Connect with us

‘You’re Fundamentally Wrong On Civics’: Rachel Maddow Explains The Constitution To Rick Santorum

Published

on

One of the greatest match-ups in the world of modern politics has to be top liberal journalist Rachel Maddow interviewing one of the most right-wing anti-gay political crusaders, Rick Santorum. And it was. Watch.

Rick Santorum knows people who used to be gay but no longer are, regrets his infamous statement comparing same-sex marriage with “man-on-dog” marriage – though stands by his beliefs surrounding it – and doesn’t “spend a whole lot of time thinking about” issues like same-sex marriage or if people choose to be gay.

So he said Wednesday night when he sat down with MSNBC anchor Rachel Maddow for a heated and powerful interview that ended up revealing far more than the Republican former U.S. Senator who is again running for president bargained for – including getting a lesson on how the Constitution actually works.

“Can I ask you if you believe people choose to be gay?,” Maddow gently inquired.

“You know, I’ve never answered that question because I don’t really know the answer to that question,” Santorum, guardedly responded. Which is a bit stunning since he has worked closely with people who are gay, and has claimed to have good friends who are gay. 

“I suspect that there’s all sorts of reasons that people end up the way they are. And I’ll sort of leave it at that,” Santorum said, trying to wiggle out of a politically dangerous answer. “There are people who are alive today who identified themselves as gay and lesbian and who no longer are. That’s true. I do know — I’ve met people in that case,” he offered, after Maddow pushed for a better answer. 

“So, I guess maybe in that case, may be they did” choose to not be gay, Santorum concluded.

Not satisfied, Maddow continued.

“Do you think people choose to – people can choose to be heterosexual?”

“All I’m saying,” Santorum insisted, “I do know people who have lived a gay lifestyle and no longer live it.”

“Again, I don’t spend a whole lot of time thinking about these things to be very honest,” he added.

Maddow reminded him that he talks about gay issues and LGBT rights “all the time.” She brought up his 2003 interview when he told a reporter that since the Supreme court had just struck down the ban on sodomy, he said it was a slippery slope to legalizing “man on child, man on dog, whatever the case may be.”

Santorum told Maddow he regretted that remark.

“It was a flippant comment that should have come out of my mouth. But the substance of what I said, which is what I’ve referred to, I stand by that. I wish I had not said it in a flippant term that I did, and I know people were offended by it, and I wish I hadn’t said it.”

But he couldn’t bring himself to apologize for it.

The two began the interview with a debate over the Constitution. 

Santorum offered his view, which is that Congress and the President have as much right to say a law is unconstitutional as does the Supreme court, and he strongly suggested that the opinions of the legislative and executive branches of government are equal to that of the supreme Court on constitutional law.

The Supreme Court is “not a superior branch of government. I mean, if the Congress comes back and says, you know, we disagree with you and were able to pass a law and get it signed by the president and say, courts, you’re wrong, I mean,” Santorum argued, forcing Maddow to interject.

Here’s the exchange, via Real Clear Politics:

SANTORUM: Why not? Why? 

MADDOW: You can amend the Constitution. 

SANTORUM: Why?

MADDOW: They’re ruling on the constitutionality of that law. 

SANTORUM: What if they’re doing it with an — from an unconstitutional basis? I mean —

MADDOW: They decide what’s constitutional. That’s how our government works.

SANTORUM: No, no, that’s not necessarily true. The Congress has the right. 

When I took my oath of office as a United States senator, what did I say? I would uphold the Constitution. 

And my feeling is, and I think it’s clearly from our founding documents, that the Congress has a right to say what’s constitutional. The president has a right to say what’s constitutional. And that’s part of the dynamic called checks and balances. 

MADDOW: Yes. But — I mean, you’re fundamentally wrong on civics, right? If there is, if there is a question as to the constitutionality of a law, it gets adjudicated. 

SANTORUM: Right.

MADDOW: And the second syllable of that word means it get decided in the judiciary, the Supreme Court decides whether or not a law is constitutional. So, you could not now pass a law – 

SANTORUM: But if they have —

MADDOW: — that said we’re banning same sex marriage.

The debate went back and forth, with Santorum at one point explaining his view of how the Supreme court decided that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.

“I think what was going on with this court is what Justice Kennedy was saying. You know, we sort of see this definition of liberty is whatever we want it to be. And this is sort of where the culture is going right now and so this is what we’re going to do,” Santorum insisted, wholly ignoring the 14th Amendment on which the Court based its opinion.

“He didn’t tie to it any constitutional basis,” Santorum insisted, wrongly. “There’s no precedent that set — that gives him the ability to create this new right in the Constitution,” he decried, again ignoring that the Supreme Court has many times stated marriage is a fundamental right.

“And so, if it’s created on a whole cloth, it can be re-created in a different way out of whole cloth. And I think that’s the role of the Congress is to pressure the court to get it right.”

UPDATE –
The video at the top is what MSNBC provided, it is not the complete interview. For real political junkies, here’s the complete interview, which includes the beginning portion that MSNBC cut:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g2FKzhB9Os 

 

Image: Screenshot via MSNBC
Transcript via Real Clear Politics

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

Watch: America, We Just Got Our First Openly-Gay Active NFL Player

Published

on

America, meet your first openly-gay, active NFL player.

Las Vegas Raiders defensive lineman Carl Nassib, 28, in an Instagram video announced he is gay, HuffPost reports.

“What’s up people, I’m Carl Nassib. I’m at my house in West Chester, Pennsylvania,” Nassib says. “I just wanted to take a quick moment to say that I’m gay. I’ve been meaning to do this for a while now, but, I finally feel comfortable now to get it off my chest. I really have the best life, the best family, friends and job a guy can ask for.”

He also says he’s donating $100,000 to The Trevor Project, which works to help young LGBTQ youth in crisis or feeling suicidal.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Carl Nassib (@carlnassib)

“I’m a pretty private person so I hope you guys know that I’m not doing this for attention,” Nassib adds. “I just think that representation and visibility are so important. I actually hope that one day, videos like this and the whole coming out process are not necessary, but until then I will do my best and my part to cultivate a culture that’s accepting and compassionate and I’m going to start by donating $100,000 to the Trevor Project. They’re an incredible organization, they’re the number one suicide-prevention service for LGBTQ youth in America, and they’re truly doing incredible things, and I’m very excited to be a part of it, to help in any way that I can and I’m really pumped to see what the future holds.”

In one of the several text images on that post Nassib explains why this is so important:

Developing…

 

Continue Reading

'LYIN' TED'

‘Living Refutation of Manly Virtue’: Ted Cruz Mocked for Claiming ‘Nobody Is Banning’ Critical Race Theory

Published

on

U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) is being mocked and chastised after claiming on Monday that “nobody is banning” critical race theory, the now-highly contentious school of study used to examine societal issues and institutions that propagate and perpetuate systemic racism. Conservatives like Cruz have decided that any anti-racism instruction should be called “critical race theory,” with Fox News using the term 1300 times in under four months.

“Trump Derangement Syndrome is astonishing,” Cruz tweeted, inexplicably bringing the disgraced former president in to the conversation to attack anti-Trump conservative Charlie Sykes, “who used to be conservative, Cruz claimed, and “is now defending critical race theory.”

“He proffers a series of straw men, eg, don’t ‘ban’ it. Nobody is banning it; but we don’t have to allow schools to teach our kids to hate each other based on race.”

In fact, as NBC News reported, as of last week 21 states across the country are in the process of (16 states) or already have (5 states)  banned the teaching of critical race theory in classrooms.

Critical race theory does not “teach kids to hate each other based on race,” or based on anything else.

Lincoln Project co-founder Steve Schmidt unleashed his anger onto the Republican Senator from Texas.

“This is what racial demagoguery looks like in 2021,” Schmidt, a student of history, declared. Senator Cruz “is coloring in his part of the toxic mosaic, speaking in a code that when assembled completely says, militant black people who hate you and want to take your pocessions [sic] away are trying to brain wash your kids into hating you.”

Ted Cruz “is doing what he has always done,” Schmidt continued. “He is lying and trying to scare dim witted and vulnerable people into maintaining his political power by conning them into believing they need protection from something that in fact doesn’t exist in primary and secondary educational curriculum. It’s not real.”

Schmidt was far from the only one to go after Cruz.

By the way, Sykes replied. Twice.

 

 

Continue Reading

LOL – SURE

Meteorologist Is Latest Local Newscaster to Announce On-Air She Is Teaming Up With Right Wing Project Veritas

Published

on

A Detroit weekend weather anchor is the latest local reporter to announce on-air she is teaming up with the far right wing deception activists Project Veritas to attack their employer.

On Sunday April Moss, smack in the middle of her weather forecast, snuck in an announcement about the “discrimination” going of at her local CBS affiliated station.

“All good things must come to an end,” Moss told viewers as she announced “showers moving in around 8 AM.”

“Speaking of a brand new week I will be sitting down this week with Project Veritas to discuss the discrimination that CBS is enforcing upon its employees.”

Project Veritas is the group that has been repeatedly discredited for deceptively-edited videos created to attack the left.

And speaking of a brand new week, it appears that Moss may be planning on leaving the station – or getting fired. She’s worked for 9 years for CBS, but on Saturday created a new Instagram account without her “CBS” affiliation in the name.

Moss’ LinkedIn page lists among her interests Maria Bartiromo and Tim Tebow. The bio on her Instagram page says: “Galatians 2:20.”

Last week Fox 26 Houston reporter Ivory Hecker announced live, on-air “that Fox Corp. has been muzzling me to keep certain information from you, the viewers.”

She said just hours after she was fired.

What was that information that was so important for her to risk her job for?

Pushing hydroxychloroquine, which has been discredited as a cure for COVID-19.

No word yet on what “discrimination” Moss faces.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.