Rick Santorum Thread

[NewEnglandPriest]

The thing is, both of those religions recognize Jesus as important and a holy man.

ADL is just trying to discredit a threatening conservative candidate, because Romney, the centrist, is far closer to their liberal stance.

Yeah, I’m sure these forums would have zero posts about a Muslim candidate talking about the need for a “Mohammed candidate.”

 

[LiveCatholic]

The issue is for the ADL is that he specifically mentioned Jesus. How would Catholics react if a Muslim political candidate said we need a “Mohammed candidate”? Or what would the Evangelical reaction be if Romney or Huntsman said we need a “Joseph Smith candidate”?

This was a blatant challenge to Mr. Santorum’s faith. Its on par with someone calling in when Mitt Romney is on air and saying that: “We do not need a Mormon candidate.”

Your interpretation distorts somewhat the tempo of the conversation.

The caller stated: “We do not need a Jesus candidate…”

Mr. Santorum retorted that we always need a Jesus candidate.

“My answer to that was, we always need a Jesus candidate. We need someone who believes in something more than themselves and not just the economy.”

Mr. Santorum’s isn’t a particularly radical assertion. Only considering the ‘Jesus candidate’ phrase, given what Jesus stands for in 21st century America, this could simply amount to being nice, ethically aware, concern for the poor, &c.

What if Senator Lieberman during the Gore-Lieverman run was told that: “We do not need a kosher candidate…”–would he be unjustified in saying “We always need a kosher candidate, blah blah blah?”

I think this would be completely fair play, the caller would be excoriated in the press and by the ADL ESPECIALLY, and the senator’s call for a ‘kosher candidate’ would be interpreted as ‘ethically aware’ and ‘morally sound.’

 

[LiveCatholic]

Yeah, I’m sure these forums would have zero posts about a Muslim candidate talking about the need for a “Mohammed candidate.”

A Muhammad candidate would be a polygamous, bigoted, child-raping beast from Hell, in the fashion of Muhammad.

 

[L_piperatus]

I think the ADL falls well short of expectations on a logical, intellectual level. The ADL’s arguments are a bunch of straw-men.

For a comparison, let’s try this: Is supporting a “Mahatma Gandhi candidate”, a “Shimon Perez candidate”, or a “Dr. MLK Jr. candidate” exclusionary towards non-Hindus, non-Jews, and non-Christians, respectively? Of course not. I as a Christian can readily identify with many of the values promoted by the late Gandhi and the late Perez, and I would feel much sympathy towards a politician following their values and ideals today. Likewise, many non-Christians feel great respect and approval for all those moral values promoted by Jesus Christ and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., respectively, and thus they do welcome “Jesus candidates” and “Dr. MLK Jr. candidates” whose political platform is built on the same moral values represented by Jesus Christ and by Dr. MLK Jr.

Also, candidate Rick Santorum clearly stands for such moral values taught to us by Jesus, like adherence to the Ten Commandments (Thou shalt not kill! - including as in abortion) and re-uniting and serving all of America, which flows from the great commandment of “Love your neighbor as yourself”. These moral values clearly have legitimacy in the marketplace of ideas, and it would be an offense against Christians’ First Amendment rights to censor these ideas just because they can be prominently linked to the person of Jesus. In addition, the same ideas are upheld by many well-meaning agnostics, atheists, Muslims, and Jews, thus we may yet see a number of agnostic, traditional (Torah) Jewish, and Muslim people supporting the “Jesus candidate”.

 

[gnjsdad]

The thing is, both of those religions recognize Jesus as important and a holy man.

Not if you consult the Talmud…

DihydrogenOxide:

ADL is just trying to discredit a threatening conservative candidate, because Romney, the centrist, is far closer to their liberal stance.

If you’ll notice, the ADL has no problem at all with Santorum’s economic agenda, which is why they are perfectly happy with him acting as their Catholic waterboy…as long as he doesn’t make it too obvious that he’s a Catholic by referencing Jesus.

 

[Carlan]

The issue for the ADL is that he specifically mentioned Jesus. How would Catholics react if a Muslim political candidate said we need a “Mohammed candidate”? Or what would the Evangelical reaction be if Romney or Huntsman said we need a “Joseph Smith candidate”?

I think in those situations Catholics and Evangelicals would find those comments to be “inappropriate and exclusionary.”

Valid point really.
The government, after all, represents all the people no matter their religion. Separation of Church and State.
He can put forth his values without declaring his specific religious beliefs. Fair enough.
Peace, Carlan

 

[DihydrogenOxide]

Yeah, I’m sure these forums would have zero posts about a Muslim candidate talking about the need for a “Mohammed candidate.”

Santorum referring to Jesus was a red flag of conservatism for the libs.

Any liberal group would feel the same. He is a threat to them, just as Palin was last election. So many conservatives are willing to compromise to “get along”. Think the liberals do that?

Obama has supported Islam his whole presidency.

 

[stewstew03]

The issue for the ADL is that he specifically mentioned Jesus. How would Catholics react if a Muslim political candidate said we need a “Mohammed candidate”? Or what would the Evangelical reaction be if Romney or Huntsman said we need a “Joseph Smith candidate”?

I think in those situations Catholics and Evangelicals would find those comments to be “inappropriate and exclusionary.”

The quote from the ADL website is misleading and dishonest. The full quote is:
“I said, ‘We always need a Jesus candidate.’*** I don’t mean necessarily that we always need a Christian***, but we need someone who believes in something more than themselves.” (Source: CBS News).

Clearly, Mr. Santorum wasn’t saying that we only need Christian candidates, as the ADL infers. Additionally, the term “Jesus candidate” has to be understood in context. It has a particular meaning in the realm of politics that goes back to Pat Robertson’s campaigns in the '80s. In other words, the caller to the radio show was saying “we don’t need a ‘socially conservative’ candidate * we need an economic candidate.” Mr. Santorum’s response was that the Republicans always need a “moral” candidate . So, within that context, I don’t understand the ADL’s objection. I will grant that Mr. Santorum specifically said the name “Jesus.” And I recall a few years ago that President Obama actually said Jesus Christ died for his sins; i.e., that salvation is through Jesus Christ. And perhaps I missed it, but I don’t recall the ADL fussing about Obama’s mention of the name Jesus…*

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

The quote from the ADL website is misleading and dishonest. The full quote is:
“I said, ‘We always need a Jesus candidate.’*** I don’t mean necessarily that we always need a Christian***, but we need someone who believes in something more than themselves.” (Source: CBS News).

I understand that. However, I think I proved my point with one of the quick responses I received in my “Mohammed candidate” analogy. I don’t think Santorum was meaning to be exclusionary but as Romney learned with his “I like firing people who provide me services” comment Presidential candidates need to be careful about what they say. I don’t think its surprising that nonChristians became slightly reactionary to Santorum’s statement, its what happens in politics.

 

[RACJ]

I understand that. However, I think I proved my point with one of the quick responses I received in my “Mohammed candidate” analogy. I don’t think Santorum was meaning to be exclusionary but as Romney learned with his “I like firing people who provide me services” comment Presidential candidates need to be careful about what they say. I don’t think its surprising that nonChristians became slightly reactionary to Santorum’s statement, its what happens in politics.

Everywhere in the world where Islam prevails there is no tolerance for political dissent nor acceptance of the concept of freedom of conscience, so I would be horrified if someone said that we need a Mohammed candidate. To us, Jesus is God, so someone from any faith BUT Islam saying that we need a God candidate would be inoffensive to me, esp. the way, Santorum said it. :thumbsup: Rob

 

[stewstew03]

I understand that. However, I think I proved my point with one of the quick responses I received in my “Mohammed candidate” analogy. I don’t think Santorum was meaning to be exclusionary but as Romney learned with his “I like firing people who provide me services” comment Presidential candidates need to be careful about what they say. I don’t think its surprising that nonChristians became slightly reactionary to Santorum’s statement, its what happens in politics.

So your point is that Presidential candidates need to be careful about what they say? Okay, I misunderstood you - I thought you were arguing that the ADL was justified in characterizing Santorum’s comment as “exclusionary.”

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Everywhere in the world where Islam prevails there is no tolerance for political dissent nor acceptance of the concept of freedom of conscience, so I would be horrified if someone said that we need a Mohammed candidate. To us, Jesus is God, so someone from any faith BUT Islam saying that we need a God candidate would be inoffensive to me, esp. the way, Santorum said it. Rob

And to people who have historically suffered at the hands of Christians a comment about a need for a “Jesus candidate” is just as horrifying…

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

So your point is that Presidential candidates need to be careful about what they say? Okay, I misunderstood you - I thought you were arguing that the ADL was justified in characterizing Santorum’s comment as “exclusionary.”

I don’t think its surprising that a nonChristian group would react in that way. We already have posts saying that its ok to say “Jesus candidate” but it would be horrifying to hear someone say “Mohammed candidate.” Apparently the irony is lost. Thankfully the mods removed the worst post.

As I said, I agree with you that he meant it generically but the fact that anyone is shocked by a negative reaction I question how much they pay attention to politics…

 

[RACJ]

And to people who have historically suffered at the hands of Christians a comment about a need for a “Jesus candidate” is just as horrifying…

You completely blow off my point about lack of freedom in every Muslim country, and instead spout the meme that *Christians* were mainly responsible for "historical (horrors)" against them. Perhaps they were historically attacked by Hindus and Buddhists as well? That would explain their difficulty to get along with people of these faiths as well! :doh2: Rob

 

[stewstew03]

As I said, I agree with you that he meant it generically but the fact that anyone is shocked by a negative reaction I question how much they pay attention to politics…

I wasn’t aware that anyone posted that they were “shocked” by the ADL’s reaction.

In any event, does it concern you that the ADL intentionally distorted Santorum’s words? In an effort to support their narrative that Santorum is a bigot, they deliberately left out the portion of his comment where he says he did NOT mean that we always need a Christian candidate.

 

[kbf1970060]

Santorum’s site is for a limited time, offering Richard Santorum sweater vests, (gray), to those whom contribute $100.00 or more dollars.

 

[kubark]

Would someone please demonstrate how Rick Santorum is more pro-life, pro-constitution, pro-America, more conservative and more electable than Ron Paul? Thanks.

 

[sharptiger999]

Ron Paul supporter here. I’m interested if anyone has any questions or reason why they dislike Dr. Paul I’d be happy to answer.

This is a video I did which is going viral right now. If I see your response quickly and you want me to confirm I am the creator of the video I can post a comment on the video page referencing you. youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

 

[irishpatrick]

Would someone please demonstrate how Rick Santorum is more pro-life, pro-constitution, pro-America, more conservative and more electable than Ron Paul? Thanks.

*** I trust a well formed Catholic conscience regarding the life issue, which is Santorum, not Paul. I also trust a well formed Catholic conscience regarding traditional marriage, which is Santorum, not Paul.

*** They are equally pro-constitution, though I believe Santorum’s foreign policy knowledge is very current and excellent.

*** I believe Paul is too extreme for the majority.

*** Sadly, I believe that Paul is too old for the majority.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

You completely blow off my point about lack of freedom in every Muslim country, and instead spout the meme that Christians were mainly responsible for “historical (horrors)” against them. Perhaps they were historically attacked by Hindus and Buddhists as well? That would explain their difficulty to get along with people of these faiths as well! :doh2: Rob

The fact you can’t see that “Jesus candidate” might be equally appalling to nonChristians seems to me that you’ve missed my point.