Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: santorum is the man

Posted 2 years ago on March 10, 2012, 9:50 p.m. EST by jbob (74)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

you cant argue that santorum is doing amazingly well. first he has almost no money compared to romney and he is still kicking ass. and he is getting all the midwestern votes ie. the blue collar workers. he is going to be the best thing to happen to this country since Reagan.

41 Comments

41 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by untold (24) 2 years ago

you can not argue that santorum is doing amazingly well because his competition is just as pathetic as he is. also, we are talking about the primaries AKA no one cares. bottom line- santorum won't get elected because too many people think he is crazy! i had nothing against the guy until i saw a youtube video of him casually combining war with his religion. there is something fundamentally wrong with your head if you don't understand why separation between church and state is important. voltaire was able to understand it and he was born in 1694

[-] -1 points by jbob (74) 2 years ago

are you retarded? no one cares about the primaries? you might not because all youre worried about is voting your socialist president in so you dont have to work for anything in your pathetic life.

[-] 2 points by ARod1993 (2420) 2 years ago

Untold's point stands; the only reason that Santorum is getting any traction right now is because of a nasty split between right-wing extremists and ordinary moderate Republicans. The latter group isn't particularly pleased with Romney, but they're smart enough to realize that he's the only one in the bunch that has a snowball's chance in Hell come the general election in November (and so they won't be particularly enthusiastic, but they'll back him in the primaries).

The extremists don't really understand the concept of there being a portion of the country that doesn't think the way they do, and have spent the entire primary season in loud denial of the facts. They've bounced around from candidate to candidate, from Perry to Cain to Paul to Gingrich, and now appear to have finally settled on Santorum. This is looking to be an incredibly drawn-out and nasty battle, and whoever wins it is going to be in really bad shape in the general election.

I, for one, would like to thank Mr. Santorum (among other people) for turning the normally quick, clean Republican primaries into a knock-down, drag-out shitshow.

[-] 3 points by EricBlair (447) 2 years ago

"he is going to be the best thing to happen to this country since Reagan."

He's going to triple the national debt?

[-] -2 points by jbob (74) 2 years ago

if you think that that is reagans legacy you really need to inform yourself a lot more. obama has doubled the national debt, but the debt was at 8 trill when he got in. he has fucked up this country way more than any president in history in respect to the debt. so you cant use that against reagan.

[-] 1 points by EricBlair (447) 2 years ago

<<<if you think that that is reagans legacy you really need to inform yourself a lot more.>>>

You're right. To be fair, Reagan legacy is a lot worse than simply raising the Debt.

<<<obama has doubled the national debt, but the debt was at 8 trill when he got in. he has fucked up this country way more than any president in history in respect to the debt. so you cant use that against reagan.>>>>

I'm not quite sure I understand. If Obama does something terrible, then Ronald Reagan gets a pass for doing the same thing? What do Obama's crimes have to do with Reagan? It's a plain fact: Ronald Reagan raised the national debt more than every president before him (from George Washington to Jimmy Carter) COMBINED. He raised the national Debt from 900 million to 2.85 trillion---he tripled it. Reagan was a spend-happy nut. He absolutely LOVED government spending---just as long as the money went to the military industrial complex and other giant corporations (instead of 'lazy' poor people).

He also liked to give money to terrorists. After Congress forbade him from giving any more of our tax money to these terrorists, he snuck around them by selling weapons to Iran so he could secretly funnel the money back to the terrorists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Contra_Scandal

[-] -2 points by jbob (74) 2 years ago

your argument is pretty terrible. you said it yourself, reagan raised the debt more than all the presidents before him...... back in the fucking 80's. so did obama. but when obama did it it was about 6 trillion so far.... in three years. he has already spent more than anu other fucking president ever....in 3 years. and you cant just look at number values. check out the percent debt of national GDP. thats what really matters you fucking dipshit.

[-] 1 points by EricBlair (447) 2 years ago

Still not clear on how Obama has anything to do with Ronald Reagan.

It's like if I said:

"Bill did a bad thing by stealing from the cookie jar"

And you replied:

"Aha! But Tod stole FOUR cookies from the cookie jar!"

How exactly does Tod's wrong-doing diminish Bill's wrong-doing?

One has nothing to do with the other.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Then we could call the White House the Sanatorium.

[-] 3 points by ancientmariner (275) 2 years ago

Then we can call the White House "The Sanatorium."

[-] 3 points by EndGluttony (507) 2 years ago

Santorum is exploiting the ignorance, bigotry, and zealotry of troglodytes.

[-] 1 points by MaryS (678) 2 years ago

LOL! Thank you, that was tasty

[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

Ever wonder where this crap comes from:

Dominion Theology are not denominations or faith groups. Rather, they are interrelated beliefs which are followed by members of a wide range of Christian denominations. In his article on dominionism, researcher and author Chip Berlet credits sociologist Sara Diamond with popularizing the term dominionism as "a growing political tendency in the Christian Right." Diamond defined dominionism in 1995 as:
Christians alone are Biblically mandated to occupy all secular institutions until Christ returns--and there is no consensus on when that might be. "Dominionism," Berlet writes, "is .. a tendency among Protestant Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists that encourages them to not only be active political participants in civic society, but also seek to dominate the political process as part of a mandate from God.
"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." (King James Version).
"Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth and over all the creatures that move along the ground.'" (New International Version).
The vast majority of Christians read this text and conclude that God has appointed them stewards and caretakers of Earth. As Sara Diamond explains, however, some Christian read the text and believe, "that Christians alone are Biblically mandated to occupy all secular institutions until Christ returns--and there is no consensus on when that might be." That, in a nutshell, is the idea of "dominionism."
The Christian Right, Dominionism and Theocracy - Part II by Chip Berlet, December 5, 2005:
In her 1989 book Spiritual Warfare , sociologist Sara Diamond discussed how dominionism as an ideological tendency in the Christian Right had been significantly influenced by Christian Reconstructionism. Over the past 20 years the leading proponents of Christian Reconstructionism and dominion theology have included Rousas John (R.J.) Rushdoony, Gary North, Greg Bahnsen, David Chilton, Gary DeMar, and Andrew Sandlin.
Diamond explained that "the primary importance of the [Christian Reconstructionist] ideology is its role as a catalyst for what is loosely called 'dominion theology.'" According to Diamond, "Largely through the impact of Rushdoony's and North's writings, the concept that Christians are Biblically mandated to 'occupy' all secular institutions has become the central unifying ideology for the Christian Right." (italics in the original).
In a series of articles and book chapters Diamond expanded on her thesis. She called Reconstructionism "the most intellectually grounded, though esoteric, brand of dominion theology," and observed that "promoters of Reconstructionism see their role as ideological entrepreneurs committed to a long-term struggle."
So Christian Reconstructionism was the most influential form of dominion theology, and it influenced both the theological concepts and political activism of white Protestant conservative evangelicals mobilized by the Christian Right. But very few evangelicals have even heard of dominion theology, and fewer still embrace Christian Reconstructionism. How do we explain this, especially since our critics are quick to point it out?
The Christian Right, Dominionism, and Theocracy - Part Three, Talk To Action, December 12, 2005:
Open advocates of dominionism declare that "America is a Christian Nation," and that therefore Christians have a God-given mandate to re-assert Christian control over political, social, and cultural institutions. Yet many dominionists stop short of staking out a position that could be called theocratic. This is the "soft" version of dominionism. The "hard" version of dominionism is explicitly theocratic or "theonomic," as the Christian Reconstructionists prefer to be called. For America, it is a distinction without a difference. Christian Reconstructionism arose out of conservative Presbyterianism in the early 1970's. Adherents of Christian Reconstructionism believe " that every area dominated by sin must be 'reconstructed' in terms of the Bible ." Its followers ... are attempting to peacefully convert the laws of the United States so that they match those of the Hebrew Scriptures. They intend to achieve this by using the freedom of religion in the US to train a generation of children in private Christian religious schools. Later, their graduates will be charged with the responsibility of creating a new Bible-based political, religious and social order. One of the first tasks of this order will be to eliminate religious choice and freedom. Their eventual goal is to achieve the "Kingdom of God" in which much of the world is converted to Christianity.
The Christian Right, Dominionism, and Theocracy - Part Four, Talk To Action, December 19, 2005
From What is Christian Reconstructionism? by Frederick Clarkson:
A general outline of what the reconstructed 'Kingdom,' or confederation of Biblical theocracies, would look like emerges from the large body of Reconstructionist literature. This society would feature a minimal national government, whose main function would be defense by the armed forces. No social services would be provided outside the church, which would be responsible for 'health, education, and welfare.' A radically unfettered capitalism (except in so far as it clashed with Biblical Law) would prevail. Society would return to the gold or silver standard or abolish paper money altogether. The public schools would be abolished. Government functions, including taxes, would be primarily at the county level.
Women would be relegated primarily to the home and home schools, and would be banned from government. Those qualified to vote or hold office would be limited to males from Biblically correct churches.
Dominion theology provides the theological rationale for a "Christian" nation. John F. Sugg writes in the Weekly Planet, Tampa, Florida, March 2004:
Dominion theologians ... preached ... that it was Christians' job to take over the world and impose biblical rule. Christ would not return, they said, until the church had claimed dominion over all of the world's governments and institutions ...
In 2000, the Republican Party of Texas declared that it "affirms that the United States is a Christian nation." Last month, [February 11, 2004,] that sentiment reached the national level. The Constitution Restoration Act of 2004 would acknowledge Christianity's God as the "sovereign source" of our laws. It would reach back in history and reverse all judicial decisions that have built a wall between church and state, and it would prohibit federal judges from making such rulings in the future.

[-] 1 points by Dutchess (499) 2 years ago

thats what Amadinejad ran his campaign on ;)

[+] -5 points by DKAtoday (28287) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

You always find and share such interesting things.

Thank you.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Good Morning, DKA! Thanks.

[+] -7 points by DKAtoday (28287) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

GOOD MORNING - GirlFriday.

I see as usual that you have gotten up on the right side of the world.

Welcome the new day.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Or the Left side, depending on how someone views it!

It's going to be a good one. :D

[+] -7 points by DKAtoday (28287) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

I suppose I really should have said You got up in a good frame of mind ( or in a good place in the world ) - as is usual.

I try not to be left, right or center. To divisive - labels.

Yes a very good day I can feel it.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Yeah if you don't agree with the constitution and you hate equality.

Rick Santorum's entire platform is based on violating the constitution, particularly the first amendment.

I don't believe in his God and I don't want him forcing his religion on me and the laws in our country.

[-] -1 points by jbob (74) 2 years ago

how is he violating the first amendment?

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

He has said "I will change laws to make them abide by God's laws."

The 1st amendment is "No law shall be created respecting an establishment of religion."

Rick Santorum is a religious freak that thinks God speaks to him and has chosen him. In my book, that means he's a loon. I believe in the bible as much as I believe in Stephen King's the Shining.

Should we start stoning people too?

Maybe if Santorum wins we can live in a whale and pluck out our eyes for looking at things and thinking sexual thoughts.

[-] 2 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 2 years ago

One thing that I've never seen anyone at an actual occupation argue about is Presidential candidates. They're way past that.

[-] 2 points by elf3 (2503) 2 years ago

Santorum has been in Congress for how many years - wow ya just keep hitting the rewind button huh - ? Time to flush I think - say did he get any money from Abramoff like most of congress at the time of that under-reported scandal - just a little government bribery - oh well who cares about freedom anyway? Yeah I want to elect people involved with people who took bribes to make laws and take away my freedom. Makes so much sense!!

[-] 2 points by richardkentgates (3269) from Fort Walton Beach, FL 2 years ago

go fish

[-] 0 points by jbob (74) 2 years ago

huh?

[-] 2 points by rrazputin (18) 2 years ago

He will be a great nominee...since he will get crushed by Obama in the general election.

[-] 0 points by jbob (74) 2 years ago

how so?

[-] 5 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

because his dominionist perspective scares the living shit out of me. Someone who believes the way he believes, would be a president that would bend over backwards for money interests while believing he is doing God's work.

[-] -1 points by jbob (74) 2 years ago

do you know what he would do if he got into office? or are you just regurgitating what you hear jon stewert and bill mahar say?

[-] 4 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

Please don't insult my intelligence. I have watched most of the debates, and his persona and beliefs are right up the Dominionist alley. He believes rich people are rich because God has favored them. And this sentiment is expressed whenever he speaks.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Everybody knew from the beginning it was going to be Romney. The ultra-rich control the Republican Party and just take the social conservatives, the fiscal conservatives and the just plain ignorant along for the ride. The moment they win the election they do nothing but pay lip service to these groups while robbing the national treasury blind. That should be obvious to anyone by now.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Oh, they'll just shove Romney down you silly people's throats.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

santorum is sarah palin in a vest is george bush in a dress

LEMMINGS! - is it time to laugh or to cry?

http://media.caglecartoons.com/media/cartoons/29/2012/03/16/108320_600.jpg

[-] 1 points by onepercentguy (294) 2 years ago

... for me to poop on

[-] 1 points by jpmaddogdavis (5) from Cleveland, OH 2 years ago

I read in Foreign Affairs that 50% of self-identified republicans see mixing politics and religion as acceptable (about how many are voting for santorum), But only 25% of the total electorate. He has WAAAYYY too many embarrassing statements on video to become a serious candidate.

[-] 1 points by Pujete (160) from New York, NY 2 years ago

He lisps.

[-] 0 points by TimSykes (-22) 2 years ago

I agree one hundred percent. His conservative views are exactly what this hippy infested country needs. Furthermore, having gone to the same high school as this first class citizen, I know that he not only has a top notch private school education, but he also has values for life.

[-] 0 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Ummm, retarded :)

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by energy (30) 2 years ago

Moderators! I'm crying foul! I don't care that these guys are talking about Santorum, but I want the same right to talk about my favorite candidate too. Fair is fair, no?