlement using taxpayer funds, thus creating dependancy on government. This is nanny state lunacy. Government, using tax dollars on thousands of wasteful programs won't save everybody from themselves. Never has. This is why liberals have no business putting their hands on the levers of government.....they abuse it.

As far as states banning birth control, he's for allowing states the right to choose which laws they want to pass. Even if it is about birth control. Birth control is not a right or power enumerated in the US federal constitution. Therefore, he is correct. Leave it up to the states to pass their own laws. Let the courts determine the constitutionality.

Between Rick Perry and this Santorum fella, umm, i'm noticing a common trend, and I have to wonder, what the hell are they thinking? If the republicans want the white house back, they're gonna need to find candidates that most people across the country can agree on. These two jack wagon's are only going to scare away everyone who isn't on the extreme right. Just the fact that they are candidates at all, is scary.

Be careful. That's exactly what people thought about Obama. He is on the extreme left and he has largely been a failure. Obama is a looney marxist with all kinds of weird ideas, yet he got elected. Before his election, he was thought to be unelectable. Just understand, Obama's election changed things. People who you find "scary" are very much electable these days. The Republicans want the White House back...and these "fellas" can get it back for them. The whole USA does not live in your bubble. If you're old enough, this is almost like Reagan redux.

Demon, you wouldn't know a marxist loony or otherwise if he was parading naked in front of you holding an I am a marxist sign.
But given the fact that you are saying you support a prime fundy pillock like santorum may suggests that you are secretly an Obama fan and want the republicans to choose the biggest unelectable tosspot from the bunch of idiots that have put themselves forward.
So tell me, when exactly was it you became such a big fan of your current slightly left of right President?

And what makes you think it lives in yours? :hmmm:

I think if you look out in the world in general, or at least Western politics, in almost any perspective but the US right-wing's, Obama would hardly be considered left-wing at all, let alone loony marxist. It's no secret that the US neocon and social conservative scene is a bizzare one in the big scope of things.

But that aside, you don't need to look very here to see that the religious right represents a very small number of US constituents, while alienating huge portions of the population based on beliefs and social circumstances. Don't kid yourself, they're not a 'moral majority' and when push comes to shove, you'll see people voting for Obama just out of fear of these guys. And that's the worst kind of political situation, one that will get you stuck with this doofus and the likes of him for a while to come. The point is, when you get a crappy president, you don't get rid of him by voting for candidates with extreme views based on the fact that they're perceived to be opposite to his. If that's how America actually thinks, I would be very disappointed.


And the Reagan romanticism is just laughable. But I guess that's how neocon lore works.

Politically, Santorum is a loser. The guy lost the seat he held for two terms to Bob Casey by 17 percentage points. Bottom line is that if Team R puts him up, they lose big. He's toxic.

In Canada, Pres. Obama would probably be at home in the left wing of the Conservative Party, to the right of the Liberals and far to the right of the New Democrats. American's who call him a socialist or communist have zero political knowledge outside their pathetically narrow, bigoted and fanatical fundamentalist dogma.

Exactly.

I think all the Republican candidates right now share some degree of toxicity, for various reasons. For the Tea Party, Romney and Gingrich are "the establishment". For "the establishment", Paul is an anathema to neoconservative politics. For libertarians, both the religious right and the "establishment" are suspect.

I don't think team R could be any more fragmented right now, over its identity most of all. A far cry from a 'bubble' - I honestly can't see anything remotely resembling a consensus emerging. There are at least 2 conflicting versions of economics and foreign policy and 3 different versions of social policy revolving around GOP circles right now, all under bitter attacks from within party ranks and their main electorate. That's a bad situation, and the ones who built their politics on far-reaching and supposedly-unassailable interpretations religious morals are very much to blame. They don't budge, and IMO that's a very bad thing for everyone. It might look like a great thing if you're in the target demographic for those types, but the reality is that most of America is no longer that demographic at all, and you won't win democratically on that sort of platform.


Pretty much. I would actually say that the mainstream of the US Democrat party is either even with or even a little to the right of our Conservative party, which is our furthest-right party with realistic chances of governing. That is also the case with most of the world's developed democracies (Europe, Australia/New Zealand, Japan, South America, etc. etc.) So, looking from the outside, US mainstream politics does look grotesquely skewed to the right...

Because it's not about religion. The fact is, the economy still sucks. The housing market still sucks. Infrastructure is still crumbling. The deficit is still rising (And Obama has increased this ten fold.....and wants Trillions more). And businesses are still showing a reluctance to hire because of things like the costs of Obama's healthcare bill. Obama is toxic. To the Democrat party and the country both. People are ticked off. Don't fool yourself into believing Obama is a guarantee. He's lost a vast amount of the white independant vote, and will not get it back. I'm not saying they all go Republican....some of them will, others don't show up. That hurts Obama more than any GOP candidate. GOP voters want to drive Obama out of the White House. This race is for the Republicans to win or lose.

It's not Reagan "romanticism". This happens every presidential election regarding GOP outsiders from the beltway East Coast. Reagan was an unelectable senile actor. G.H.W. Bush was a "corrupt" unelectable and unworthy VP (time for change). George Bush was an unelectable "bumbling idiot". This is a pattern. Now anybody but Mitt is unelectable. The same people will say he's unelectable if he wins the nomination. Cracks me up. :DL

Reagan ran on his version of hope and change. He won. Clinton ran on his version of hope and change. He won. John Kerry ran on 'I'm not Bush' during an election that he probably should have won. He lost. Team R is running on 'I'm not Obama' in an election that they probably should win. Instead of new ideas, they are recycling the same neoconservative politics that have been in place since the Reagan administration; the very budget-busting policies that helped move us into this mess.

My personal view is that this race is not about Obama. This race is a contest for the soul of the Republican party. The party must not be permitted to return to the White House until the Reagan NeoCons are purged. This Reagan worship must end, and we must return to the roots of fiscal responsibility. This includes the bloated military budget, not just civil programs and services. For that to happen; for the Republicans to start acting like Republicans again they must recieve the message that we will not tolerate neoconservative politics any more. Obama must win, and I am confident that he will.