Connect with us

Rick Santorum, The New President Of Jesus

Published

on

As the South Carolina Primary approaches, and the prospect of Willard Mitt Romney becoming the Republican nominee begins to become more and more inevitable, the game of musical chairs that is the search for the Anti-Romney has reached new lows of desperation. Will Republicans be forced to endure yet another Presidential election cycle with an insufficiently hateful candidate at the top of the ticket? Must Evangelical Christians tolerate a candidate who is capable of even the smallest measure of tolerance?

Given this state of emergency, Evangelical leaders descended on the Texas ranch of Judge Paul Pressler in an effort to find a consensus Anti-Romney to swoop in and save the day. After two days of deliberation and three rounds of balloting, it was decided. Evangelical Christians have found their champion, and his name is Rick Santorum.

READ: Santorum Wins Key Endorsement Of Evangelical Anti-Gay Hate Group Consortium

Tony Perkins, President of certified anti-gay hate group Family Research Council and spokesman for the confab, had this to say:

Rick Santorum has consistently articulated the issues that are of concern to conservatives, both the economic and the social, and has woven those into a very solid platform.

As a gay man, I find any large gathering of Evangelical Christians terrifying, especially when that gathering includes people like Gary Bauer, James Dobson and Don Wildmon, or as I like to call them, the Three Tenors of Hate.

In the olden days when Christians gathered in groups it was probably to talk about Jesus, or The Bible, or perhaps to have potluck dinners. Those days appear to be long gone. The focus of modern Evangelical Christians appears to have narrowed to include only issues involving what people should do be allowed to do with their genitals. Oh, and abortion. They still hate the crap out of abortion. Christians have managed to turn from an organization concerned with spreading the message of God’s love, to one that spends most of its time coming up with long lists of things they hate. It must be very fulfilling.

Regardless, the new president of Jesus is Rick Santorum, and I for one would like to offer him my sincerest congratulations. There were several world class anti-gay bigots they could have chosen, and they went with one of the best. If mean-spirited bullying had a hall of fame, Rick Santorum’s induction would surely be lock.

So, if Rick Santorum is the man who best articulates the views of conservatives everywhere, perhaps we should examine some of those views.

READ: Rick Santorum’s Top Ten Most-Offensive Anti-Gay Comments

It is likely no surprise to you that gay people by and large dislike Rick Santorum, to put it mildly. This is because he says things like this little diatribe, delivered to students and local residents attending a Santorum event a couple of weeks go, as reported by the L.A. Times:

Citing the work of one anti-poverty expert, Santorum said, “He found that even fathers in jail who had abandoned their kids were still better than no father at all to have in their children’s lives.”

Allowing gays to marry and raise children, Santorum said, amounts to “robbing children of something they need, they deserve, they have a right to. You may rationalize that that isn’t true, but in your own life and in your own heart, you know it’s true.”

That’s right. Rick Santorum would rather your child be raised by violent psychopathic convicts than allow them to be cared for by a loving homosexual couple. He doesn’t stop at merely insisting that gay people shouldn’t marry or raise children. He’s been pissed off since the Supreme Court declared that the government couldn’t put homosexuals in jail anymore.

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.

Sure. That was in 2003. Perhaps he’s changed his tune. He did say this after all, during the recent Meet The Press debate, via TPM:

I would be a voice in speaking out for making sure that every person in America, gay or straight, is treated with respect and dignity and has the equality of opportunity.

He even outlined his response should his child come out to him:

“I would love him as much as I did the second before he said it,” Santorum said. “And I would try to do everything I can to be as good a father to him as possible.”

Has Rick Santorum softened his views? No. Not even a little bit. Here is quote from his apperance on renowned bigot Bradlee Dean’s radio show, as reported by the Minnesota Independent:

“I stood up from the very beginning back in 2003 when the Supreme Court was going to create a constitutional right to sodomy and said this is wrong we can’t do this,” Santorum said. ”And so I stood up when no one else did and got hammered for it. I stood up and I continue to stand up.” Santorum added, “I do not believe that sexual orientation should be added to hate crimes, but let me be honest, I don’t believe in hate crimes, period.”

I suppose the idea here is that he is OK with being gay, provided you never have sex with anyone. He would also prefer that view be enforced by penalty of law. Rick Santorum has quite a strange definition of “equality of opportunity.”

But it’s not just gay sex that Rick Santorum finds offensive. He’s got it out for you too, heterosexuals. According to Think Progress:

“(Sex) is supposed to be within marriage. It’s supposed to be for purposes that are yes, conjugal…but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen…This is special and it needs to be seen as special.”

He also goes after, of all things, contraception. The same article quotes him as saying:

“One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country,” the former Pennsylvania senator explained. “It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.”

Here is a video of him saying it, in case you catch him trying to deny it. Rick does this thing where he says something awful, and then tries to walk it back like he never said it. He tried it recently with his “Black Welfare” comment.

On January 3, Santorum said this:

I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money. I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money and provide for themselves and their families.

When asked about it by Bill O’Reilly a few days later, he said this:

“I looked at that, and I didn’t say that,” Santorum told O’Reilly. “If you look at it, what I started to say is a word and then sort of changed and it sort of — blah — came out. And people said I said, ‘Black.’ I didn’t.”

We have this stuff on tape Rick, so stop lying. I thought Christians had a thing about not lying. Perhaps you should try reading the parts of The Bible that don’t deal with gay sex.

To recap. Rick Santorum thinks homosexuality should be illegal, and that contraception leads to, well, I’m not even sure what contraception is supposed to lead to. Jazz and Gin? The loss of womanly virtue? “Doing things in the sexual realm?” Who knows. Rick Santorum is a crazy fundamentalist. What is clear is that Santorum has a lot of opinions about everybody’s sexual business. He also spends a lot of time thinking about sodomy, which is a little strange for a straight guy. When I look at Rick Santorum I see a man terrified of the future, and so filled with hate that he would see the lives of millions of LGBT people around the country destroyed simply to see the world conform to his extreme religious beliefs.

Evangelicals, on the other hand, see the embodiment of the Republican Party.

This raises a question that I would like to ask you rank and file Republicans out there: Are you sure about this? Do you really want to be associated with Rick Santorum? Every civil rights movement contains opponents like Rick Santorum; vicious, nasty, ideologues who remain dedicated to outdated and vile prejudices long after the rest of society has moved on. You read about guys like this in history class. George Wallace comes to mind. People that you look back on, and wince. Rick Santorum is one of these people. The future reveres men like Harvey Milk, and Martin Luther King, Jr., and makes people like Anita Bryant and groups like the KKK the villain of the story. History doesn’t look kindly upon those who work to deprive others of their civil rights.

Who do you want to be? I understand that you are conservatives, but must your desire for smaller government and lower taxes also mean that you must support the deprivation of rights to an entire class of your fellow citizens? Why are those two things connected? Must the preservation of a strong military and the pursuit of an aggressive foreign policy also mean that you must support efforts to deprive LGBT couples hospital visitation and access to adoption? Is that actually who you want to be? Why would that even make sense?

Let’s be clear. If you throw your support behind Rick Santorum, you are making a decision you don’t get to take back. You are deciding to be an embarrassment to your grandchildren. You are choosing to place a black mark on your personal legacy. You are declaring for all to hear that when the time came to stand up for civil rights, you instead worked to keep those rights from people who have never done you a moment’s harm. It makes you the villain of the story. All I am asking is that you consider this carefully, and make absolutely certain that this is who you want to be. Please think this through. Try to take a long view. Rick Santorum is a bad person, and you, or at the very least your children, will be ashamed that you supported him. Don’t let people like Tony Perkins decide who speaks for you, or who represents your values. Speak for yourself. Do the right thing. Don’t be self-righteous. Be righteous.

 Image, top, by boris.rasin

 Benjamin Phillips is a Humor Writer, Web Developer, Civics Nerd, and all around crank that spends entirely too much time shouting with deep exasperation at the television, especially whenever cable news is on. He lives in St. Louis, MO and spends most of his time staring at various LCD screens, occasionally taking walks in the park whenever his boyfriend becomes sufficiently convinced that Benjamin is becoming a reclusive hermit person. He is available for children’s parties, provided that those children are entertained by hearing a complete windbag talk for two hours about the importance of science education, or worse yet, poorly researched anecdotes PROVING that James Buchanan was totally gay. If civilization were to collapse due to zombie hoards or nuclear holocaust, Benjamin would be among the first to die as he has no useful skills of any kind. The post-apocalyptic hellscape has no real need for homosexual computer programmers who can name all the presidents in order, as well as the actors who have played all eleven incarnations of Doctor Who.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Who Exactly Is Running the Government?’: Trump’s War Plans Leak Denial Backfires

Published

1 hour ago

on

March 24, 2025

By

President Donald Trump’s claim that he was unaware of a cabinet-level breach of classified information—an incident reportedly involving up to 18 top national security officials discussing sensitive details of a planned military strike—appears to have backfired, raising questions about his knowledge of the actions of his top officials, and, as Commander-in-Chief, his knowledge of U.S. national security and military operations.

The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, revealed Monday afternoon that he inadvertently had been included in the 18-person group chat on the unclassified messaging app Signal. Experts say those discussions should never have been held over the app, but rather inside a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, or inside multiple SCIFs.

On Monday afternoon at a press conference, a reporter asked the Commander-in-Chief for his reaction to the story in The Atlantic.

“I don’t know anything about it,” was Trump’s immediate response. His next response was to attack the media outlet.

“I’m not a big fan of The Atlantic, it’s, to me it’s a magazine that’s going out of business,” the President declared. “I think it’s not much of a magazine, but I know nothing about it.”

READ MORE: Alina Habba Immediately Targets Top NJ Democrats After Trump Names Her New US Attorney

He then asked the reporter to explain to him what had been reported in The Atlantic.

“You’re saying that they had what?” “Having to do with what?” he asked twice. “What were they talking about?”

After the reporter gave him more information, Trump, seemingly still not understanding all the details, declared that the leak “couldn’t have been very effective because the attack was very effective, I can tell you that.”

He again denied any knowledge of the leak.

“I don’t know anything about it,” Trump repeated. “You, you’re telling me about it for the first time.”

The White House has acknowledged the leak occurred. Axios called it a “mind-boggling security breach.” The Washington Post reported that “the disclosure raises questions about how the administration has discussed classified issues and whether anyone will be disciplined.”

“As the bombing campaign moved ahead, Hegseth’s [Signal] account shared details that Goldberg said he believed could put at risk the safety of U.S. troops or intelligence officials, especially those deployed in the Middle East,” the Post reported. “Those details, the Atlantic article says, allegedly included the specific weapons to be used and in which sequence the Houthi targets would be hit.”

Military and national security experts are stunned — not only that this massive leak occurred, but that the President was not informed until a reporter asked him about it on Monday.

“If the President is telling the truth and no one’s briefed him about this yet, that’s another story in itself. In any other administration, CoS would have been in the Oval within nanoseconds of learning about something like this, wrote The Atlantic’s Tom Nichols via social media, referring to the White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. Nichols is a retired U.S. Naval War College professor who is an expert on national security, international affairs, Russia, and nuclear weapons.

“Heads need to roll for this. They have broken laws and endangered the lives of our service members with this idiocy,” commented Army veteran of 22 years, Fred Wellman, a graduate of West Point and the Harvard Kennedy School.

Journalist Wajahat Ali wrote, “What’s worse is that he HAS no idea, allegedly, about the story, which makes it even worse and more terrifying. Like, bro, why don’t you know?”

“One wild thing about Trump,” observed journalist Isaac Saul, “is that he is notoriously insulated from certain information streams by his team. Absolutely believable that he went out to the podium having not been informed of this massive story bc the people who brief him on info were culpable in the leaks.”

READ MORE: Arkansas Senator Files Bill to Abolish State Library, Give Education Department Control

“Here’s some insight,” offered Sophia Kinzinger, a former press secretary for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. “The White House has an entire department, staffed by military professionals, dedicated to facilitating secure communications. They travel with staff, provide devices, and set up SCIFs (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities) whenever and wherever needed, operating 24/7. There is absolutely no excuse for mishandling classified information, especially for someone leading the National Security Council at the White House. Their actions clearly demonstrate a lack of qualification for such a critical role. we deserve better!”

U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX) added: “If it’s true that the President of the United States had no idea that his war cabinet and VP were discussing war plans on a Signal chat that included a journalist, that is astounding ignorance and profound incompetence.”

Derek Martin, who conducted supply chain counterintelligence at the National Security Agency (NSA), asked: “If Trump doesn’t know about a major incident involving his VP, Chief of Staff, NatSec Advisor, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Director of National Intelligence, and CIA Director, then who exactly is running the government?”

U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-DE), according to Deadline, wrote: “Every single one of the government officials on this text chain have now committed a crime – even if accidentally – that would normally involve a jail sentence. We can’t trust anyone in this dangerous administration to keep Americans safe.”

In his report at The Atlantic, Goldberg noted that “coordinating a national-security-related action over Signal, may have violated several provisions of the Espionage Act, which governs the handling of ‘national defense’ information, according to several national-security lawyers interviewed by my colleague Shane Harris for this story.”

Goldberg also explained that he chose to not publish all of the texts, noting that, “if [some] had been read by an adversary of the United States, [they] could conceivably have been used to harm American military and intelligence personnel, particularly in the broader Middle East, Central Command’s area of responsibility. What I will say, in order to illustrate the shocking recklessness of this Signal conversation, is that the Hegseth post contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump Claims US ‘Doesn’t Need Anything From Canada’, Yet Still Wants It as a State

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

Alina Habba Immediately Targets Top NJ Democrats After Trump Names Her New US Attorney

Published

4 hours ago

on

March 24, 2025

By

President Donald Trump has named his former personal attorney Alina Habba, who has been serving as White House Counselor, the interim, or acting, United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey. Habba immediately lashed out at the Garden State’s top Democrats.

Trump said the he is also nominating the current acting U.S. Attorney, John Giordano, who has been in that role for a mere three weeks, to a new post: U.S. ambassador to Namibia. Giordano is listed as a member of the White House Historical Association.

Habba, who recently faced backlash for suggesting that veterans dismissed from federal jobs may be “not fit to have a job at this moment,” quickly went on the offensive against U.S. Senator Cory Booker and New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy (video below), claiming they have “failed the state of New Jersey.”

READ MORE: ‘Fake Tough Guy’: JD and Usha Vance Blasted for Greenland Threat and ‘Aggressive’ Visit

Telling reporters that “there is corruption, there is injustice, and there is a heavy amount of crime right in Cory Booker’s backyard and right under Governor Murphy,” Habba vowed, “that will stop.”

“I look forward to working with Pam Bondi and with the Department of Justice and making sure that we further the president’s agenda of putting America first, cleaning up mess, and going after the people that we should be going after, not the people that are falsely accused,” she said, a possible reference to the numerous state and federal charges Trump had faced until winning back the White House.

Politico describes Habba as Trump’s “legal attack dog.” Trump remains a convicted felon after being convicted by a jury in the State of New York on 34 counts of business fraud in what prosecutors said was an effort to influence the 2016 election.

The New York Post’s Manhattan Courts reporter Molly Crane-Newman noted on Monday that “Habba’s behavior during Trump’s defamation trial last year was so far outside the bounds that Judge Kaplan threatened to imprison her.”

READ MORE: Arkansas Senator Files Bill to Abolish State Library, Give Education Department Control

The Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reported that “Habba previously represented Trump in the New York civil cases where he was ordered to pay $450m for inflating his net worth and $83m for defaming E Jean Carroll.”

“In 2023, a federal judge also ordered Trump and Habba to pay $1m in sanctions for filing a frivolous claim against Hillary Clinton and others, calling the lawsuit ‘a hodgepodge of disconnected, often immaterial events, followed by an implausible conclusion,'” Lowell added.

Critics blasted the decision to name Habba.

Talking Points Memo founder and editor Josh Marshall appeared to compare Habba to an underboss in the Mafia, writing: “lol Alina Habba is now the capo of New Jersey.”

Former federal prosecutor Mitchell Epner wrote, “I served as an AUSA in the District of NJ from 2001-04.”

“I’m disgusted by this,” he said, adding: “Caligula’s horse would have been a better choice.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump Claims US ‘Doesn’t Need Anything From Canada’, Yet Still Wants It as a State

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘Fake Tough Guy’: JD and Usha Vance Blasted for Greenland Threat and ‘Aggressive’ Visit

Published

7 hours ago

on

March 24, 2025

By

Vice President JD Vance and Second Lady Usha Vance are launching a coordinated campaign targeting Greenland, the semi-autonomous Danish territory that President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed interest in acquiring for the United States—despite firm resistance from Denmark, Greenland’s residents, and NATO allies such as France.

Over the weekend, the White House announced that the Second Lady will travel to Greenland, the world’s largest island, on Thursday with one of the Vances’ sons.


It could be considered a cultural charm offensive given her published agenda, but also traveling to Greenland are Trump National Security Adviser Michael Waltz and U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright. According to The New York Times, Wright and Waltz are not traveling with the Second Lady, while others, including Sky News, report that Vance “will lead the delegation.”

‘WHAT IS THE SECURITY ADVISER DOING IN GREENLAND?’

Waltz is a former Army Special Forces officer who is seen as a war hawk. A Republican former U.S. Congressman, he was the sponsor of the American Critical Mineral Exploration and Innovation Act of 2020, which highlights the importance of the U.S. becoming independent from China for critical rare earth minerals. Some experts say Trump’s desire to take over Greenland is due to its rare earth minerals.

READ MORE: Arkansas Senator Files Bill to Abolish State Library, Give Education Department Control

Wright is the former CEO of a hydraulic fracturing company who served on the boards of companies related to nuclear technology and mineral and mining rights royalty payments.

Ahead of the visits, the Prime Minister of Greenland is sounding the alarm.

“The Trump administration’s posture is ‘now so serious that the level cannot be raised any higher,’ Prime Minister Múte Egede said in an interview with Greenlandic publication Sermitsiaq Sunday, according to a translation,” Axios reports.

“We are now at a level where it can in no way be characterized as a harmless visit from a politician’s wife,” Egede reportedly also said.

Asking, “what is the security adviser doing in Greenland?”  the Prime Minister said Waltz’s presence is a “demonstration of power.”

The New York Times added that Egede “said on Sunday that Greenlanders’ effort to be diplomatic just ‘bounces off Donald Trump and his administration in their mission to own and control Greenland.'”

The Trump administration’s posture is that this is just a friendly visit.

“The United States has a vested security interest in the Arctic region, and it should not be a surprise the national security adviser and secretary of energy are visiting a U.S. space base to get firsthand briefings from our service members on the ground,” Brian Hughes, the National Security Council spokesman, said in a statement. “We also look forward to experiencing Greenland’s famous hospitality and are confident that this visit presents an opportunity to build on partnerships that respects Greenland’s self-determination and advances economic cooperation. This is a visit to learn about Greenland, its culture, history and people.”

VP VANCE TARGETS GREENLAND

Meanwhile, Vice President Vance has come under fire in the U.S. for remarks he made on Sunday, which were anything but friendly.

“Denmark, which controls Greenland, it’s not doing its job, and it’s not being a good ally,” Vice President Vance told Fox News (video below). “So you have to ask yourself, how are we going to solve that problem, solve our own national security?”

“If that means that we need to take more territorial interest in Greenland, that is what President Trump is going to do, because he doesn’t care about what the Europeans scream at us. He cares about putting the interests of American citizens first.”

CRITICS BLAST VP

Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul, now a Stanford University professor of political science wrote: “Trump and Vance have never explained what US national security would be advanced by invading Greenland. Not once. We can buy their minerals without invading. We can open new bases without invading. And even buying Greenland would be a giant waste of money. And Denmark is doing its job providing on a per capita basis much more to Ukraine than we are.”

“The US has real security challenges to address. We don’t need to be inventing new ones by threatening to invade an ally,” Ambassador McFaul added.

READ MORE: Trump Claims US ‘Doesn’t Need Anything From Canada’, Yet Still Wants It as a State

Former U.S. Ambassador to Jamaica, Luis Moreno, noted that “Denmark lost 43 soldiers killed and over 200 wounded defending the United States of America in Afghanistan. But they’re ‘not a good ally.’ These people have no shame, no honor. Hope Denmark is taking steps to avoid a ‘Reichstag Fire’ type incident during provocative US VIP visits.”

Journalist, attorney, and former House Oversight Committee counsel Sophia A Nelson, a Republican turned independent, called Vance “a quack,” and added: “Threatening to take the territory of a sovereign nation, just because is sick, demented and dangerous. Also illegal.”

U.S. Rep. Don Bacon, a Republican of Nebraska, chastised the vice president: “Denmark has been a great ally. They’ve served with us in the Middle East. They’ve been key contributors to Ukraine. Greenland is also our ally. We have a great base there and they’re willing to partner more. Let’s be a better ally and not a bully in our own right.”

Journalist John Harwood criticized the Vice President’s remarks, writing: “yes, you and Trump are bold enough to harm our allies and surrender to our enemies congratulations, fake tough guy anti-American freak.”

Healthcare advocate and former Democratic congressional candidate Melanie D’Arrigo said, “Trump wants to take Greenland because Elon wants to control the critical minerals his companies’ products rely on. Cut through the gaslighting and don’t overthink it. $390 million of Musk’s money buys a lot of policy.”

Joerg Lau, international correspondent for the German weekly DIE ZEIT warned: “We are heading for a clash. At some point, someone in Europe will have to stand up to this outrage. The US Vice President is threatening an EU member, a NATO member. We need a collective response to this. Appeasement is not working.”

Former Republican U.S. Congressman Adam Kinzinger added, “In fact, Denmark is one of our best allies, and one of the top donors to Ukraine relative to their size. Shut your stupid mouth @JDVance.”

Author and former FBI agent Joe Navarro warned, “Beware when out of nowhere, a leader says there is a security problem when none exists. Jethro needs to tune it down just a bit, Greenland Is part of a sovereign nation. Nation states are not up for grabs unless you are Mussolini, Hitler, or Putin, or . . .”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: AG Pam Bondi Says Tesla Vandals Could Get 20 Years In Prison

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.