Santorum publishes Extremist Views in his New Book

[Keystone Phil]

How is Moveon any different from right-wing groups like Progress for America, Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, Americans for Tax Reform, and countless others?

Pennsylvanians are more open to conservative groups than liberal groups. I don't know if you realized this, Scoonie, but this isn't a race for the U.S. Senate in New York. This is Pennsylvania.

[Keystone Phil]

Let the Casey campaign make Santorum the issue of this campaign. Let them go negative. If they like the MoveOn folks run the show, Santorum wins the race.

Speaking of MoveOn.org.  They offically announced that they will back Casey over Pennachio in the Democratic primary.  Im not sure whether this is a good thing or a bad thing.  Could help w/ liberal turnout in the GE.  But at the same time it could hurt with Swing voters and moderate Republicans.

I don't know how much it will matter in the primary but if you have MoveOn people knocking on doors for Casey in the Fall, that will hurt. There are RINOs in the SE that do not like Santorum yet Casey is not their favorite guy either (because of his conservativism) and MoveOn is too extreme.

Classic example: bullmoose. He doesn't like Santorum yet isn't a fan of Casey. He's an undecided voter. I am willing to bet that a MoveOn volunteer asking him to vote for Casey would only move him towards supporting Santorum.

[Bono]

Actually, this just raised my opinion of Santorum by a lot.

[TheresNoMoney]

Approval ratings look good. He's only dipped into the 40s twice within the past three years of polling in the Quinnipiac polls.

Latest Survey USA poll:

http://www.surveyusa.com/100USSenatorApprovalRatings061305.htm

Approve: 45%, Disapprove: 44%

Highest disapproval percentage of any Senator in the country!

[TeePee4Prez]

Phil, I do have a strong feeling at leat one of his kids will be messed up when they get older.  He is pushing the envelope on extremism here.  One thing Santorum is good at his hiding it in his rhetoric to make him not sound so bad.  I do not know why supersoulty and KeystonePhil are apologizing for his bumbling asshole.  Game over Phil, HE LOST!

[TeePee4Prez]

I also have a feeling at this point we should scrap Casey in favor of Hoeffel or Hafer.  Would help us in the money department which could out Santorum's extreme views better.

[A18]

Casey is supposedly the best shot the Democrats have at winning that seat, at least according to most people that know the state here.

[TheresNoMoney]

I also have a feeling at this point we should scrap Casey in favor of Hoeffel or Hafer.

No way!! It would be stupid to take any chances on this one.

Besides, Senator Specter will likely be retiring either in 2006 or 2008 and Hoeffel, Hafer, or anther Democrat will be appointed.

[Speed of Sound]

I also have a feeling at this point we should scrap Casey in favor of Hoeffel or Hafer.  Would help us in the money department which could out Santorum's extreme views better.

it might help with money, but i think right now what we need is a conservative dem with at least some name recognition(from his father, obviously) who can oust Santorum in moderate counties. plus it would seem unusual for Hoeffel or Hafer to re-join the race, after both already declaring that they wouldn't run.

[Keystone Phil]

Phil, I do have a strong feeling at leat one of his kids will be messed up when they get older.

It's ashame if that happens. Atleast you'll have company.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We admire him and believe in what he believes in. I'm not apologizing. I'm defending. I'm apologize for not joining the ranks of the other idiots who say Santorum is an extremist moron. I know it hurts you that I'm not a member of that club.

Game over? He lost? I'm looking at my calendar right now and it says July 2005. I thought the election was in November 2006. I might be mistaken...

Scoonie, we go by Quinnipiac. When the new numbers come out, we can argue over them at that time. SurveyUSA does a poll on Senators once every six months of so. I'm not going to drop Quinnipiac (one of the most accurate polling institutes in the area) for one SurveyUSA poll.

Flyers, please get rid of Casey. I beg you. If you do that, you might just get invited to Santorum's re-election party. He'd beat Hoeffel or Hafer by about six points.

Your silly logic of fundraising over someone who has the better chance at winning always gets me, Flyers. I thought Howard Dean would make the best DNC chair for the GOP. Ha! You'd be a whole lot better.

[Speed of Sound]

He'd beat Hoeffel or Hafer by about six points.

At least. Even though im a huge Hoeffel supporter, if he cant get within 10 points of Specter, he cant anywhere close to Santorum. and Hafer's only chance at ever holding another political office would be Lt. Gov. or local state senator/congresswoman. i dont think that a senate seat is in her reach anymore, sadly.

                                                 ---------------- 
                                                 l   Here lie     l
                                                 l Hoeffel and l
                                                 l Dreams of   l
                                                 l Ever Being  l
                                                 l   Senator    l
                                                 l      R.I.P.     l
                                                 ---------------- 

[Keystone Phil]

He'd beat Hoeffel or Hafer by about six points.

At least. Even though im a huge Hoeffel supporter, if he cant get within 10 points of Specter, he cant anywhere close to Santorum.

He'd do better against Santorum than he did against Specter.

Santorum - 52%
Hoeffel/Hafer - 46%
Other - 2%

Basically, it would be another Santorum vs. Klink result.

[Alcon]

This is absurd.  These quotes are mostly contextless and un-extreme.  There are bigger fish to fry than this stuff, and I seriously doubt this will even become a semi-major campaign issue.

Women's Place is in the Home: "In far too many families with young children, both parents are working, when, if they really took an honest look at the budget, they might confess that both of them really don’t need to, or at least may not need to work as much as they do… And for some parents, the purported need to provide things for their children simply provides a convenient rationalization for pursuing a gratifying career outside the home." (It Takes a Family, 94)

Not only does he not mention women in this paragraph, but he goes out of his way to not even imply women.  Bravo to Santorum.

This is absurd.

Blame Feminism for Women wanting to work: "Many women have told me, and surveys have shown, that they find it easier, more “professionally” gratifying, and certainly more socially affirming, to work outside the home than to give up their careers to take care of their children. Think about that for a moment…Here, we can thank the influence of radical feminism, one of the core philosophies of the village elders." (It Takes a Family, 95)

I don't totally understand what he's going for here ("core philosophies of the village elders" suggests this requires greater context), but the general idea seems to be that some women would rather work outside of the home than raise their children soley because of radical feminism.  Honestly, I don't entirely agree with him here - if they want to work outside of the home, it's their right; I'm not entirely sure what this has to do with feminism.  But this isn't totally absurd.

Who Needs College? "The notion that college education is a cost-effective way to help poor, low-skill, unmarried mothers with high school diplomas or GEDs move up the economic ladder is just wrong." (It Takes a Family, 138)

Definitely a context issue.  I'd like to hear his argument, which is impossible with just a topic sentence.

Slavery Wasn't So Bad:"But unlike abortion today, in most states even the slaveholder did not have the unlimited right to kill his slave." ((It Takes a Family, 241)

This is a rather stupid argument on Santorum's part.  It does what many pro-abortion arguments (but not all do) - assume that everyone agrees that life starts at conception and goes from there.  This does NOT in any logical way say that slavery "wasn't so bad."

Diversity is Bad: "The elementary error of relativism becomes clear when we look at multiculturalism. Sometime in the 1980s, universities began to champion the importance of “diversity” as a central educational value." (It Takes a Family, 406)

I think this is probably a set-up for a case against affirmative action and hyper-multiculturalism, which is understandable.

Public/Private Schools are bad:"By asking the right question, we can see that when it comes to socialization, mass education is really the aberration, not homeschooling. Never before in human history have a majority of children spent at least half their waking hours in the presence of 25 to 35 unrelated children of exactly the same age (and usually the same socio-economic status), with only one adult to keep order and provide basic mentoring. Never before and never again after their years of mass education will any person live and work in such a radically narrow, age-segregated environment. It’s amazing that so many kids turn out to be fairly normal, considering the weird socialization they get in public schools." (It Takes a Family, 386)

Socializing with people our age is weird?  OK...

There is a whole campaign's worth of attack ads in this book. Santorum is a complete nutjob who wants to take America back to the Puritan days of the 1700s.

This extremist Senator is a danger to this country and needs to be defeated in 2006.

None of this is extremist.  Some of it I disagree with, but it's hardly calling for anything extreme.  Besides, most ideas expressed here are his personal, not political, views.  It's not like we're doing away with public schools anytime soon.

This is just a mix of muddled context and statements that not everyone will agree with but aren't really extreme.  If this is the best you can find in the entire book, Santorum must be a lot more even-headed than I thought.

[Keystone Phil]

I seriously doubt this will even become a semi-major campaign issue.

In 2000, Ron Klink brought up some comments that Santorum made about how he raises his children. Santorum pretty much set the story straight and Klink kept whining about it, trying making Santorum out to be a racist. Now everyone says Klink was incredibly weak but he wasn't all that weak with debating. Casey is. If anyone thinks Casey is going to be one to make this an issue during a debate, for example, you're kidding yourself.

[Everett]

One more reason why I hate book reviews. I could quote any book completely out-of-context and make it sound very overblown and confusing.

[Keystone Phil]

They just finished up debating this on Inside Politics' Strategy Session.

The main part of the debate (atleast the part that I saw) focused on Santorum's mom comments. The stretching continued and the Republican (I believe her name was Victoria Clark) didn't say a thing.

An excerpt was read about working mothers and Begala made a point about how Santorum believe working mothers are inferior to stay at home mothers. The problem: Santorum never said that and I highly doubt that he would believe that.

I think what he is trying to get at is that a good amount of women have gotten so wrapped up in their career that their time for their family has been greatly scaled back. That's obviously a problem. Again, I don't think he's going against the idea of a working mother, in general. I think he's going after the problems that have come about in the case of some working mothers.

Victoria Clark then went on to say that at the end of the day this will be a "political wash." That it won't matter. For Santorum, this might sting his campaign in areas like Montgomery and Bucks counties. However, in more traditional, culturally conservative areas out west and in central PA, this won't be a problem.

[Everett]

I think what he is trying to get at is that a good amount of women have gotten so wrapped up in their career that their time for their family has been greatly scaled back. That's obviously a problem. Again, I don't think he's going against the idea of a working mother, in general. I think he's going after the problems that have come about in the case of some working mothers.

But I'm sure a lot of people would jump to conclusions and call him sexist and anti-working mothers.

[Keystone Phil]

But I'm sure a lot of people would jump to conclusions and call him sexist and anti-working mothers.

If Casey starts ads like that in the SE and it becomes an issue, it will only help Santorum overall. People in this state aren't Santorum haters.

[Speed of Sound]

But I'm sure a lot of people would jump to conclusions and call him sexist and anti-working mothers.

If Casey starts ads like that in the SE and it becomes an issue, it will only help Santorum overall. People in this state aren't Santorum haters.

and they hate negative ad campaigns....or is that just me?

[Smash255]

But I'm sure a lot of people would jump to conclusions and call him sexist and anti-working mothers.

If Casey starts ads like that in the SE and it becomes an issue, it will only help Santorum overall. People in this state aren't Santorum haters.

He isn't that well liked.  You have your head wrapped in older polls when their are newer ones out.  Yes I know its not "Quinnipiac" please..

[Keystone Phil]

But I'm sure a lot of people would jump to conclusions and call him sexist and anti-working mothers.

If Casey starts ads like that in the SE and it becomes an issue, it will only help Santorum overall. People in this state aren't Santorum haters.

He isn't that well liked.  You have your head wrapped in older polls when their are newer ones out.  Yes I know its not "Quinnipiac" please..

He isn't that well liked? Are you just ignoring the pattern concerning his popularity? What new polls are out besides the SurveryUSA poll? If Santorum is up in the next Quinnipiac poll, will you back down in your argument that he's not well liked?

[Smash255]

But I'm sure a lot of people would jump to conclusions and call him sexist and anti-working mothers.

If Casey starts ads like that in the SE and it becomes an issue, it will only help Santorum overall. People in this state aren't Santorum haters.

He isn't that well liked.  You have your head wrapped in older polls when their are newer ones out.  Yes I know its not "Quinnipiac" please..

He isn't that well liked? Are you just ignoring the pattern concerning his popularity? What new polls are out besides the SurveryUSA poll? If Santorum is up in the next Quinnipiac poll, will you back down in your argument that he's not well liked?

If he is up in the next poll (other than Rasmussen & Zogby who I have explained before why I don't trust) then yes.  If its Quinnipiac, Survey USA, Gallup or whatever if he is up in the next poll I will give him credit for being a bit more popular (going up to 46 doesn't count).  The only way I on't put much stock into the next Quinnipiac poll is if we have several oother polls that come out around the same time with vastly different results.  Anyway right now we have  2 polls which are MORE RECENT than the poll you cite.  I tend to go by the most recent polls & when a bunch of polls come out within a short period of time take the average of the polls.  You for some reason seem to be so wrapped up in this 2 and a half month old Quinnipiac poll, when we have newer polls that are out that show a different result than the old poll you ignore them, I wonder why.....

[Keystone Phil]

.  Anyway right now we have  2 polls which are MORE RECENT than the poll you cite.  I tend to go by the most recent polls & when a bunch of polls come out within a short period of time take the average of the polls.  You for some reason seem to be so wrapped up in this 2 and a half month old Quinnipiac poll, when we have newer polls that are out that show a different result than the old poll you ignore them, I wonder why.....

Two more recent polls? Where? The only one that was noted was the one SurveryUSA poll.

I am "so wrapped up" in the Quinnipiac polls because they are the most accurate polls in the area. There's a reason why almost everyone in PA politics follows Quinnipiac, Smash.

And, once again, you have only presented ONE other poll and the results are as drastically different as you think!

[Smash255]

.  Anyway right now we have  2 polls which are MORE RECENT than the poll you cite.  I tend to go by the most recent polls & when a bunch of polls come out within a short period of time take the average of the polls.  You for some reason seem to be so wrapped up in this 2 and a half month old Quinnipiac poll, when we have newer polls that are out that show a different result than the old poll you ignore them, I wonder why.....

Two more recent polls? Where? The only one that was noted was the one SurveryUSA poll.

I am "so wrapped up" in the Quinnipiac polls because they are the most accurate polls in the area. There's a reason why almost everyone in PA politics follows Quinnipiac, Smash.

And, once again, you have only presented ONE other poll and the results are as drastically different as you think!

Survey USA did TWO seperate Polls

One in May, one in June.  His approval in May was 44% with a 38% disapproval, it June it was 45% approval 44% disapproval.  He had the 7th lowest approval rating in May & 10th highest disapproval in May, in June he had the 8th lowest approval & the highest disapproval

[Keystone Phil]

.  Anyway right now we have  2 polls which are MORE RECENT than the poll you cite.  I tend to go by the most recent polls & when a bunch of polls come out within a short period of time take the average of the polls.  You for some reason seem to be so wrapped up in this 2 and a half month old Quinnipiac poll, when we have newer polls that are out that show a different result than the old poll you ignore them, I wonder why.....

Two more recent polls? Where? The only one that was noted was the one SurveryUSA poll.

I am "so wrapped up" in the Quinnipiac polls because they are the most accurate polls in the area. There's a reason why almost everyone in PA politics follows Quinnipiac, Smash.

And, once again, you have only presented ONE other poll and the results are as drastically different as you think!

Survey USA did TWO seperate Polls

One in May, one in June.  His approval in May was 44% with a 38% disapproval, it June it was 45% approval 44% disapproval.  He had the 7th lowest approval rating in May & 10th highest disapproval in May, in June he had the 8th lowest approval & the highest disapproval

Links, please.