Connect with us

Santorum Refuses To Tell Crazed Obama Hater The President Did Not Try To Nuke South Carolina



It’s one thing to oppose the President and his policies, but it’s un-American to allow crazed lies and rabid hate to stand without denouncing it.

Rick Santorum is no statesman.

During the heated 2008 race for the White House, Republican U.S. Senator John McCain was presented with a challenging Obama opponent audience member in an open forum. The older woman insisted then-Senator Barack Obama was not an American. “I can’t trust Obama. I have read about him, and he’s not, he’s not. He’s an Arab,” the woman cried. 

McCain, on camera, with less than one month to go before the election, after the September financial crash that ultimately would ensure Obama the presidency, shook his head, took the microphone from his Tea Party lies embracing supporter, and responded.

“No ma’am,” McCain said repeatedly.

“He’s a decent, family man, citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues, and that’s what this campaign is all about.”

That’s what a statesman does.

Love or hate McCain and his policies, he deserves praise for that important moment.

Politico reports audience members later booed McCain, and “yelled ‘liar,’ and ‘terrorist,’ referring to Obama.

Fast forward about seven and a half years, McCain is the one who stayed in the Senate, Obama won the White House, twice, as he amusingly reminded congress during his State of the Union address this January, and another (likely) presidential candidate encounters another older anti-Obama audience member, one even more crazed with Tea Party lies and hate.

Former Republican U.S. Senator Rick Santorum was presented with an opportunity to be a statesman this past weekend at the South Carolina National Security Action Summit. He failed.

“Why is the Congress rolling over and letting this Communist dictator destroy my country?,” the older woman, a retired schoolteacher, demanded to know. “Y’all know what he is, and I know what he is. I want him out of the White House. He’s not a citizen. He could have been removed a long time ago.”

“Larry Klayman’s got the judge to say that the executive amnesty is illegal. Everything he does is illegal. He’s trying to destroy the United States. The Congress knows this. What kind of games is the Congress of the United States playing with the citizens of the United States?”

“Y’all need to work for us, not the lobbyists that pay your salaries. Get on board, let’s stop all of this, let’s save America. What’s going to stop — Senator Santorum, where do we go from here? Ted [Cruz, perhaps?] told me I’ve got to wait until the next election. I don’t the country will be around for the next election. Obama tried to blow up a nuke in Charleston a few months ago, and the three admirals and generals — he’s totally destroyed our military, he’s fired all the generals and all the admirals who said they wouldn’t fire on the American people.”

Of course, not one single word of that Obama hatred is factual.

Santorum easily could have done what John McCain did and respectfully explain to the woman she is mistaken.

He could have told her and the audience that President Obama did not try to nuke South Carolina, and did not fire all the generals and all the admirals who said they wouldn’t fire on the American people.

Oh, and that Pres. Obama is in fact a citizen.

How does former Senator Santorum respond?

He corrects her faulty perception that he is still a U.S. Senator, then says, “as you mentioned, the word tyrant comes to mind.”

Complete and utter statesmanship failure.

This is what cowardice looks like. This is not how a leader acts.



Image by Gage Skidmore via Flickr and a CC license
Hat tip: Gawker
Transcript: Bloomberg


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.


‘Very Bad News for Chauvin’: Legal Expert Weighs in on Jurors Having Reached a Verdict So Quickly in Murder Trial



Jurors have reached a verdict, less than 24 hours after the trial of Derek Chauvin concluded. Chauvin is charged with the killing of George Floyd, and faces three charges.

The verdict is expected to be announced in about an hour.

Former federal prosecutor Renatto Marioitti says this is “very bad news for Chauvin.”

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. This story will be updated, and NCRM will likely publish follow-up stories on this news. Stay tuned and refresh for updates.

Continue Reading


McEnany Lectures Biden: ‘It’s the Role of the President of the United States to Stay Back, to Not Inflame’



Former White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany on Tuesday blasted President Joe Biden for speaking out about the Derek Chauvin trial even though her former boss, Donald Trump, often expressed his opinion on similar events.

After the sequestered jury began its deliberations in the Chauvin trial, Biden told reporters that he was praying for the “right verdict.”

McEnany, in her role as Fox News host, criticized the current president.

“I’m glad that he at least waited until the jury was sequestered,” McEnany ranted. “But I think that the country is such a tinderbox right now, especially Minneapolis. There’s so much hurt, so much pain.”

And I think it’s the role of the president of the United States to stay back, to not inflame the tensions,” she added. “I think he should have just reserved comment and said he’s praying for the family as we all are.”

As president, Trump often weighed in on legal matters and controversial events.

After Kyle Rittenhouse was charged with homicide for shootings that left two protesters in Wisconsin dead last August, Trump offered a defense of the suspect.

“He was trying to get away from them, I guess, it looks like,” Trump opined at the time. “I guess he was in very big trouble. He probably would have been killed.”

Watch the video below from Fox News.


Image by Gage Skidmore via Flickr and a CC license

Continue Reading


Republicans Planning to Force Censure Vote Against Maxine Waters – Here’s How It Could Backfire: Report



Republican Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) is set on forcing a vote in the House on his resolution to censure Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA). There’s little chance it will pass, and Democrats might be able to block it before he’s able to force a vote, but regardless it very easily could backfire against them, according to Politico.

Republicans in the House and Senate are claiming to be furious after Waters went to Minnesota to talk with Black Lives Matter protestors and told them if former police officer Derek Chauvin is not found guilty of killing George Floyd they must “stay on the street” and become “more confrontational.”

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene is falsely claiming Waters is inciting violence, and she’s moving to expel the California Democrat, which also will not happen.

Others, like House Republican Minority Whip Steve Scalise, on Tuesday falsely claimed Waters was “trying to incite violence and, in fact, there is violence going on right now in Minnesota because of her actions.”

Republicans are trying to inflate Waters’ comments and use them against Democrats. The National Republican Congressional Committee “is already planning to use this vote to tie moderate Democrats to Waters, according to spokesman Michael Mcadams,” Politico reports.

Politico says if Republicans go ahead with this plan it “could also trigger Democratic action as well.”

Many House Democrats are still furious about the January 6 insurrection, and that they’re forced to work “alongside apologists to an insurrection.”

“Tensions remain high in the House after Jan. 6, with Democrats privately lamenting that they’re working alongside apologists to an insurrection. Democratic leadership has privately worked to persuade many of these frustrated members to hold back on forcing votes rebuking their GOP colleagues to try to lower the temperature in Washington. They may be less restrained after the GOP-led vote on Waters.”

Democrats could force action against some of the extremists, or resuscitate what had appeared to be an all-but-dead January 6 House Commission, something Speaker Pelosi just brought up again, as did a New York Times editorial board member.


Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.