Can someone please explain to me how and why the GOP is moving to so far to the right? Can they not see that the "base" that they are reaching out to is in no way the majority? Can they not see that there is no way that they will win a national election and that their new "hero" only desires to take away many of the freedoms that have been apart of our democracy for over a generation?
Mr. Santorum is probably one of the most dangerous candidates that I have ever seen. In this nations last Presidential election cycle, I thought that Palin was a dangerous idiot, and she is. And I totally blame John McCain for this country having to endure her vitriolic rhetoric. Then in this election cycle, when she announced her candidacy, I thought that Bachman was someone that just desired the limelight and was an egomaniac and I was right about that too. To this day she still says that "SHE. was the perfect candidate."
Well, now in the last few weeks, riding some of the weirdest Primary Elections I have ever seen, Mr. Santorum is sending his message further and further to the right to garner the support of the religious extremists and fundamentalists that see the future of our nation as "Their Way of the Highway." His stump speeches in Iowa had none of this current rantings on the elimination of our social freedoms.
I cannot abide any candidate that has the unmitigated gaul to tell me how to have sexual relations. You have to see this video in order to believe it. He touts a smaller government yet his ideology dictates the implementation of the "Big Brother" that he says he despises.
Watch in horror what could become the GOP candidate for President of the United States of America. I thought that the last election was imperative to win but now I am even more afraid of what would happen to our freedoms and our individual rights.
I realize that this interview is over 44 minutes long and a great deal of it is rambling but here is the dialog that wants to make me scream.
Rick Santorum:
"One of the things I will talk about that no president has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea... It's not okay because it's a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They're supposed to be within marriage, for purposes that are, yes, conjugal... but also procreative.
That's the perfect way that a sexual union should happen. We take any part of that out, we diminish the act. And if you can take one part out that's not for purposes of procreation, that's not one of the reasons, then you diminish this very special bond between men and women, so why can't you take other parts of that out? And all of a sudden, it becomes deconstructed to the point where it's simply pleasure. And that's certainly a part of it--and it's an important part of it, don't get me wrong--but there's a lot of things we do for pleasure, and this is special, and it needs to be seen as special. Again, I know most presidents don't talk about those things, and maybe people don't want us to talk about those things, but I think it's important that you are who you are. I'm not running for preacher.
I'm not running for pastor, but these are important public policy issues."
Read the Editorial in The Atlantic by Conor Friedersdorf
No comments:
Post a Comment