[Coleman]

[img]http://www.grassrootspa.com/It%20takes%20a%20Family.jpg[/img]

[quote:371a1]Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) will directly challenge Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's view that "It Takes a Village" to raise a child, arguing in a book scheduled for release this summer that America would be stronger if people focused instead on "strengthening the family." Santorum will make his case in "It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good," which his publisher bills as the "conservative response" to Clinton's heralded - and in conservative circles, controversial - look at the role played by the community and society in raising children. Santorum's book, published by the conservative Intercollegiate Studies Institute, will appear roughly nine years after Clinton's 1996 volume - just as both he and Clinton gear up first for re-election in 2006 and then expected presidential bids in 2008. While the Pennsylvania Republican said he is not criticizing Clinton personally by mimicking her book title, he noted his book reaches a different conclusion. "It is a contrast to how the left looks at structure and order in society and how I look at structure and order in society," Santorum said in an interview yesterday. "To me, government should not be about telling individuals what is best for them, or ordering society so individuals can sort of run wild and do whatever they want to do. Government should be nurturing mothers and fathers to raise children in responsible families and communities."

Santorum said his book would also discuss how institutions such as the "big media and big academia" are not helping to provide answers that are needed to strengthen the family.[/quote:371a1]

He came to my school this past December and visited our band (when we marched in the presidential inaugural parade). He gave a small little politician's speech about some of his views and forth. I don't know too much about him at the moment, but I'll probably check out his book and have a better idea of his beliefs are so if he is up for the republican presidential nominee, I'll have some sort of idea what he's about.



PS. He's a PSU and Pitt alumni rock:

[KTOG]

Fuck him, he's a joke. He openly bashes gays and says they are not equal to others and does not know what he's talking about:

http://www.spreadingsantorum.com/santorumspeaks.mov

He speaks for the right so extremely just to attract God/Homosexual/Liberal fearing people. If his arguements fails he will always fall back on what is moral, but laws are not always moral. Also, he believes church and state belong together and openly says they should be. Just another Bush wannabe.


As for his book, i have yet to read it but i read a review on it today. It described how we must fall back on old values such as the man of the family being the head while a woman should stay home and raise there kids. Sounds anti-feminist to me.

Gary don't follow someone just because of their party.

[Bullitt]

1. santorum
The sometimes frothy, usually slimy, amalgam of lubricant, stray fecal matter, and ejaculate that leaks out of the receiving partner's anus after a session of anal intercourse. Named, by popular demand and usage, after legislator Rick Santorum because of his homophobic political statements.

[Coleman]

i'm not following him b/c he wears a Republican nametag. Don't worry about that.

From what I've gathered, his book talked about how women don't have to go out into the work force JUST SOLEY TO GAIN RESPECT socially. He says that there is nothing wrong with a woman being a stay-at home parent. He talked about the radical female rights people and how they do not reflect ALL of society; when much of the media portrays their views as being universally accepted.

video issues
I find nothing wrong with how he defended himself about the girl's question about gay sex/polygomy/incest/etc. I find that legit.

Regarding his views on homosexuals, well I feel as if I'm in the same hemisphere with him rather than being in an opposite pole with someone like Hilary Clinton. What's wrong with having the same views of politician in that regard? I like what he said in response to that second person (dude with the long hair). "You should respect every individual as a person of God, but that does not mean that you have to respect everything they do." or something like that.

With how you believe church and state belongs together...well I'm not sure how much of that is true to that extreme extentwhen you look at his voting record. He has already 'gave in' to the liberal side when it came to school vouchers. He voted against using vouchers (which was one of Bush's big strong points to the conservative party). That's a big criticism by his own party. Saying he's a "bush wannabe" is a stupid thing to say...name calling.

EDIT: I really found nothing wrong with his comments in the video. As for the end, any politician will have his aids defend them at any point in time where a weakness may be exposed. Who wants to look bad from an awkward question? No one. Yes, they had the right to do it and I found nothing wrong with them asking the questions.

[Coleman]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

1. santorum
The sometimes frothy, usually slimy, amalgam of lubricant, stray fecal matter, and ejaculate that leaks out of the receiving partner's anus after a session of anal intercourse. Named, by popular demand and usage, after legislator Rick Santorum because of his homophobic political statements.

I know bullit that you didn't make that definition up. But how many times do we have to state this? Anti-gay does not equal homophobia.

[Short Hand]

Originally Posted by Coleman

I know bullit that you didn't make that definition up. But how many times do we have to state this? Anti-gay does not equal homophobia.

WTF ? Does that make any sense ? oOo: I am sorry but any hate for homophobia is in part by a fear of it. (Fear = Driving Force OF Hate) THUS making Anti-Gay People homophobic. PERIOD.

[KTOG]

I just read another blurb on the book. Its just a mockery of what woman have fought for. His views are based solely on the middle-middle class and above. What should he tell a single mom that lives in projects? She wants to be socially accepted? ...my ass. What about a family that was recently nationalized? They came here for the opportunity to have the freedom to work. They did not have the priveledges that us take for granted.

It takes a family, is an obvious poke at woman because it is taken from the mouth of Hillary Clinton. She has said many times during her term "It takes a village to raise a child." I THINK SHE WOULD KNOW SHE IS A WOMAN. Santorum doesn't know what he talking about because he does not have the proper 'equipment'. All his supporters have already raised there children or are male. I know many expectant or recent mothers would love to have the oppurtunity to stay at home, but they can't. For social reason ... no ... its the fact that people have driven the economy to the point where we can't get by without 2 incomes.

[KTOG]

Also here is some back story and a non-bias remove on the book:

[quote:f8d1e]I live in this man's balliwick and I can tell you, he is not only crazy, he's a liar. He (actually, it's his wife) homeschools their (many) kids in comfort in his expensive home in VA, then allows the Bethel Park, PA school district they "live" in to pay upwards of $80,000 for his kids school fees, since they "attend" its online homeschool forum? He still hasn't paid that debt back and only admitted to it when forced to, when asked by a local reporter for the local PPG newspaper. Look it up folks, those are facts.

And the "home" he and his large family "live" in when he's here? A very small, 2 bedroom, 1 bath home lived in fulltime by his niece and her husband, for which he gets the tax break as a homestead (but the relatives are listed as the permanent residents and use it as their registered voting address?)! Also fact, on record, folks.

For those of you who say "so what?" or "that information has nothing to do with his book", I say, think again. A man's reputation must be as good as his word, or at least as good as he pretends both to be, if he is going to put himself out there and set himself up as an example. And that is exactly what he is attempting to do with this book.

It does take a family to raise children, I agree. I am a SAHM myself, now. But only because we can't afford decent daycare. Thankfull my husband still has a job, his job is one of the few that hasn't been sent overseas or pushed out of the county by greedy local politcians (the ones you lie down with daily, Rick). Apparently Rick does not have those worries, so it's easy to say "stay home" and "homeschool" and "live on one income".

Why not help fund programs for working moms to pay for decent daycare instead of adding more guilt to their overflowing plates? I am this man's absolute worst nightmare. An educated woman.

His narrow and narrowminded view of what a family is also frightens me. So, Rick. Feminism is responsible for the decline of public schools (which you state are unneccessary and should be abolished in favor of homeschooling), for the degradation of the mother image and of morals in general? Get real, Rick. Try living life the way the rest of us mere mortals do, those of us upon whom you wish to impose your "morals", instead of in that voter-paid-for, country club, ivory-tower mansion you've hidden yourself and your family away in.

What you say isn't even new--it's just repackaged, and poorly, too. Did your aide gather all the "facts" and you signed off on them before the proofs went to the printer?

I agree that if people took a good look at their finances and decided what they really needed vs. what they wanted (ie: jetskis and boats vs. saving for college education for the kids), they might decide it's in their and their children's best interests for the lower earner to stay home when the kids are young, but Santorum seems bound and determined to see that the low earner is and always remains a woman.

And since we live and die by our 401Ks, not social security or the PERS-style, taxpayer funded COLAs we pay for, but that he and his cronies (both Dem and Reprobate, I mean Republican) reap the benefits of, it's easy for him to say parents have an obligation to their children to have one stay at home with them. And then he recommends cutting Pell program funding, so our kids can't get into and stay in the same colleges he wants to send his kids to? What a hypocrite!

Socialization among school-age children is a bad thing? Women in the workforce is a bad thing? A woman who chooses not to have children has made the wrong choice?

But giving himself a raise while cutting Medicaid is a good thing? Stealing from his overwhelmed, overtaxed and overburdened local school district is a good thing? Maybe in his little world it is, where people who disagree with him are "bad" and "wrong". Righteousness with a capital R is not the same thing as being right, Rick.

This book frightens me, more so because it is starting to gain a following among conservatives who haven't read it and do not know what it really says; they tout it as a good book simply because Rick wrote it.

And that's what this book is really about, folks. It's not literature, it's not about a belief system, it's not a sociological study, it's not a guidebook showing how we should parent our kids and be fulfilled and better people while we do it. It's a campaign-builder and stepping stone, a book he can quote from later to make his own comments appear to be factual.

God help us if this man becomes President one day. The Stepfordization of America will have come full circle and we will all be the sorrier (and poorer) for it. And if we let him get in, we will have deserved him.

And to the person (guy, I presume) who wrote that he couldn't believe people read the book two days after publication? He is either 1) a conservative or 2) a bigger idiot than Santorum. Or both. I read it the same way you did, doofus! But probably lots faster and while changing diapers and chewing gum at the same time! We educated women are good like that.[/quote:f8d1e]

PS: Bethel Park is 15 minutes from my house oOo:

[Coleman]

My brother's room mate lives in Bethel Park happy:

He is one of the lowest paid congressmans with a salary of like $160,000. I KNOW it's no garbage truckdriver salary. Most congressmen are WELL off compared to him.



Short, just stfu already. Just because I don't agree with what gay people do DOESN'T MEAN THAT I'M AFRAID OF THEM AND THEIR ACTIONS.

In regards to having him tell women to stay at home. I am not sure how much of a direct order it seems to be in words. I am going to go to Waldenbooks or Barnes & Noble today to go pick up a copy and find out myself what all of the hype is. I'll be sure to fill you guys in on what I find.

[Pyro]

Originally Posted by KTOG

Fuck him, he's a joke. He openly bashes gays and says they are not equal to others and does not know what he's talking about:

[Coleman]

Originally Posted by Pyro

lol he didn't openly bash any gay. He said, "You should respect every individual as a person of God, but that does not mean that you have to respect everything they do."

[Short Hand]

Colemon........ oOo:

[Coleman]

[quote="Short Hand":98ac0]Colemon........ oOo:[/quote:98ac0]I like ktog as a person and good friend, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with his drinking habbits. Am i openly bashing him and calling him a dickface? No.

[KTOG]

[quote=Coleman]

Originally Posted by "Short Hand":36cc8

Colemon........ oOo:

I like ktog as a person and good friend, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with his drinking habbits. Am i openly bashing him and calling him a dickface? No.[/quote:36cc8]

My best friend in RL is a hardcore conservative, gun toting, homosexual fearing, man.

[Madmartagen]

Originally Posted by Pyro