Burch: American Ayatollah

Friday, March 2, 2012 at 10:52am
By Michael R. Burch

As I write this article on Leap Day, Tennessee conservatives are undoubtedly leaping up to cheer for Rick Santorum at Belmont University. “The majority of Santorum’s supporters are Bible-believing Protestants. But I wonder how many of them understand that, according to Santorum, they are in league with the Devil if they have sex for intimacy and pleasure when they’re not trying to procreate?”

Yes, Santorum really is that irrational, and due to what seems to be some sort of exotic obsessive-compulsive disorder, he can’t stop talking about sex, contraception and religion, even though doing so will surely cost him any chance at the presidency. Why? Because American women will not allow him to return them to the Dark Ages.

Santorum is a cult of one in American politics. But the political figure he most closely resembles is Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini: a rigid moralist with prehistoric views about women and sex whose puritanical regime dismantled family planning centers and ordered health care professionals not to advocate contraception. Sound familiar?

Yes, Santorum really does want to ban contraceptives. He admits it himself: “One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is ... the dangers of contraception ... It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is [sic] counter to how things are supposed to be.” In other words, Americans should breed mindlessly like rabbits, leaving how many babies they have up to the whims of chance, or give up sex altogether. Why? Because Rick Santorum knows the mind of God.

The contraception question is quite simple: do American women have the right to decide if and when to become mothers? Right-wing chauvinists are increasingly saying “No!” as they attack women’s rights, contraception and Planned Parenthood with typical alpha male bravado. For Protestants like Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention to side with the Vatican is hypocritical, because they wouldn’t say that the religious liberty of Mormons should result in polygamy being legalized, or that pagans should be allowed to sacrifice children to the “gods.” Now the GOP risks alienating the better half of its voters by foolishly suggesting that men can legislate medieval “morality” at the expense of women’s health and happiness.

Incredibly, Santorum also believes that our government has the right to monitor what we do in bed. In an interview with the Associated Press, he opined that the “right to privacy ... doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution.” Since he’s opposed to all forms of non-procreation sex, he would like to monitor married couples to make sure they aren’t defying the “will of God” by “fooling around” unless they’re trying to make babies.

Santorum obviously can’t help himself. He babbles compulsively in public about Satan, “spiritual warfare” (obviously to be led by him) and states having the right to ban contraceptives, which could only encourage sexually active American women to remain pregnant until they reach menopause. But how many of those women will vote for him in the general election, once they understand that his worldview is that of a medieval inquisitor?

Unlike JFK, who in a 1960 speech firmly advocated separation of church and state, Santorum clearly wants his chosen religion to dictate morality to the masses. In fact, he recently said that Kennedy’s speech made him want to “throw up.”

Yes, Santorum is honest, but then most KKK members are honest about their disdain for people with darker skin. Santorum has similar disdain for “liberals,” by which he doesn’t mean just gays, atheists, agnostics and secular humanists, but millions of married and faithful Protestants as well (and probably most Catholics to boot, since most of them now use contraceptives and have sex as they please).

Santorum would be Church Lady hilarious if he wasn’t two steps from the White House. Now we know how free-thinking Iranians felt when they realized that Khomeini might actually rise to power in Iran.

It is truly ironic for so many American Protestants to support Santorum when in a 2008 speech delivered at Ave Maria college, he said that “mainstream, mainline” Protestantism has been seduced by the “Father of Lies” to such an extent that Protestants are no longer Christians but have fallen prey to “vanity” and “pride” (both hallmarks of the Devil).

Like the Ayatollah Khomeini, Rick Santorum calls mainstream America the “Great Satan.”

Michael R. Burch is a Nashville-based editor and publisher of Holocaust poetry and other “things literary” at www.thehypertexts.com.

75 Comments on this post:

By: govskeptic on 3/2/12 at 11:31

With Tuesday's upcoming Primary, it's fitting to have the Leftist view
on the perceived Front Runner in this State. I seriously challenge the
statement above the author attributes to AP that he opined that the
"right to privacy...doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States
Constitution"! Half truths will ring true to the unsuspecting, but this
phony attack is not on Santorum, it's on the author's zealotry and constant
belittling not only of Christians, but those of any faith. Is it an
Editorial? Sure appears to be!

By: JohnGalt on 3/2/12 at 11:57

For a closer look at the alternate universe in which Mr. Burch lives, obtain some of whatever he is smoking.

By: BenDover on 3/2/12 at 11:57

I remember when people would unearth something sketchy about something Obama had DONE in his past and the media always did a full on front page barrage with Obama's WORDS to erase the criticisms from the public's eyes.

Instead with the conservatives the media leads with the most sketchy version of the truth they can muster and ignores any clarification or response by the candidates.

History is rewritten daily before our eyes.

Santorum on birth control:


By: BenDover on 3/2/12 at 12:16

The right to privacy issue:


By: yogiman on 3/2/12 at 2:19


May I offer a little bit of history on our nation. And from living through that part of the nation's history, I believe I know what I'm commenting about.

Sex has been in existence since God put this world together and decided to put man on this earth before he decided his men needed a sex partner to keep him in existence. So he then made a woman a little different from the man.

Sex was not talked about publicly in my younger days. If a young couple had sex, it was kept quiet. Or if they lived together, for whatever reason, they were "no damn good" and weren't looked at as part of the normal society.

If a young girl got pregnant and wasn't married, it was common for them to "run out of town" and elope to get married. They wanted their child to have a father.

And yes, they had contraceptives back then. If a young man wanted one he would ease up to the pharmacist and "mention" it to him. The pharmacist would slightly nod his head and slip the pack out under the counter. Today, they're displayed in many stores at the checkout register. WOW! What an advancement of contraceptives. You sure have a helluva choice today.

And have you checked out the advertisements in so many of the mail-order catalogs today?

But, back to the subject: Today, it isn't unusual for people to live together as a pair and call themselves different things. Some are partners, some are mates and some are families. Did you see the young man of TV after the storm went through the other day talking about he and his girlfriend were in the living room of their trailer [with their 2 month old baby]? Question: Why did he word his remark that way?

What are the children of these parents of today supposed to think of their parents when they mature? Love them? Hate them? How can they be proud of them?

By: Mike Burch on 3/3/12 at 1:35

Folks, I quoted what Santorum said himself.

The man clearly hates the Protestant religion for very simple reasons. I didn't make this up. It makes perfect sense, if you study Roman Catholic dogma.

Santorum considers Protestants to be deluded by Satan because:

(1) He "knows" that the only kind of sex God allows is baby-making sex.

(2) He "knows" that only God has the right to create life. Therefore, it is a "sin" to use contraceptives and disobey the will of God.

(3) Therefore, as he said himself, "mainstream, mainline" Protestantism is no longer Christian. Rather, Protestants are following the Devil.

You can complain all you want because the conservative Messiah is a religion-addled moron. But the Messiahs of the Southern Baptist Convention -- Richard Land and Albert Mohler -- are just as moronic.

Sooner or later conservatives will have to admit the simple fact: their leaders are morons incapable of rational thought, because they put their faith in religious beliefs that make no sense.

So ironically, the people who hate Barack Obama need to vote for him, because to vote for men like Santorum, Gingrich and Romney is to court disaster.

By: Mike Burch on 3/3/12 at 1:40

It really is a delicious irony that the bigots who hate Barack Obama need him to save themselves from the stupidity of their "saviors" Santorum, Gingrich and Romney.

That's like asking the Three Stooges to explain the theory of relativity.

By: BenDover on 3/3/12 at 6:46

Sometimes I wonder if you are amping these guys up as boogie-monsters to create a straw-man that is easier to dispose of; or if you really believe this crap you spew. I'm coming down on the side of the latter.

Do you really think that the vast majority of people with religious convictions have not asked themselves the same questions in their journey to faith? Your ignorance in this matter is only trumped by your arrogance.

For all of your Spock-like reason you try to apply; you negate that there is a spiritual component to humanity. When left unnurtured by time tested and, in my opinion, divinely revealed truths, the spirit is left to attach itself to whatever snake-oil that's being peddled in that generation.

Whether it's the Ehrlich's population bomb (ripped off from Malthus btw), or Al Gore's crazy global warming scam or this whole moral relativism crap that has grown into a new religion of its own... people prance around their superiority and indignation over the Christian rubes not realizing they are serving their own god to an untested, and often detrimental, end.

Then we suffer their preaching; though the dogma is so hollow it resorts mainly to the attack and destruction of other people's faith rather than honest introspection of their own.

Burch, you seem like a smart guy so I'll end it with a paraphrase of one of my favorite men and another guy who everyone claimed would destroy the country with his conservative views, informed by his faith and religion.

"It's not that our liberal friends are ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Reagan

By: dargent7 on 3/3/12 at 6:48

Sat. 03/03
Burch, you nailed it as usual.
And, as usual, the John Galts are flushed out of the Tennessee sewers claiming your truths are false, made up, a form of Communism, liberal indoctrination, eg., going to college.
Sanitarium is a danger to society, like an Adolph Hitler or a Charles Manson,...differing only in quantity.
Sanitarium shouldn't be allowed to carry a bowling ball, much less any state in America.

By: yogiman on 3/3/12 at 8:08


I'm sure you have the answers. But if you don't, I'm also sure dargent7 can help you with them.

My question: Why is Santorum so wrong in his religious beliefs? Why do all religious believers think their beliefs are right under God's eyes and all others are wrong and the others beliefs will take them to hell?

What makes any religion right except for the believers of that religion? Why do they all chant: I'm right and you are wrong, come on to my church? Are the ones who will eventually be proved to be wrong going to hell?

By: govskeptic on 3/3/12 at 8:36

Today it's Richard Land and the Protestants along with Santorum and the Catholics.
Next week Mitt Romney and the Mormons, devils group all. It appears the author's
Dreams of Obama, of which he has written, along with the Liberation of the Palestinians has turned to a hate filled obsession against all others having any
difference of opinion. Others share that as well, so it will be interesting to see
how things go between now and Nov. By next Sunday there will probably one
less devil for the press to go after since Super Tues and the Al & Ms primaries
will be completed.

By: Loner on 3/3/12 at 10:58

Another fine missive from Mike Burch.....Bravo!

Rick Santorum's campaign for POTUS has re-opened all sorts of debates that most of us thought were settled law.

Rick is a throwback to the year 1962, by my calculations. A time when blacks and whites in the South had their own segregated water fountains, restaurants, bars, schools and churches.....and a time when back-room abortions were being performed, using the coat hanger technique.

In those days, the condoms were kept out of view in the drugstores...in some states one needed a prescription to buy them. Women used aspirin for birth control....just kidding.

Santorum, the born-again, super-Catholic would lead this nation back to those unenlightened times.

As an End Times believer and Armageddon Expediter, Santorum would serve as a vassal to the Israeli Prime Minister.....Rick believes that the Jews are God's Chosen People and that every Jew on earth has a God-given right to real estate in Palestine....the Arabs of Palestine, however, have no rights to their own land, according to Richard the Zion-hearted.

Hopefully, most Americans are not cheering for and not expecting the imminent Second Coming of Jesus and they will reject anyone who is trying to induce the fulfillment of the Biblical prophecies concerning the end of the world.

If Israel strikes Iran this Spring, all bets are off....anything could happen, even a Rick Santorum presidency. It's all up to the Israeli Prime Minister...our Scripturally-approved overlord and the functional Commander-in-Chief of the Judeo-Christian armed forces....Benjamin Netanyahu.

Which way is it gonna be, Bibi...war or peace?

Is Obama on the Mossad's hit list? Netanyahu has run out of patience with Obama...the POTUS could be a marked man.....watch for a "freak accident" or something along those lines....the Mossad is very clever these days.

May God preserve our president and this nation from our "closest ally".

By: Captain Nemo on 3/3/12 at 11:27

Mike you did it again. The fringe right is a crying baby about you feature. Keep up the good work.

Speaking of fringe nuts, what do you think of Limbaugh? That man can sure drive buffoons like Santorum

By: yogiman on 3/3/12 at 11:56


If Rick is right in his thinking, and it's a known fact the Jews are God's chosen people, why isn't everyone wanting to go to Heaven a Jew? Or are they choosing so many other religions to be sure they'll make it to Hell? Is that why you're so hateful against the Jews of Israel? So you'll make it to Hell? Why did Rick invert to Catholicism?

By: yogiman on 3/3/12 at 12:59


As a fan of Obama, I just received an email from an old friend showing something I never though of before. And I'm sure you haven't either. I'll quote what he posted and then explain what he was talking about.

"For a long time, we have noticed that the decor at the white House has changed since BHO moved in.

"The Oval Office is now stripped of the traditional red, white, and blue, and replaced with middle eastern wallpaper, drapes, and decor.

"The hallway that he walks out of to talk to the press now has middle eastern chairs, drapes, etc. And the thing that has bothered me the most is the bright yellow drape behind him every time he speaks from the White House. It has Arabic symbols on it and has been there from the beginning.

"Today I received this and it clearly shows what I have been noticing. That yellow curtain is highly visible, but as you scroll down, you will see what is predominantly absent.

"Also, as you look at the pictures of the other presidents speaking from the same spot, look at the traditional 'American' background and decor as opposed to the new decor. It should alarm every American. What is missing at Barack Hussein Obama's press conference? No, it is not the teleprompters. See the other presidents for a clue."

Please understand, I've known this man for almost half a century and and worked with him for many years. I know he isn't BSing me because he told be before he voted for Obama and resented me forwarding anti-Obama remarks on the internet.

I wish I knew this computer well enough to forward this post to you. To be blunt, it might wake a lot of people up and make them wonder why the media hasn't taken a stance on it.

By: yogiman on 3/3/12 at 1:06

Follow up:

The drape behind Obama is a bright yellow color drape with Arab designs on it. No appearance of the American flag.

There are American flags behind all presidents in the pictures after Obama, back to Ronald Reagan. And I'm sure probably before them.

By: Loner on 3/3/12 at 2:51

"Middle Eastern wallpaper, drapes and decor"? Probably Israeli interior decorators renovated the place...Washington, DC is Israeli Occupied Territory...the Congress probably awarded a no-bid contract to an Israeli firm....those who object to the Middle Eastern theme are anti-Semites.

By: Captain Nemo on 3/3/12 at 4:32

Loner yogi must be smoking some very strange Rabbit Tobacco, because President Obama did not change the Oval Office décor. Look for yourself.


By: Captain Nemo on 3/3/12 at 4:55

Here is some reading for you to read yogi. If you can read.

The Truth About Presidents And Teleprompters

There's one reason above all others that President Obama uses a teleprompter in delivering most of his speeches: he's good at it.

Ronald Reagan was the same way. He was more at ease in reading his speech off the dual screens of a teleprompter than looking up and down at a speech text on his lectern

Not so, George W. Bush. He often got that nervous, deer-in-the-headlights look when giving an address from a teleprompter. He would seem stiff and ill-at-ease. He did not convey a sense of understanding.

"He preferred using large index cards," said his one-time White House Press Secretary Ari Fleisher, "plus I think he was just more comfortable with the cards."


By: JayBee56 on 3/3/12 at 8:44

Can Mike write about anything that doesn't denigrate conservatives or Christians? We are not electing a king, only a president. I will vote for Moe, Larry or Curly before I will vote for another 4 years of this president.

By: yogiman on 3/3/12 at 9:04

Sorry, JayBee56, he can't, he's a democrat.

By: Captain Nemo on 3/4/12 at 11:21

yogi can't read the truth.

By: Ask01 on 3/4/12 at 11:50

Speaking entirely for myself, I believe elected officials need moral and ethical codes by which to live, a sense of justice tempered with compassion when appropriate and a firm grasp of the principles of the U. S. Constitution.

Those elected or appointed should be capable of recognizing the boundary separating religious dogma and constitutional law, and accept the fact not everyone may share their beliefs.

I don't care what belief system, if any, is followed so long as those beliefs, or lack there of, are not imposed on the public.

Religious extremism of any faith is totally unacceptable in our very diverse society and I cannot support anyone who might seek to impose their beliefs on others or employ a strict interpretation of their faith while performing their duties.

By: BenDover on 3/4/12 at 3:47

Most people feel that way Ask01 which makes this portrayal by the City Paper of Santorum and the other conservatives as extra-constitutional Theocrats especially disgusting.

By: BenDover on 3/4/12 at 3:53

Most people agree that the candidates should be informed by their religious convictions but not impose them on people of other convictions. The media is especially remiss in their failure to examine Obama's church's commitment to Black Liberation Theology and then do hit jobs on mainstream orthodoxy of the Catholic and Protestant churches.

It is outrageous but so common we don't even notice what the media is doing to society anymore.

By: pswindle on 3/4/12 at 5:25

Was Geo. Bush examined on the "White Church Theology?" Oh, I forgot, he was a dry--drunk maybe he did not even have a Theology. We'll have to ask Bush's brain, Karl Rove.

By: Loner on 3/4/12 at 7:04

Santorum is not voicing the "mainstream orthodoxy of the Catholic church", as Ben claims...Santorum has adopted the hateful gospel of the Southern born-agains....very clever, but far from "orthodoxy", Santorum's message smacks of heresy....it does not appear to be truly Christ-centered....it seems to be Israel-centered....and Santorum-centered.

By: Mike Burch on 3/4/12 at 7:42

JayBee56 asked: "Can Mike write about anything that doesn't denigrate conservatives or Christians?"

Is that a rhetorical question? Should abolitionists have stopped writing against slavery while the terrible institution still existed? I will be glad to stop "denigrating" conservative Christians when they give up warmongering in the name of Jesus Christ, and ignoring his prime directive to take care of the poor and sick. Someone needs to defend the name of Jesus, on the chance that he's not the unjust monster orthodox Christianity paints him to be (for instance, sending Gandhi and Einstein to an "eternal hell" for having the good sense not to believe he would be cruel and unjust).

By: Mike Burch on 3/4/12 at 7:57

Nemo, you asked, "What do you think of Limbaugh? That man can sure drive buffoons like Santorum."

I think Limbaugh and Santorum are very different cookies. Limbaugh seems to actually despise feminists, gays, blacks, et al. He seems like a vitriolic bigot to me.

Santorum seems like a medieval moralist. He believes God is angry about Americans using contraceptives and having sex for intimacy and pleasure, rather than baby-making. Like people who sacrificed animals to Jehovah hoping for rain, Santorum wants to force Americans to give up sex and contraceptives in order to earn the favor of God. But of course killing animals doesn't bring more rain.

The real problem is that the entire GOP seems infested with such bizarre thinking. This is why the party is incapable of rational solutions to modern problems. The main actors have a black-and-white view of the world. For instance, only God can decide whether a baby should be born, hence abortion, contraceptives and even the "wrong" types of sex are taboo.

So they attack women's rights, Planned Parenthood, feminists, gays, and everyone who isn't contributing to global overpopulation. The result? More unwanted babies being born to teenage mothers who can't afford them. Many of those children will grow up to become drug addicts and/or violent criminals because the same people who insist that the babies be born will refuse to spend money to care for and educate them.

Limbaugh and Santorum would be troubling if they were extreme cases. But the whole party seems to have lost its mind. The glue holding the irrational crowd together is bizarre religious beliefs, racism, intolerance and anger. Nothing they believe makes any sense.

By: Mike Burch on 3/4/12 at 8:02


I agree with you. In his 1960 speech, JFK said pretty much the same thing. But Rick Santorum said JFK's speech made him want to "throw up."


Because Rick Santorum doesn't believe in separation of church and state. He wants to make contraceptives and non-baby-making sex illegal. He has said so himself, more than once, in public.

But conservatives are so blind with prejudice for Barack Obama that they can't parse what Santorum is actually saying. Santorum's advisers are trying to keep him from spilling his guts, but he can't help himself. He is an OCD moralist, and an evangelist of Roman Catholic dogma on sex and contraception.

By: Mike Burch on 3/4/12 at 8:13


I usually find myself nodding agreement with what you say, but in this case I must beg to differ. You said, "Rick is a throwback to the year 1962."

I would say he's a throwback to 1269, when the Inquisition was in full swing.

By: yogiman on 3/4/12 at 9:01


While you're in the disagreeing mode, I must disagree with your comment referring prejudice as the conservative's actions against Barack Obama. What prejudice does the conservatives have concerning Obama?

I have only seen Obama's legal qualifications for our Oval Office as the sole reason for their concern. Is that prejudice? I only see it as a great concern as to who is in charge of our Executive Branch of government.

The hand over that "red button" should be the greatest concern of any reasonable thinking person in this nation. And when you accept him as your leader and don't even know who that man is, that scares the hell out of me.

Every party, political, religious, or any other, does have a certain amount of prejudice. That's their choice.

By: Mike Burch on 3/4/12 at 10:23


You don't know who any other man is, really. But the concerns about Barack Obama's birth status are obviously the result of his having slightly darker skin than the norm, and an unusual-sounding name. If he was white and his name was Barry Oldham, no one would be questioning his parentage or his citizenship.

If there was any real evidence that Barack Obama is not an American citizen, it would have come out by now and the GOP would be investing millions of dollars in ads to make sure American voters knew about it. Since that isn't happening, it is completely obvious that he is an American citizen.

But there isn't a shred of real evidence, just a mountain of lies.

By: yogiman on 3/4/12 at 11:21

Sorry, Mike, I must disagree with you.

The point that Obama is a black man has nothing to do with the question of his legality. You can bet your a$$ even if he was a "white" man, the question would still be there. In essence: Just who in the hell is he?

You mention offering evidence Obama is not an American citizen. That has been done by himself with his refusal to identify himself other than opening his mouth. And he's been caught in too many lies to believe him.

If you could look a little deeper into the pond, you might be able to see the evidence being offered on him. And by that, I mean the requirements of the Constitution and the laws of the USA in 1961, if that was the date of his birth.

If he was born to the mother and father as claimed, he could only be given a dual citizenship status. But if he was born in Kenya as has been argued, his mother could not have passed her American citizenship down to him He would have been born as a subject to the British Empire. He would have been given Kenyan citizenship when The British Empire released Kenya.

The mountain of lies is coming from Obama lovers that either don't know who the man is, or are in the party with him. No one has officed any sign of proof of his eligibility, his citizenship or even if he is going by his legal name.

Why do you think he refuses to prove his identity?

There is two books I have suggested be read which will "prove" everything I have argued from the beginning. One is his autobiography, unless he was lying like hell writing it. The other is "Where's the Birth Certificate?" by Dr. (Ph. D.)Jerome R. Corsi who spent over three years researching his data.

Dr. Corsi has recently added more information to his book.

By: gdiafante on 3/5/12 at 6:37

Yogi, have you found that case law I asked you to submit? Nah, didn't think so.

Re the article, keep your religion out of our secular government. That doesn't mean that leaders can't have morals, ethics and/or be guided by their particular faith. There's a difference being a person of faith and a Theocrat. Santorum gives off the vibe of the latter to too many people to be electable.

I think Republicans are blowing any chance they had in the general election the longer this goes on.

By: yogiman on 3/5/12 at 7:20


There are situations that create a "case law" as you're asking to be submitted. How about considering this usurpation of the Oval Office as a case?

All that Obama has been asked to do is present a legitimate birth certificate and he refuses. Haven't you wondered why?

I can only offer known facts from his autobiography and researches done by others. Can you offer any evidence he's who he says he is? Didn't think so. Can you offer an explanation of why he refuses to identify himself? Didn't think so.

You had better wake up, fella. I feel sorry for your children if he gets away with this, which will mean this nation as joined the communist party. And with the help he's getting from congress I won't be surprised.

By: Captain Nemo on 3/5/12 at 7:36

Poor yogi, when confronted with the truth and logic his half brain shutdown and his mouth closes tighter than a sex starved gay man.

By: yogiman on 3/3/12 at 1:06
Follow up:

The drape behind Obama is a bright yellow color drape with Arab designs on it. No appearance of the American flag.

There are American flags behind all presidents in the pictures after Obama, back to Ronald Reagan. And I'm sure probably before them.

By: Captain Nemo on 3/3/12 at 4:32
Loner yogi must be smoking some very strange Rabbit Tobacco, because President Obama did not change the Oval Office décor. Look for yourself.


By: Captain Nemo on 3/5/12 at 7:44

By: yogiman on 3/5/12 at 7:20

There are situations that create a "case law" as you're asking to be submitted. How about considering this usurpation of the Oval Office as a case?

All that Obama has been asked to do is present a legitimate birth certificate and he refuses. Haven't you wondered why?

No one can convince an persons that does not want to be convinced.

By: parnell3rd on 3/5/12 at 8:02

Yogi, the mountain of lies not only come from Barrack Hussien Obama lovers, but the main stream media as well. The downfall of our great nation came when President Andrew Jackson invented the Democratic Party for his re-election.

By: yogiman on 3/5/12 at 8:27

I must agree, parnell3rd,

And it looks like the Democratic Party has decided it's time to expose themselves as the socialists they are.

I'll admit, I only have half the brain I used to have, but I can see so much more trouble for this nation than these apparent Obama lovers.

Isn't it funny you have to show your birth certificate to prove your identity; like to get a driver's license, or show your child's birth certificate to enroll them in school, yet it's okay to welcome a man in the White House of our nation whom you don't even know if he's who he says he is?

Well, no, that isn't funny. That's so ridiculous it makes one wonder what kind of intelligent people we have in the USA today.

When I see a news program asking people about who they voted for in an election and they can give you a run down on the Republicans but can't even tell you Obama is a registered voter makes you wonder... what country are they voting in?

By: Moonglow1 on 3/5/12 at 9:17

Moonglow1: I think I know why Santorum is so obsessed. I read an article recently about his wife. When she was 20, she dated a physician who was in his 60s and was known in Pennsylavinia as the Go to Doc for abortions. Apparently, Karen Graves (now Karen Santorum) was a member of the ACLU and was very active in helping women obtain abortions. I really wonder about her past history (for example, was she pregnant with the 60 year old, and if so did she have an abortion). Usually when people are zealots, they have a reason. Perhaps Santorum is "atoning" for his wife. Weird people for sure.

I've include one of many links below:


By: yogiman on 3/5/12 at 10:18

It takes all kind to make this world, Moonglow1, and there ain't no two alike. It's hard to conceive a young woman dating a man old enough to be her grandfather.

So, what was her reason? Sex? Grandfatherly adoration? Only they know while everyone else has to wonder.

By: Mike Burch on 3/5/12 at 11:00


You said, "I think Republicans are blowing any chance they had in the general election the longer this goes on."

I agree. The GOP's bigots have set their sights on so many targets, they're going to run short of voters. When it was only homosexuals, the bigotry was terrible, but they might still have made the numbers work. But now the GOP is attacking women, union workers, teachers, the elderly, the sick and the poor. They seem to have forgotten that 1% cannot rule over 99% in a democracy.

It's hard to imagine pissing off women, who represent half the voters, and winning an election.

By: Mike Burch on 3/5/12 at 11:11


A cultish religion can cause strange behaviors. Mind you, I'm not knocking just the Roman Catholic Church, because the Southern Baptist Convention is just as batty. I know, because my family attended Southern Baptist churches when I was a teenager.

My guess is that Rick Santorum is just acting logically, based on his faith. He "knows" that God hates and is enraged by non-procreational sex and the use of contraceptives. He fears what the wrath of God will do to the United States unless someone like him can "save" Americans from having the wrong kinds of sex. If making nookey for pleasure will cause God to destroy the United States, then it makes perfect sense to have the government put an end to such dangerous behavior.

If Rick Santourm is correct in his a priori assumptions about God, sex and procreation, then he is acting rationally. But if he is incorrect in his assumptions, he is just a small bundle of irrational fears. Most Americans would agree that his fears are unfounded and ridiculous.

Nixon was paranoid and we know how he acted in office. Do we want a president who's paranoid about God, sex and contraception?

By: gdiafante on 3/5/12 at 11:15

Yogi, cite case law to prove your point. It's laughable how you evade such a simple request. (Of course, we both know you are unable to prove your point).

By: gdiafante on 3/5/12 at 11:21

"It's hard to imagine pissing off women, who represent half the voters, and winning an election."

I agree. However, two steps forward, three steps back. As this religious fundamentalism grows, so does the belief that a woman should be subservient to the man. It's amazing that in the 21st century we seem to be reverting back to 16th century Puritanism.

What the hell is wrong with this country?

By: Captain Nemo on 3/5/12 at 11:46

It has being bagged into a tea pot gdia.

By: Captain Nemo on 3/5/12 at 12:01

Mike did you see where the Irish have lost their faith in the church, but not in God. It seems that with all of the pedophile priest and the Vatican more interested in saving there image rather than saving the children, the Irish are turning their backs to Rome.

Church in Ireland at a breaking point says Archbishop Diarmuid Martin on “60 Minutes”

By: yogiman on 3/5/12 at 12:03

I'm sorry, gdiafante. I've been trying to explain to you through your feeble mind a "case" is currently being established. I understand how you can accept someone as your CIC even though you don't know who he is with the mental capacity of the brain you obviously have.

The case is developing day by day. Hopefully, one day in the not too distant future it may dawn on you: Well, by dingle dog damn, now I understand why that man is not qualified to be in that office. Why in the hell did we put him there to begin with?

I hope your thick skull isn't too thick to understand what you should already know.

By: Captain Nemo on 3/5/12 at 12:05


The old Jack Ass still can not cite any evidence of his lies.