Santorum, meanwhile, suggested a double standard, especially in what appears to be a new era of civility in the wake of the Arizona shootings.
“It’s just a sad commentary,” he told Roll Call. “You want to talk about incivility. I don’t know of anybody on the left who came to my defense for the incivility with respect to those things."
And then there was this:
Santorum compared homosexual acts to allowing for “man on child, man on dog” relationships.
“And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does,” he said at the time.
Too bad Dan didn't have the presence of mind to consider others with the Santorum surname, and the annoyance that they will endure forever - some of whom are statically liberal democrats.
If there are other people with that last name, they're probably related to him. Which is a far bigger problem than having your name smeared on the interwebs.
Hah, after LMAO I sent this to Dan last night. Here is the link for http://www.spreadingsantorum.com/. Everyone needs to click on it a half dozen times for good measure.
Just proves what "one guy" with a computer and a host of interwebs flying monkeys can accomplish.
I am really disturbed by a statistic quoted down in the body of the article. Is it true? Do 31% of the LGBT community vote GOP? Gay Republican seems to make about as much sense as a Jewish Nazi or a black Klansman.
I like how the article framed it as a google-bombing issue when really, it's that regardless of what Google does, that is now a term people use. Many associate 'santorum' more with the sex term than with the politician anymore.
Okay, I've done my good deed this morning. I'll click more later if I get a chance. Thanks for the reminder, Rick! As long as Dan gets the credit for it, it's all good.
@21: That statistic of 31% is no doubt a highly inflated number, from apocryphal sources, created to help push a distorted world-view. Y'know, like 94% of Republican cited statistics.
Careful, people might get the impression you guys are supportive, or something.
And then there was this:
Civility: ur doing it wrong.
It's that he looks and acts like a twerp.
Good work Dan.
BTW, a typo: statically s/b statistically.
I am really disturbed by a statistic quoted down in the body of the article. Is it true? Do 31% of the LGBT community vote GOP? Gay Republican seems to make about as much sense as a Jewish Nazi or a black Klansman.
Okay, I've done my good deed this morning. I'll click more later if I get a chance. Thanks for the reminder, Rick! As long as Dan gets the credit for it, it's all good.