• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Technically true, but collectively nonsense

Eh, that’s media spin. biden’s health is fine and he’s doing a good job.

Republicans do not pay their debts.

My years-long effort to drive family and friends away has really paid off this year.

Teach a man to fish, and he’ll sit in a boat all day drinking beer.

Incompetence, fear, or corruption? why not all three?

It’s always darkest before the other shoe drops.

Consistently wrong since 2002

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

Reality always lies in wait for … Democrats.

You don’t get rid of your umbrella while it’s still raining.

Republicans in disarray!

Republicans seem to think life begins at the candlelight dinner the night before.

The revolution will be supervised.

Whatever happens next week, the fight doesn’t end.

Republicans are radicals, not conservatives.

Presidents are not kings, and Plaintiff is not President.

The words do not have to be perfect.

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

The willow is too close to the house.

A last alliance of elves and men. also pet photos.

Everybody saw this coming.

Putin must be throwing ketchup at the walls.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Republican Stupidity / He’s Picking Out a Thermos, For You

He’s Picking Out a Thermos, For You

by John Cole|  July 14, 200512:22 pm| 29 Comments

This post is in: Republican Stupidity

FacebookTweetEmail

Rick Santorum is picking out a thermos for you, and not an ordinary thermos, for you. Why? Because Rick Santorum is “The Jerk“:

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) led a phalanx of Massachusetts politicians yesterday in demanding that the third-ranking Republican in the Senate, Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, apologize for blaming the Catholic Church’s sex abuse scandal on “liberalism” in Boston.

In an indignant, unusually personal speech on the Senate floor, Kennedy said that “Boston-bashing might be in vogue with some Republicans, but Rick Santorum’s statements are beyond the pale.”

Other Massachusetts Democrats quickly piled on. Rep. Edward J. Markey said Santorum should apologize for maligning “the courageous Boston parishioners who finally stood up to decades of an international Catholic Church coverup.”

Sen. John F. Kerry said the families of Massachusetts soldiers who have died in Iraq “know more about the mainstream American values of Massachusetts than Rick Santorum ever will.”

Rep. Barney Frank called Santorum a “jerk.”

I wrote about this over two weeks ago– it seems the MSM has finally caught up. Kudos to the Captain for playing this one straight:

Normally I would rather eat raw squid with mushrooms and beets than agree with Ted Kennedy and John Kerry. Neither of these men conducted themselves with much honor during their political careers. Both owe so many apologies to so many people that hearing them call for someone else to apologize almost makes me spit out my beverage over my laptop screen.

In this case, however, they’re right…

It is unfair in the extreme of Santorum to blame the scandals on the community of Boston, a community that indeed was victimized by the pedophiliacs and those who hid their crimes. Santorum’s remarks attempt to turn the blame away from the criminals and onto the victims. Those remarks were wrong three years ago, and he should have known better than to repeat them now. His spokesman, Robert Traynham, should also have known better than to keep digging the hole by blaming Harvard University for the sins of the Catholic priests and other clergy.

I wonder if Santorum’s continued block-headedness has anything to do with this:

Incumbent Republican U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum has gained slightly on State Treasurer Robert Casey, Jr., but still trails the Democratic challenger 50

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Ebbers
Next Post: Plame/Rove »

Reader Interactions

29Comments

  1. 1.

    bodiddly

    July 14, 2005 at 12:43 pm

    “I wrote about this over two weeks ago- it seems the MSM has finally caught up.”

    Yes, you did. And the statement was made over two YEARS ago. Congratulations for jumping aboard the smear campaign.

    I don’t feel like re-stating the points I threw out on this story over at Wizbang, but you really ought to read Santorum’s column before you jump into this with both feet. He makes a connection between the liberal agenda and the decline of decency. The Catholic scandal was a symptom of that decline. Boston was simply an example of an area in which both the liberalism and the scandal are readily visible.

    These statements getting so much play right now is just the Glob’s way of trying to turn the political tide.

  2. 2.

    John Cole

    July 14, 2005 at 12:46 pm

    I linked to the initial piece in it, and it has just come to light that it was written, period. In the interum, rather than back away from it, his staff has inflamed matters by continuing to pretend there is some accuracy to the statement. Santorum himself, stands by the comment.

    Next.

  3. 3.

    Vladi G

    July 14, 2005 at 12:53 pm

    bodiddly might want to, ya know, actually read the article. Not doing so makes him look not so bright:

    What drew the concentrated ire of the Bay State’s congressional delegation was Santorum’s decision this week to repeat his three-year-old comment that liberalism was at the root of the scandal over child sex abuse in the church.

  4. 4.

    p.lukasiak

    July 14, 2005 at 12:57 pm

    “liberalism” did play a role in the Church pedophile scandals — but it was because of the increased sexual openness in the public sphere that made it possible for victims of sexual abuse at the hands of Catholic Clergy to come forward. Catholic priests have been diddling boys long before the “sexual revolution” took place — but in the past no one dared speak of it.

  5. 5.

    JG

    July 14, 2005 at 1:02 pm

    How surprising is it really to hear a conservative point out something insidious and then blame it on liberals? Isn’t this the whole basis behind right wing talk radio? Seriously find one thing in this country that pisses people off that the right hasn’t spun to be the fault of liberalism. There audience sucks this up too.

  6. 6.

    Jeff

    July 14, 2005 at 1:06 pm

    As i said in another thread about Santorum, I live in Philly but have no intention of voting for him. that being said, those poll numbers are meaningless for a number of reasons.

    Ignoring the obvious, that the election is still 16 months away, other reasons include:

    A) he’s running against an idiot who managed to blow a bigger lead than this in his Democratic primary against Ed Rendell during the Gov race in 2002

    B) Despite PA’s blue state status, Santorum managed to win in 2000 even though Al Gore carried PA. Outside of Philly and Pittsburgh, it’s a very conservative state. I would repeat what James Carville said about PA, which was pretty accurate, but i’d rather run through a pit of Rottweilers with raw steaks strapped to my body than quote James Carville.

    C) Despite the fact that most of us here find what Santorum said to be idiotic and stupid, i’m sure there are people who agree with him. some of those people, while agreeing with his idiotic statement, might also not wanna admit that they plan on voting for him.

    As i said, I live in PA and Santorum’s act got old a long time ago, but the fact that Democrats are already putting this one in the win column is crazy.

  7. 7.

    docG

    July 14, 2005 at 1:08 pm

    I wasn’t aware that pedophila was a part of the liberal agenda. Pedophiles have certainly attempted to use the left’s ideas of morality to promote their own agenda (NAMBLA comes to mind), but that cannot be construed as liberalism creating or supporting pedophilia. Santorum’s origin article (yes, I read it) made some points worth pondering regarding liberalism and moral decline, but the attempt to smear liberals with responsibility for the child molestation scandal in the Roman Catholic Church completely undermined any arguments of value.

    Additionally, while I most often think Ted Kennedy lives in his own private Idaho, he is right in this matter.

  8. 8.

    Mike S

    July 14, 2005 at 1:09 pm

    The largest American part oif the scandal is in Kentucky. Can bodiddly point me to the liberal parts of Kentucky that caused it?

    …According to the diocese’s most recent public report, it has received 205 allegations against 35 priests, nearly 10 percent of the 364 priests who have ever worked for the diocese. Sixteen of the accused priests are dead; five have been laicized, or defrocked; and 14 have been permanently removed from ministry but remain priests, the diocese said.

    …”After personally meeting with more than 70 victims, I am painfully aware that no amount of money can compensate for the harm these victims suffered as innocent children,” Bishop Roger Foys said in a written statement. “Nevertheless, I pray that this settlement will bring some measure of peace and healing to victims and their loved ones.”

    If the Catholic Church had had the same attitude as Bishop Foys, I may have still called myself a Catholic. Unfortunately they didn’t. Santorum can rot in hell with his good buddy Randall Terry.

  9. 9.

    Mike S

    July 14, 2005 at 1:11 pm

    Pedophiles have certainly attempted to use the left’s ideas of morality to promote their own agenda (NAMBLA comes to mind),

    Huh?

  10. 10.

    Defense Guy

    July 14, 2005 at 1:26 pm

    He may be referring to the ACLU’s defense of NAMBLA’s ‘right’ to produce their manual on the best way to seduce a child and get away with it. Not exactly a bright shining moment in the history of the ACLU.

    Just a guess.

  11. 11.

    docG

    July 14, 2005 at 1:27 pm

    Pedophiles have certainly attempted to use the left’s ideas of morality to promote their own agenda (NAMBLA comes to mind),

    Huh?

    NAMBLA (North AmericanMan/Boy Love Association) is an organization that works to legalize sex between adult males and minors. From their home page:

    NAMBLA’s membership is open to everyone sympathetic to personal freedom. Our goal is to end the oppression of men and boys who have freely chosen, mutually consensual relationships.

    Liberalism’s values promotes personal freedom and nonjudgemental attitudes. The example of these creeps misusing these values to promote pedophilia was my point.

  12. 12.

    aaron pacy

    July 14, 2005 at 1:31 pm

    My Senator (I live in Erie PA) constantly shows how he would like to go back to a simpler time…back before our “moral decline”. The debate rasied by his new book..you know..the one that says at least 1 parent should stay at home…is part of his belief of some kind of good-ol-days. Where gays pretend to be straight and enter sham marriages and get beat up if any find out they’re gay. Or the simpler times …where blacks(chinese,mexican,etc..) couldn’t eat in the same place with whites. This was all before our “moral decline” brought on by liberalism.
    How moral were we when we separated our races from eachother? How moral were we when we were lynching people?

    What confuses me is this almost utopian idea people like Santorum have. Life is not simple. Life,civilization,relationships…not simple.

  13. 13.

    aaron pacy

    July 14, 2005 at 1:33 pm

    P.S.
    The “picking out a thermos” song is now firmly implanted in my brain. Thank-you.

  14. 14.

    Mike S

    July 14, 2005 at 1:34 pm

    docG

    Looks more liberatariun to me. But I see your point. No one I know, gay or straight, has anything but contempt for NAMBLA.

  15. 15.

    j

    July 14, 2005 at 1:36 pm

    The largest American part oif the scandal is in Kentucky. Can bodiddly point me to the liberal parts of Kentucky that caused it?

    Hey, I’m in Kentucky. If there are “liberal parts” here, I’d love to know about it, so I could move a bit closer and reside near sane people . . .

  16. 16.

    Sojourner

    July 14, 2005 at 1:45 pm

    He makes a connection between the liberal agenda and the decline of decency.

    The Republican leadership, by failing to stand up to this administration, has lost all credibility on the issue of decency.

    But Santorum is too stupid to understand that.

  17. 17.

    Jeff

    July 14, 2005 at 1:55 pm

    um, aaron, my contempt for Santorum is pretty strong, but linking him to lynchings and white only dining is pretty stupid.

    For all his faults, and he has many, he spends quite a bit of time in North and SW Philly, which would be pretty strange for a guy who doesn’t like black folk.

  18. 18.

    norbizness

    July 14, 2005 at 1:57 pm

    THe funniest part of this idiocy was when somebody (staff, Santorum) threw MIT into the mix of liberal provocateurs that caused this scandal. Especially hilarious when disgraced Cardinal Law now has a position in the Vatican.

    As for the igit who put NAMBLA in the liberal camp; I assume that you think that liberals advocate the abolition of statutory rape? No? Well, that’s because nearly everybody believes IN AN AGE OF CONSENT. Christ!

  19. 19.

    Defense Guy

    July 14, 2005 at 2:11 pm

    If you are referring to me, I would not make any party take NAMBLA into their camp. I would say it is a fair assessment that the ACLU leans far more to the left than to the right.

  20. 20.

    aaron pacy

    July 14, 2005 at 2:11 pm

    Jeff…I’m not linking Santorum to lynchings. What I’m pointing out is: many people (like Santorum) think that our “moral decline” is based on liberals ideas of sexuality and families and gender roles etc…yet during the years when being gay was not accepted..and women didn’t work..and familes were “nuclear”….we were not shining examples of morality. For the reasons I stated above.
    I’m not saying Santorum wants to see lynchings again or anything…I’m saying that while his utopian world of nuclear families and traditional values was going on…it was far from utopia for many Americans.

  21. 21.

    Mike S

    July 14, 2005 at 2:41 pm

    My initial reaction was that docG was trying to say that NAMBLA was the fault of liberals. His explanation was sufficient for me to discount that reaction. As was Defence Guy’s comment.

  22. 22.

    Stormy70

    July 14, 2005 at 3:12 pm

    Pedophilia was around before liberals or political parties. Predators go where they can be around children , in churches, in schools, in social work, etc. It has nothing to do with a person’s politics or political environment. In fact, it has been around since the dawn of man.

    Who was the commenter who said Santorium is really, really dumb? It’s constantly being recycled because it fits many of Santorum’s utterances.

  23. 23.

    Sojourner

    July 14, 2005 at 3:28 pm

    Well said, Stormy.

  24. 24.

    jcricket

    July 14, 2005 at 3:43 pm

    …yet during the years when being gay was not accepted..and women didn’t work..and familes were “nuclear”….we were not shining examples of morality. For the reasons I stated above.

    And yet people seem to think of the past as a “golden” era where all was perfect. While I’m sure minorities, gays and women would disagree, it wasn’t even that great of a time for your average white person. Infant mortality was high, leisure time was non-existent and povrety and unemployment were very common.

    So why the romanticism about the past?

    One analogy to this issue can be seen if we look at trends relating to “causes of death” over the last 100 years. 100 years ago it was quite common to have people die (at 40) of “natural causes”, with no other explanation, where as now you rarely see that listed as the cause of death.

    So while we know people live longer (on average) these days, we tend to think that there are many more diseases ravaging us because of our “modern” way of living (or some other such formulation).

    However, the rise in the incidence of cancer deaths is not a reflection of people “suddenly” starting to get cancer more, but mainly of better understanding of diseases and more accurate record-keeping. We understand so much more about disease and the human body, that we are able to correctly identify deaths caused by cancer, congestive heart failure, organ failure brought on by ALS, etc. Doesn’t mean they happen any more than they did 100 years ago (although it’s possible certain things like Alzheimers weren’t an issue because most people died of causes before that could come into play).

    The same is true with statistics regarding crime, divorce, etc. I have a relative who is a criminologist/statistician and he regularly points out that the “Old West” was a terribly unsafe place to live. Brawls, street riots, mass murders (not serial killers), robberies and rapes were a common, daily occurence. No one kept the kind of statistics we do nowadays, and there wasn’t 24×7 national news, so most people assume that except for a few outlaws, the west was kind of a rough-and-tumble, yet morally upright place to live.

    Several books I’ve read point this out, and I’ve seen it generally referred to as the “media paradox”: For something to be newsworthy it has to be unusual/not regular. But when it’s reported, people naturally assume that something is widespread/common, by virtue of beind reported publicly, by people with a big megaphone (so to speak).

    So we all end up romanticizing a time mainly because very little bad was reported or understood as bad (thinking that meant everything was OK) and instead worry needlessly about things that have almost no chance of happening to us (shark attack, runaway brides, kidnapped children) – All while slowly killing ourselves with McDonalds food :)

  25. 25.

    Pug

    July 14, 2005 at 3:57 pm

    I actually like raw squid. Don’t know what Captain Ed’s problem is. Mushrooms on the side sound OK, too.

  26. 26.

    norbizness

    July 14, 2005 at 4:02 pm

    Defense Guy: I was not referring to you (I think it was DocG), but I would say that ACLU is off the traditional political spectrum, at least as it is comprised (unless I could be said to politically support the KKK or Rush Limbaugh by having made contributions to the ACLU in the past). Politically, people of all stripes are strongly supportive of maintaining ages of consent.

  27. 27.

    Stormy70

    July 14, 2005 at 6:07 pm

    Well said, Stormy

    Staring at screen in disbelief and wonder! It is the dawning of the New Age. Well, on this thread anyway. :)

  28. 28.

    Jess

    July 14, 2005 at 7:29 pm

    Well, Stormy, when you say something sensible, an independent thinker will give you due credit.

    So let me see if I understant Santorum’s position; criminal behavior is the fault of one’s environment? Not a matter of personal responsibility? Those right wingers sure are soft on crime, huh?

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Captain's Quarters says:
    July 14, 2005 at 3:52 pm

    Santorum Shoots His Mouth Off … Again

    I like Rick Santorum. I really do. Unfortunately, the Pennsylvania Senator has a habit of talking without thinking about the consequences of his rhetoric. Earlier this year, he broke Godwin’s Law and used Hitler for an analogy in reference to…

Primary Sidebar

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

2023 Pet Calendars

Pet Calendar Preview: A
Pet Calendar Preview: B

*Calendars can not be ordered until Cafe Press gets their calendar paper in.

Recent Comments

  • NotMax on Late Night Open Thread: Elon Musk Is SAD! (Feb 7, 2023 @ 7:30am)
  • Aussie Sheila on Late Night Open Thread: Elon Musk Is SAD! (Feb 7, 2023 @ 7:29am)
  • OzarkHillbilly on Late Night Open Thread: Elon Musk Is SAD! (Feb 7, 2023 @ 7:29am)
  • lowtechcyclist on Late Night Open Thread: Elon Musk Is SAD! (Feb 7, 2023 @ 7:28am)
  • Princess on Late Night Open Thread: Elon Musk Is SAD! (Feb 7, 2023 @ 7:28am)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Favorite Dogs & Cats
Classified Documents: A Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Front-pager Twitter

John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
ActualCitizensUnited

Shop Amazon via this link to support Balloon Juice   

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!