Did Santorum really say he didn’t want to make “black people’s lives better”?

posted at 8:40 am on January 3, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

This created an eruption on Twitter and in some of our comment threads yesterday evening, thanks to a CBS News transcript that put words into Rick Santorum’s mouth — or one word in particular.  Santorum spoke to a crowd in Iowa yesterday about the fiscal sinkhole of Medicaid, and argued that government shouldn’t redistribute wealth to improve the lives of some at the expense of others.  Santorum stumbled momentarily on the word “lives,” though, and that provided this Rorschach moment for CBS, who reported it thusly on their YouTube channel:

While campaigning in Sioux City, Iowa Sunday, GOP presidential hopeful Rick Santorum said if elected he plans to cut regulations and entitlements and he doesn’t want to “make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money.”

Except that’s not what Santorum said at all. What he said was, “I don’t want to make [pause] lives, people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money.” This makes sense in the context of what immediately preceded this statement: “It [Medicaid] just keeps expanding. I was Indianola a few months ago, and I was talking with someone who works at the Department of Public Welfare here, and she told me that the state of Iowa is going to get fined if they don’t sign up more people under the Medicaid program. They’re just pushing harder and harder to get more and more of you dependent upon them so that they can get your vote.”

In other words, Santorum’s point didn’t have anything to do at all about race; it had to do with creating a dependency class that includes a lot of Iowans for political purposes. Whether one agrees with this or not, it’s pretty standard fare, and it’s certainly a legitimate concern to raise at a time when ObamaCare will expand the number of people eligible for government subsidies to families who make 60% more than the average household income. Instead of listening carefully to what Santorum actually said, CBS just assumed that Santorum was a racist. Don’t they watch the videos before transcribing them at CBS News?

One person who did listen to what Santorum said was my friend Tommy Christopher, who I assume doesn’t agree with Santorum’s point or much else Santorum has to say. Tommy, however, is both honest and thorough, and says that CBS gave Santorum a bum rap:

A review of a clearer version of the video, however, casts serious doubt on whether Santorum actually said “black people’s lives.”

CBS News has posted a cleaner version of Santorum’s remarks, and it seems as though Santorum did not actually say “black people’s lives,” but rather, that he stumbled in mid-sentence with a verbal tic that sounded like that.

“I don’t want to make…mmbligh…people’s lives better” is what it sounds like to me, although CBS News also transcribes it as “”make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money.”

Given the preceding context, in which he talks about the government trying to get more Iowans enrolled in Medicaid, the former explanation makes much more sense than the latter.

The Santorum campaign has still not returned our request for comment.

Here’s the CBS clip. The viewer can judge, but even as an LGBT-friendly liberal, I’m inclined to give Santorum the benefit of the doubt here[.]

“Lives” sounds pretty clear to me, but either way, Santorum wasn’t talking about “black people.” He was talking about all Americans, as the context of his remarks makes obvious. Shame on CBS for this unsubstantiated allegation, and for still not correcting their record.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

It’s so obvious he did not say “black.”. CBS is just following White House marching orders. Make sure EVERY piece you put out screams that the GOP are racists and we’ll give you a cookie.

But on the other hand, I did hear Obama mumble something about hating the Constitution, the middle class, and the military… America, in general. And, then he said, but God, I love those evil corporatists’ money!

Obama says this stuff all the time.

so-notbuyingit on January 3, 2012 at 10:43 AM

I like Rick Perry. But I have concerns with his debate performance. He would be better than BHO as president, but he’d have to face him on a stage.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 9:51 AM

Consider this then…Rick Perry can always improve as a debater but Can Obama improve his dismal governing record…Can Romney?

Perry already has improved in the debates. His back is much better & he’s responding well to professional coaching…

Texans don’t go much for debating…and we have little patience for speechifyin that lasts more than about 15 minutes.

Perry is a product of the tough West Texas region he grew up in…Folks don’t talk much, rarely mention “I” but prefer “we” as in team,family,community or us and they pack in density of meaning in simple phrases. I call it west texas zen. He’s a commonsense plain speaker & always will be. He’s not a lawyer or an intellectual but a regular guy who is self-made & smart enough to studyup, be creative and open minded but grounded, and responsive to voters. That’s kinda why he keeps getting elected, He does his job and voters feel like he’s one of us. (In a recent diary at RedState a Tennesseean wrote that He doesn’t know Rick Perry but that he felt like Rick Perry knows him & that is why he headed to Iowa to volunteer)

Like most Texans he is more comfortable in conversational formats…By comparison Gingrich a History Professor is more comfortable in lecture formats and Q&A. He became a debater due to his time in congress.
Georgians tend to enjoy more flourish in their southern orators.

Perry also has a talent for making his ideas and data accessible to regular voters so they can absorb it as seen on his website.

Bottom line is this.

Nobody in this race can match Rick Perry’s executive record in Texas and nothing better illustrates conservative governance works better than Texas & That is what Obama fears.

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Santorum is not surging – it is a ploy by the media and pollsters
Even the vaunted Des Moines Register Poll, supposedly the best predictor, only had about a quarter of their respondents identify themselves as “likely caucus-goers”. I know enough about polling to know that you can do a LOT with how you phrase the questions and how you pick your sample.

If Governor Perry “surprises” tonight (defined by me as third or better), it will be due, in part in my view, to the almost desperate panic of the combined leftist media and the Beltway Republican Establishment Commentariat, which has collectively drunk the Romney “Electability Kool-Aid”, and like, Reverend Jones, is trying to lead the conservative movement to do so as well, to its, and the country’s detriment.

nancysabet on January 3, 2012 at 10:47 AM

No, I think if you don’t, you’ll probably be ok.

RINO in Name Only on January 3, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Fear of speech will not resolve USA racial division.

exdeadhead on January 3, 2012 at 10:47 AM

So what if Santorum DID say “black people’s lives”?!

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

mountainaires on January 3, 2012 at 10:28 AM

+1. There’s no love lost between me and Mr.Sanitorium, but this is just ridiculous beyond measure. So effing WHAT if that’s really what he said? He might as well say “Pull up your pants, turn down that crap music, get a job and quit whining!”…because he’d still get called racist and it would be TRUE.

MelonCollie on January 3, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Thats not sloppy reporting, its libel and slander.

In a just society, the people responsible for such remarks would be fired and fined.

KMC1 on January 3, 2012 at 10:49 AM

In the sentence prior to the word controversy he says

“They’re just pushing harder and harder to get more and more of you(gestures at the crowd which is all white by the way) dependent upon them(gestures away from the crowd) so they can get your vote.

I don’t see the big deal whether he said black or not in the next sentence because as is clear from the above quote he doesn’t want to make the lives of his all white audience “better” by putting them on welfare either.

Wigglesworth on January 3, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Thank you for pointing out the context.

THis is all PC garbage.

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 10:49 AM

I made this point yesterday. He refers to “YOU” in a room full of white people.

Also, he didn’t “clearly say black.” Anyone who is saying that is being ridiculous. There is no “ck” sound on the end, and the vowel sound is a long “i.”

But as some have pointed out, even if he did say black, it’s a stretch to scream “racist!”

JannyMae on January 3, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Hey, this is the same media and party which “clearly” heard “kill him” in a McCain rally which was in no way discernible, and then “excused” Palin from playing schoolmarm mid-speech, when she did not stop and condemn that person for what was clearly not audible on the best tape the hack media could produce to document it.

You’ll find lock-step Dems’ instant dogma that 1) Santorum said “black” (or it’s “close enough” to reveal the dark hole that they suspect of Santorum’s soul) and 2) insistence that it is not clear enough is spin.

Axeman on January 3, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Fear of speech will not resolve USA racial division.

exdeadhead on January 3, 2012 at 10:47 AM

No one should be afraid to speak about this stuff. And if Santorum had said “Black”, then while it would have been inartful, it wouldn’t have been racist.

But there is a huge difference between saying “There’s a big problem in the Black community” and “Blacks are the dependent class”. The former is talking about a problem, the latter is just slamming people, and doing so in the worst possible way – by lumping a group of people into a “class” based on their race and assigning guilt for the actions of some. We don’t do collectivism on the right, and especially not racial collectivism.

My problems are not with Santorum, whether or not he was mis-heard. My problem is only with what mountainaires himself said. Maybe I’m overreacting.

RINO in Name Only on January 3, 2012 at 10:56 AM

You’re even more dishonest that Perry putting out those hypocritical earmark ads against Santorum even though Gov. Gardasil has taken just as many if not more earmarks himself.

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Define Donor State After you look that up…and see that Texas is tops of that list then get back to me.

Perry’s point is that Santorum,Bachmann,Paul & yes Gingrich as creatures of Washington perpetuated this system and continued Washington DC consolidation and federal blackmail of states through the purse.

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 10:58 AM

he didn’t “clearly say black.” Anyone who is saying that is being ridiculous. There is no “ck” sound on the end, and the vowel sound is a long “i.”

JannyMae on January 3, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Dems are people who can’t tell frickin’ fricatives. When Clinton was heard–much more clearly–on tape saying “Riati” they insisted that without a single fricative sound that he could be saying “Godfrey”.

C’mon, you should know that even if they “buy” that it was a dipthong “i”, the instant-dogma will be “he was going to say ‘black’ but pulled out”–or perhaps “blight people” is a new intensified racist reference to “black people”.

Axeman on January 3, 2012 at 10:59 AM

It might not be a case of liberal bias. When I first listened to the clip I heard “black” too. And it’s not because it’s what I “wanted” to hear or because I hate Santorum; it’s just because it’s the closest thing that would make sense in the sentence. I think our minds naturally interpret something that is not a word (“bligh”) into into the word that it most sensibly resembles. So “bligh” becomes “black.” But after listening to it over and over he definitly does NOT say black. He says “bligh” which of course is not word. Whatever he really meant to say is kind of up in the air I guess.

MikeRuss on January 3, 2012 at 10:59 AM

And this is why I take nothing Ed says seriously ever. He is completely in the tank for Santorum and is willing to outright lie to his readers so that a social conservative doesn’t get harmed. Hey. Ed, I know you don’t want to effect Santorums vote at all in Iowa by telling the truth, but you know Santorum was askeed about it and he didn’t deny it and then he explained why he might have said blacks, right? H, of course you know that, but the truth isn’t important right now when your candidate is surging in the polls.

thphilli on January 3, 2012 at 9:28 AM

This is hilarious. In this thread just yesterday you demanded several times that HA post about this specific item. Now that they do you have a hissy fit because they don’t agree with you. Sorry man but your dead wrong on this and the lengths that you go to to continue to lie about it (and expect others to lie about it too) just make you look more and more foolish.

Scrappy on January 3, 2012 at 10:59 AM

It sounded like he said “pligh” as in a combination of “people’s” and “lives”
Stoic Patriot on January 3, 2012 at 8:56 AM

After looping it and listening to it about 15 times, I think I could get on board with this explanation. I’d certainly like to think he didn’t say “black”.

That being said, his analysis is spot on…

AttilaTheHun on January 3, 2012 at 11:00 AM

unclesmrgol on January 3, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Sorry, I could have been clearer.

I agree with you, as to the “false prism” line of thought.

I thought that by listing all those I could pull out of my “biological hardrive”, it would illustrate that we’ve had both good and bad Presidents who have had prior military experience.

listens2glenn on January 3, 2012 at 11:00 AM

I don’t know how anyone could even believe that’s what he said. In the video he says “all of you” and gestures to a crowd of people who are decidedly not all black. So there’s no correlation between the mere notion of “black people’s lives” and anything else he said in this paragraph.

The Schaef on January 3, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Santorum’s a Northeasterner. NEs can speak extremely fast at sometimes: we’ve turned the three-syllable “probably” into “pry” as in “I’ll pry be there around seven.”

I thinking that he probably elided “people’s” and “lives” together (P and B are the same basic consonant, one voiced, the other voiceless) and came up with “blai”. Being an experienced speaker, knew he had to backtrack and enunciate “people’s lives” in order to make his point.

Nonetheless, I have no doubt that in the media it will soon be unreasonable to think that Santorum said anything but “black”.

Axeman on January 3, 2012 at 11:08 AM

People seem to forget just how much words matter. Don’t forget George Allen, who was railroaded out of office over faux outrage over a supposedly racial epithet. And it isn’t a coincidence that CBS is out there throwing this crap around just a news cycle away from the primary. How many Iowans are going to caucus tonight with the idea that Santorum is a racist?

Happy Nomad on January 3, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Santorum spent 8 years on the Senate Armed Service Committee. That makes him privy to alot more foreign policy info that Perry as Gov of Texas.

The most important function of the President is national defense and this is one of Santorum’s strongest points. Also, Santorum is correct that we simply can’t reduce the foreign aid to Pakistan to zero like Perry wants to do. Pakistan has nukes and we can’t have the it destabilize and have those nukes fall into the wrong hands.

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Reagan didn’t serve on the armed services committee…But he certainly did fine didn’t he?

Santorum thinks he can build a borderwall in the middle of a 1200 mile river cause y’know he went to California once or twice.


John Bolton is advising Rick Perry on foreign policy.

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 11:08 AM

And this is why I take nothing Ed says seriously ever. He is completely in the tank for Santorum and is willing to outright lie to his readers so that a social conservative doesn’t get harmed. Hey. Ed, I know you don’t want to effect Santorums vote at all in Iowa by telling the truth, but you know Santorum was askeed about it and he didn’t deny it and then he explained why he might have said blacks, right? H, of course you know that, but the truth isn’t important right now when your candidate is surging in the polls.

thphilli on January 3, 2012 at 9:28 AM

This is crazy! Ed, AP, and Tina have been relatively fair about all the GOP candidates. I only object to their fairness, because I don’t think we need to be fair to Ron Paul. Instead, he should only be mocked.

thuja on January 3, 2012 at 11:09 AM

And this is why I take nothing Ed says seriously ever. He is completely in the tank for Santorum and is willing to outright lie to his readers so that a social conservative doesn’t get harmed. Hey. Ed, I know you don’t want to effect Santorums vote at all in Iowa by telling the truth, but you know Santorum was askeed about it and he didn’t deny it and then he explained why he might have said blacks, right? H, of course you know that, but the truth isn’t important right now when your candidate is surging in the polls.
thphilli on January 3, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Exactly. Which I alluded to on page 2. A Catholic social conservative, I might add, and yes, I think Morrissey is biased.

Random on January 3, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Who cares whether he said “black” or not? I’m pretty sad about all the race-branding being done to conservative candidates this year. Can we just talk policy and drop the PC bullcrap. It’s so easy to put words in somebody’s mouth through snipping up a Youtube or some old publication that you can spend all day on this garbage. It’s the left that wins when conservatives get hung up on PC.

TXGOP on January 3, 2012 at 11:13 AM

thuja, Tina is totally in the tank for Rick Perry and likes Rick Santorum too, since they’re both social conservatives.

Anything to have someone in the White House encouraging women to keep their hemlines up!

Random on January 3, 2012 at 11:14 AM

And this is why I take nothing Ed says seriously ever. He is completely in the tank for Santorum and is willing to outright lie to his readers so that a social conservative doesn’t get harmed. Hey. Ed, I know you don’t want to effect Santorums vote at all in Iowa by telling the truth, but you know Santorum was askeed about it and he didn’t deny it and then he explained why he might have said blacks, right? H, of course you know that, but the truth isn’t important right now when your candidate is surging in the polls.

thphilli on January 3, 2012 at 9:28 AM

This is hilarious. In this thread just yesterday you demanded several times that HA post about this specific item. Now that they do you have a hissy fit because they don’t agree with you. Sorry man but your dead wrong on this and the lengths that you go to to continue to lie about it (and expect others to lie about it too) just make you look more and more foolish.

Scrappy on January 3, 2012 at 10:59 AM

Zing!

He’s just mad because his guy is an actual racist.

catmman on January 3, 2012 at 11:15 AM

ummm down, I meant to say. I’m for higher hemlines myself.

Random on January 3, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Define Donor State After you look that up…and see that Texas is tops of that list then get back to me.

Perry’s point is that Santorum,Bachmann,Paul & yes Gingrich as creatures of Washington perpetuated this system and continued Washington DC consolidation and federal blackmail of states through the purse.

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Yet again Gov. Gardasil can do no wrong right? You Perry shills are unbelievable.

What about his support for a binational health care with Mexico? Wht’s the excuse for that one??

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 11:16 AM

I listened to clip. It reminds me of when I listened to Stairway to Heaven backwards on a turntable to hear “sssssss tan”–which the lunatics interpreted as “Satan”. Good listening means we should interpret unclear mumbles in terms of context. Obviously, Santorum didn’t mean “black”.

thuja on January 3, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Exactly. Which I alluded to on page 2. A Catholic social conservative, I might add, and yes, I think Morrissey is biased.

Random on January 3, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Personally, I don’t think Ed is biased, but why does it matter even if he is? This is a BLOG. It gives opinions.

This is not an objective news reporting site.

ButterflyDragon on January 3, 2012 at 11:18 AM

ummm down, I meant to say. I’m for higher hemlines myself.

Random on January 3, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Freudian slip, dear?

Tell us some more about YOUR biases. I’d love to hear them. :D

JannyMae on January 3, 2012 at 11:19 AM

I can see why some would think he said black but as many have noted the context suggests that makes little sense.

Even if he had said black I am somewhat perplexed. For years we have seen the likes of Maxine Waters say things like:

“disrespect and contempt for our community.”

Which community?

“I’ve been in this struggle for many years now. I understand racism. I understand that there are a lot of people in this country who don’t care about the problems of the inner city. We have to fight every day that we get up for every little thing that we get. And so I keep struggling.”

So when she brings up racism and the inner city to whom does she refer?

“This nation has always struggled with how it was going to deal with poor people and people of color. Every few years you will see some great change in the way that they approach this. We’ve had the war on poverty that never really got into waging a real war on poverty.”

So she equates people of color and the war on poverty? Is she allowed to say that???/

Does the left not want issues specific to the “black community” addressed or not? Or are they the only ones that can talk that way and not be buried?

CW on January 3, 2012 at 11:20 AM

How can you tell if the American media is misinforming the public?

They’re generating copy/newscasts, etc.

Just like BO, if their lips are moving, they’re lying.

talkingpoints on January 3, 2012 at 11:21 AM

I’m not even opposed to pointing out racial differences per se.

But he said black, and later didn’t deny it.

Random on January 3, 2012 at 11:23 AM

And spending has quadrupled under Gov. Gardasil.

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Ummmm…no

Perry signed the largest budget cuts since WWII & 6 balanced budgets.

Texas has the 2nd lowest debt per capita in the country & 1500 economic refugees from failed blue states move here a day.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/06/04/migration-moving-wealthy-interactive-counties-map.html

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 11:23 AM

I haven’t listened to Glenn Beck for awhile and just turned it on. He’s killing Herr Doktor right now on the newsletters.

Of course, according the thephilli he didn’t right them. He said so last night. But then he said Herr doktor did write them, but not the bad ones.

He’s not just talking about the racial stuff but killing him what he wrote about homosexuals, ‘black helicopters’, and various and sundry other stuff – OOOHHHH, he just threw out his anti-Israel stuff…

lol.

Just remember:

Herr Doktor didn’t write ANY of it (except the stuff he did write) so there’s nothing to see here.

And Rick Santorum is the REAL racist, or something…

Move along.

catmman on January 3, 2012 at 11:24 AM

I think it’s clear that Santorum is just trying here to pull votes away votes from Ron Paul.

/

stefanite on January 3, 2012 at 11:24 AM

ummm down, I meant to say. I’m for higher hemlines myself.

Random on January 3, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Freudian slip, dear?

Tell us some more about YOUR biases. I’d love to hear them. :D

JannyMae on January 3, 2012 at 11:19 AM

He was spouting racial crap (his racism is based on Science!!) in a thread the other night.

Him and commenter theprimordialorderedpair if I’m remembering right.

catmman on January 3, 2012 at 11:27 AM

Haven’t Stephen Bloom’s U of Iowa JournoTard graduates figured out that this kind of “racism” is sooo 2008.

You want racism in 2012? Go to any “mainstream” media outlet. Look to the comment section on any story about shoe riots, flash mobs, ect. Once upon a time, Little Green Retards had to employ sock puppets to plant a few of those kind of comments at Hot Air. Now they’re 99.9% of any comment section (including CBS News) about certain stories.

That must mean CBS news is racist…right?

MNHawk on January 3, 2012 at 11:27 AM

What about his support for a binational health care with Mexico? Wht’s the excuse for that one??

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 11:16 AM

It was a feasibility study dating from 2001. (Things have changed a bit since then) & the conclusion of the study was that it wasn’t feasible. It could have been a clever way for Mexico to pay for their squatters in the colonias since Texas cannot deport them but we foot the bill.

“Health care along the U.S. side of the border is in disastrous shape

It’s an innovative solution to a serious problem. As the 2003 Texas report put it, “health conditions on the Texas-Mexico border are among the worst in the U.S., so distressful at times that reports on health conditions suggest a remote country in need of medical missionaries, not a part of Texas.” In 2003, two million people were living along the Texas side of the border, with 34% living below the federal poverty level, compared to 14% for the remainder of the state. Health outcomes and health status are correspondingly poor. In 1999, 30% of Texan children in the region, and 35% of adults below the age of 65, were uninsured.

Legal cross-border employment is substantial. As Kevin Williamson of National Review points out, more than a million people live on one side of the Texas-Mexico border and legally work on the other side. Kevin goes on to explain:

Let’s say you’re a Mexican national working in Laredo, Texas, with a wife and children in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico. You can buy health insurance for yourself through an employer-provided plan — but not for your wife and children, and not a plan that covers expenses for treatment in Mexico if you get sick or injured while you are there. Health insurance that doesn’t cover you where you are, or that excludes your family, is not terribly useful. And if those uninsured spouses and children get sick or injured, whose emergency rooms are they going to end up in? Mexico’s? Probably not.

Such reforms would provide an important free-market alternative to the so-called “free-rider” problem of uninsured illegal immigrants seeking uncompensated care in U.S. emergency rooms. Bi-national insurance could also help reduce Medicaid spending, which is of course funded by taxpayers.

Medical tourism is a promising approach to reducing health costs…”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/09/26/rick-perrys-intriguing-idea-for-bi-national-health-insurance/

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 11:32 AM

catmman on January 3, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Those letters are filled with so much lunacy that if you removed every racist, antisemitic, and antigay comment, they would still be more damaging than all of the rest of the candidates’ flaws and gaffes combined.

There’s so much High-Octane Crazy there that we could probably achieve energy independence if there were only a way to harness it.

RINO in Name Only on January 3, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Sorry, I haven’t read all the comments but why is it we need Obamacare, and all it will cost, if Iowa can’t get “enough” people to sign up of the program designed to help poor people? I’m feeling a disconnect between actual needs and the governments need for control.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 11:36 AM

thuja, Tina is totally in the tank for Rick Perry and likes Rick Santorum too, since they’re both social conservatives.

Anything to have someone in the White House encouraging women to keep their hemlines up!

Random on January 3, 2012 at 11:14 AM

I’m sure you are right about Tina’s personal preferences, but I don’t think it has controlled her writing here.

While I strongly disagree with Tina about abortion and gay marriage, I agreed with her New Year’s Eve post about modesty. I don’t think people should be dressing to be sex objects. In fact, I would have gone further than Tina and denounced high heels as bad for the health in addition to dressing for sex appeal. I even apply rather modest notions of modesty in my own dress. I only wear shorts with long inseams and avoid tight fitting clothing.

thuja on January 3, 2012 at 11:37 AM

Random on January 3, 2012 at 11:23 AM

The word black doesn’t seem to have any context to the rest of his remarks.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 11:38 AM

I’m feeling a disconnect between actual needs and the governments need for control.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Governments’ needs are actual too. The nanny state has wants and hopes and dreams just like the rest of us. Shame on you for not being more supportive of our big brother.

RINO in Name Only on January 3, 2012 at 11:43 AM

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 11:16 AM

“Rick Santorum, in his day the U.S. senator I most admired, is an embarrassment as a no-hoper presidential candidate — and nowhere has that been more painfully evident than in his attempt to characterize Rick Perry as being soft on illegal immigration. Last night, he ridiculed a health-insurance initiative Governor Perry had supported for the benefit of those living on the Texas–Mexico border. “He gave a speech in 2001 in which in talked about ‘binational health insurance’ between Mexico and Texas,” Santorum said. “I don’t think even Barack Obama would be in favor of binational health insurance.” This was followed by thunderous applause from an audience that clearly didn’t know anything more about the issue than Santorum does.

(That would include you Levinfan)

“Which is to say, Santorum was giving Perry grief for having the audacity to suggest that insurance companies ought to be allowed to sell insurance to whom they please and where they please, that consumers ought to have more choices, and that we can alleviate the costs of providing health care to the uninsured by letting markets work. No doubt Barack Obama would be opposed — but why is Rick Santorum? Two possible answers to that question: 1. He is engaging in cheap demagoguery. 2. He has no idea what he is talking about.

“There’s a boatload of illegal immigrants in Texas, to be sure. There’s also a boatload of illegal immigrants in Santorum’s native Pennsylvania, and an even bigger boatload in the Washington suburbs, where he now lives. Texas’s binational health-insurance initiative was not a plan to have the government buy immigrants insurance; it was a plan to let them — and Americans living along the border — buy insurance for themselves.

Governor Perry has got a lot of grief for allegedly coddling illegals, but here’s something to keep in mind: Governors don’t set federal border policy — they just have to deal with its real-world consequences. Congress writes the law.

A guy (Gov. Perry) who wants to deploy Predator drones and the U.S. military to police the border, who would ban sanctuary cities, and who handed the Obama administration a $350 million bill for the cost of dealing with illegals in Texas is not an open-borders squish.

Santorum ought to approach the issue with a little more circumspection. He spent a decade and a half in Washington, during which time the federal government did approximately zilch on border security, while Perry — who does not have an army or the power to make immigration policy — has dispatched the Texas Rangers, along with millions of dollars, to do a job that Washington ought to be doing but isn’t…

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/278207/santorums-ill-advised-border-war-kevin-d-williamson

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 11:44 AM

The Left once again pounced based upon dishonest assumptions, dishonest accusations as to who they were jumping on.

Santorum’s statement is quite laudible, to the contrary of what CBS/the Left has tried to rework his statement to mean that it doesn’t mean.

The Left’s addiction to welfare, Medicaid reliance, the whole government dependency lifestyle, is the problem yet again and yet again, we see that it is.

Santorum, a social conservative, by this point should expect this sort of deceitful maligning from the Left and from social liberals among the Right, though that doesn’t make these ongoing maligning any more palatable or acceptable.

Lourdes on January 3, 2012 at 11:44 AM

The word black doesn’t seem to have any context to the rest of his remarks.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Why is it that some totally ignore that fact even though it has been pointed out over and over and over and…………?

CW on January 3, 2012 at 11:44 AM

And so it begins with Santorum now….

jeffn21 on January 3, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Why is it that some totally ignore that fact even though it has been pointed out over and over and over and…………?

CW on January 3, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Because it doesn’t help them push their candidate.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 11:51 AM

CW on January 3, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Because they want you to believe it is some kind of Freudian slip that shows his deep seated racism.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 11:51 AM

Nobody in this race can match Rick Perry’s executive record in Texas and nothing better illustrates conservative governance works better than Texas & That is what Obama fears.

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Again, I like Perry. He’s closer to being a Conservative than Romney, (who I admit was my guy in 08 before McCain) But also, nobody in this race fell in the polls as drastically as him (Perry) after a horrid debate performance. But if he wins the nomination, he gets my money and he gets my support. I hope his debate performance does get better.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Because they want you to believe it is some kind of Freudian slip that shows his deep seated racism.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 11:51 AM

Which kills me.

Actual racism, anti-semitism and conspiracist nut-ballery is excused, justified and equivocated.

catmman on January 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Ummmm…no

Perry signed the largest budget cuts since WWII & 6 balanced budgets.

Texas has the 2nd lowest debt per capita in the country & 1500 economic refugees from failed blue states move here a day.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/06/04/migration-moving-wealthy-interactive-counties-map.html

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Ummmmm….yes

Rick Perry tripled Texas’s debt during his governorship and has increased spending every single year, cumulatively faster than inflation and population growth combined. Yet you are blind to these facts for some reason.

Actually (and these numbers are the official numbers from the State of Texas CAFRs and from the U.S. Bureaus of the Census and Labor Statistics), between FY2001 and FY2010 debt increased 184.2% (12.3% per year), Texas population increased 18.2% (1.9% per year), and inflation was approximately 18.7% (1.9% per year).
184.2% – 18.2% – 18.7% = 147.3% (or 10.6% per year).

Therefore, during Perry’s governorship (through 2010) Texas’s debt grew 10.6% faster per year than inflation and population growth combined.

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 11:57 AM

This is what we’re up against folks. From a post in my facebook thread:

Please Vote smart, Vote Demarcate…..

Republican Yogi on January 3, 2012 at 12:01 PM

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 11:44 AM

The excuses never stop!!!

http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/23/santorum-perry-wanted-texas-mexico-health-care/

I take it as Perry allowing the gov’t expand access to Mexcio, viewing Texas and Mexico as one region. Kind of like the Trans Texas Corridor debacle.

“Legislation authored by border legislators Pat Haggerty and Eddie Lucio establishes an important study that will look at the feasibility of bi-national health insurance,” Perry said then. “This study recognizes that the Mexican and U.S. sides of the border compose one region, and we must address health care problems throughout that region. That’s why I am also excited that Texas Secretary of State Henry Cuellar is working on an initiative that could extend the benefits of telemedicine to individuals living on the Mexican side of the border.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/23/santorum-perry-wanted-texas-mexico-health-care/#ixzz1iPp9HFHh

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 12:02 PM

And so it begins with Santorum now….

jeffn21 on January 3, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Yep, time for the Paulnuts to isolate and attack another candidate, with the help of the MSM. Obama taught them well.

Norky on January 3, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Again, I like Perry. He’s closer to being a Conservative than Romney, (who I admit was my guy in 08 before McCain) But also, nobody in this race fell in the polls as drastically as him (Perry) after a horrid debate performance. But if he wins the nomination, he gets my money and he gets my support. I hope his debate performance does get better.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM

I like the 2 best conservatives in Bachmann and Santorum. I’ll support Santy if he continues the well deserved push and finishes in the top 3 tonight. We need a conservatie to beat Mittens and RuPaul.

I don’t like Perry but at this point I’d probably take him over Newt. Definitely over Mittens and RuPaul.

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Just curious – did CBS News pay any attention to the Obama campaign giving up on white workers?

The Rogue Tomato on January 3, 2012 at 12:06 PM

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 12:04 PM

We’re not so far from our rationales. I’m really not leaning yet though. I’m just soaking it all in.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 12:08 PM

My post on Stanford’s comments: http://politicalseason.blogspot.com/2012/01/rick-santorum-surges-in-iowa-with.html

Ed, you are getting a total fail from me here. What he said in your cleaner version of the video is clear as day. He said black people. Conservatives are all going to sit around and make this some version of the Rodney King video now? When CBS asked him about the comment, he didn’t say that he didn’t say black. He tried to suggest that he said black because he might have been talking about “Waiting for Superman” which he said was about black children. So even in HIS immediate response to a question about the comment, he didn’t claim he never said that.

I understand the instant reaction to defend against a charge of racism. Black people have thrown the term around so indiscriminately that it has now become nearly useless for public discourse, and we’ve won the war on racism. White people believe its evil and are horrified to be accused of it. I get it. But it is positively surreal to see people look at that video and claim he didn’t say what he obviously said because nobody really wants to challenge the implicit assumptions in his statement that blacks are dependent on government welfare, or the meme that blacks are stealing the money of good hard working white folks via the government because we are too lazy to work for ourselves.

That meme is factually incorrect. White people are the largest beneficiaries of welfare. Farm subsidies, social security, corporate bailouts; those are unearned financial payments payed for with tax dollars and the cost of which dwarfs transfer payments to blacks in AFDC or WIC or whatever. But on the stump in the 97% white state of Iowa, in a 97% white crowd (except the black cameraman behind him maybe?) to make his point about government dependency, he makes blacks his illustration with comments which implicitly suggest blacks are dependent on government, lazy and are taking money from hard working white people so they don’t have to work? And now, smart commentators like you Ed are gonna give that a pass? It seems like we all want to have a frank discussion about race when we can talk up these memes that make black people out as the problem, but we don’t want to talk frankly about race to challenge this divisive BS? Just wow. All so we can avoid calling Santorum a racist? Why? Because a huge portion of the GOP electorate agree with what he said and if what he said was racially biased and divisive and we agreed with it, well what does that say about you?

You don’t want to call Santorum a racist, then don’t. I don’t believe the man is a racist either. But his comments WERE chock full of racial stereotypes and economically scapegoated blacks as taking money from white folks. Its horrifically divisive and he’s running for president in Iowa and got applause for those comments. Ed, you don’t want to deal with it so badly that you can just listen to the video and make yourself believe he didn’t say it? Absurd.

Obama’s 2008 campaign comments about bitter and clinging white working class voters in PA was full of implicit assumptions about white working class voters and they were rightly pissed off about it. You jumped on Obama for that, correctly. This is NO different, but you’re gonna give Santorum a pass? By telling blacks they didn’t hear him say what their lying ears heard him say? Really?

Rush will be defending this today I’m sure and I can’t wait to hear his defense. At least I can count on him not to insult my intelligence by telling me I didn’t hear what I heard. Rush will likely double down on Santorum’s comments and economically scapegoat black people even more (forced reparations anyone?).

When a popular candidate like Santorum can say something like that and NO ONE in the conservative community or the GOP will call it out, you lose credibility and on the subject of race, you just lack integrity. Black people just got economically scapegoated on the campaign trail and your first defense is he didn’t say it. And if he did say it, you’re gonna claim he has a basis for saying that about blacks. Just wow. But black folks are crazy when they don’t support republican candidates or policies. You are all bewildered that blacks don’t support the GOP. Surreal. When a GOP candidate can egregiously slander blacks like that and NOBODY is gonna call him on it or push back about it, you have ZERO basis to complain when blacks don’t give GOP policy or candidates a hearing. My full post about this: http://politicalseason.blogspot.com/2012/01/rick-santorum-surges-in-iowa-with.html

Political Season on January 3, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Again, I like Perry. He’s closer to being a Conservative than Romney, (who I admit was my guy in 08 before McCain) But also, nobody in this race fell in the polls as drastically as him (Perry) after a horrid debate performance. But if he wins the nomination, he gets my money and he gets my support. I hope his debate performance does get better.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM

His debate performances are the number one reason he crashed in the polls and his brain freeze clinched his demise. People are scared to death of BHO winning another term and can’t afford to have someone that locks up in a debate.

Meanwhile, the Paulnuts continue to sharpen their Alinsky chops, here at Hot Atmosphere.

Norky on January 3, 2012 at 12:10 PM

catmman on January 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM

It is funny how that works.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 12:12 PM

My full post about this: http://politicalseason.blogspot.com/2012/01/rick-santorum-surges-in-iowa-with.html

Political Season on January 3, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Did you write the main story up on your site?

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Political Season on January 3, 2012 at 12:09 PM

It makes no sense for Santy to be singling out blacks only. In the preceding sentence he SAID that the gov’t wants to make all of you (everyone in the room which were mostly white) dependent on them.

Context matters as Ed already explained.

But go ahead and try to use liberal smear attacks and be the PC police to take down a good conservative.

Hope you’re proud of yourself.

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 12:26 PM

It’s pretty obvious he didn’t say “black people’s lives better”. What he said sounds like a minor and nanosecond verbal stumble that resolved itself as something like “but, a lot of people’s lives better”.

There’s no charge of racism to be made here. The man is definitely not guilty on this account, and those he claim he is guilty either have a tin ear or are pursuing a dullard agenda.

Sadly, though, it should be noted that making [indecipherable] people’s lives better by giving them “somebody else’s money” is a fairly standard condition of a developed and civilized democratic state.

Indeed, in such a state, the very notion that we all have “our money” is such a simplistic and infantile idea that it beggars belief. And that such a notion should be mouthed by someone hoping to be president of the United States is utterly staggering.

Mr. Santorum, as is blindingly obvious, is not going to be the next president of the United States.

JackieB on January 3, 2012 at 12:35 PM

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Good grief, that’s not it at 12:09 p.m.? There’s something longer?

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Like most Texans he is more comfortable in conversational formats…By comparison Gingrich a History Professor is more comfortable in lecture formats and Q&A. He became a debater due to his time in congress.
Georgians tend to enjoy more flourish in their southern orators.

Stereotyping candidates in order to make excuses for them is bad practice. It gives the left license to stereotype them for their own benefit.

You’re making excuses, very bad ones at that.

Capitalist Hog on January 3, 2012 at 12:41 PM

JackieB on January 3, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Did you miss the point that Iowa is in danger of being fined for not having enough of a “standard condition of a developed and civilized democratic state”? You don’t think it is odd to penalize a state for not having enough people to give “our money” to?

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 12:43 PM

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Good grief, that’s not it at 12:09 p.m.? There’s something longer?

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 12:38 PM

I’ll save you the time. It concludes that he did say balck and the writer fully asserts Santorum is a racist. Not much else there of note except for some links to some good sites.

This was his title of his story.

“Rick Santorum Surges in Iowa with Stereotypes of Lazy Blacks Taking Welfare Out of White People’s Pockets”

Sounds like Daily Kos or Huffington Post stuff.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Are you guys being -willfully- dense? (Don’t answer that).

The issue isn’t whether he said, “I don’t want to make black people’s lives better”. He did.

It’s what he said, immediately after..

“by giving them other people’s money.”

That is the classic GOP/Lee Atwater Southern Strategy.

In other words, “I won’t give the money of you hard-working white folks, to the n*ggers.”

inklake on January 3, 2012 at 12:47 PM

the lsm is still pushing this big time….

cmsinaz on January 3, 2012 at 12:48 PM

inklake on January 3, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Thanks for your opinion.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM

inklake on January 3, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Thanks for your opinion.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Your comments are very similar to political season. You’re not him are you?

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Political Season on January 3, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Wow, you really went out of your way to stretch nothing into something major. Did you hurt yourself doing all that twisting and turning?

JannyMae on January 3, 2012 at 1:00 PM

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 11:57 AM

3rd Least Debt-Ridden State n 2009: Texas
The Lonestar State’s debt load may be low, but so are its coffers, and Texas cities and towns are feeling the pinch.

According to the office of Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, “[Texas Comptroller Susan] Combs sent Texas cities $342.6 million in sales tax allocations, down 8.3 percent compared to November 2008. So far this calendar year, city sales tax allocations are down 4.2 percent compared to the same time period last year. Texas counties received November sales tax allocations of $28.2 million, down 14.5 percent compared to one year ago. For the calendar year-to-date, county sales tax allocations are running 3.7 percent below 2008 revenues.”

Total State Debt: $33,299,313,000

Total Population: 24,326,974

Debt per Resident: $1,368.82

http://www.mainstreet.com/slideshow/moneyinvesting/credit/debt/most-debt-ridden-states-america

[edit] Budget for the 2012-13 Biennium

Revenue Reports:

In December 2011, Comptroller Susan Combs wrote a letter to lawmakers stating that tax collections were on pace to produce a $1.6 billion budget surplus for the fiscal biennium ending in 2013. The state’s Rainy Day Fund at the end of 2013 is forecast to reach $7.3 billion, the comptroller said.[6]

In September 2011, sales-tax receipts in the state rose to a record $1.76 billion, up nearly 12% from the prior year, according to Combs. She attributed the increase to the rise in spending, led by the oil and gas industries.[7] The rise continued in October 2011, when sales tax revenues rose to $2.07 billion, which was about 9 percent higher than expected. The increase is good news for the state budget given that sales tax dollars account for approximately 60 percent of the general revenue the state uses to pay for basic services, including public education and prisons.[8]

The State Comptroller
http://www.window.state.tx.us/


The Democrats in the legislature want to see more of the state’s rainy day fund used to support education. [31] Gov. Perry is opposed to tapping the state’s rainy day fund, which has approximately $9.7 billion.

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/Texas_state_budget

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 1:02 PM

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 12:46 PM

S.O.P. this primary season is if you tick up in the polls, you must be destroyed, utterly and completely.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 1:03 PM

JannyMae on January 3, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Yep, he added a bunch to it to make his point stronger, but we’re dense because we don’t see it. If you wasted your time on his site, you’ll see a little soft racism of his own. Lots of white stereotypes.

S.O.P. this primary season is if you tick up in the polls, you must be destroyed, utterly and completely.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 1:03 PM

No Cindy, we do that exclusively to Ron Paul. No one else.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 1:07 PM

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Bless his/her heart, it managed to get a shot in at the South. Shouldn’t there be something about religion coming up? Step it up, people, don’t worry about being subtle.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 1:09 PM

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 1:07 PM

I don’t know, apparently I have been sadly lacking in carrying out my duties to crush “vicious and vile” remarks about Romney.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Yep, he added a bunch to it to make his point stronger, but we’re dense because we don’t see it. If you wasted your time on his site, you’ll see a little soft racism of his own. Lots of white stereotypes.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Wouldn’t say it was “soft.” To quote Political Season, I’d say it was “egregiously.”

Deanna on January 3, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Stereotyping candidates in order to make excuses for them is bad practice. It gives the left license to stereotype them for their own benefit.

You’re making excuses, very bad ones at that.

Capitalist Hog on January 3, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Perry likes BBQ,Guns,Well Made Cowboy Boots,the 10th Amendment,Jesus & Shiner http://www.shiner.com/

I doubt he’s worried about being sterotyped…Most Texans aren’t.

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Deanna on January 3, 2012 at 1:11 PM

I’m accused of being too polite.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Even Santorum doesn’t deny saying it. He just said he wasn’t sure of the context of why he said it.

Pretty funny that the guy doesn’t deny saying it, but so many people here insist our lying ears are deceiving us.

ButterflyDragon on January 3, 2012 at 1:18 PM

@hawkdriver – If you want to engage, have your facts straight. my own blog post does NOT call the man a racist. Not once. I have real problems with the racial bias in his statements, with the racially biased, prejudiced and stereotypical assumptions in his statements. The racial issues are there, point blank.

Do I believe Santorum hates black people or something like that? No. Do I think he shares a common sort of racial stereotype with the GOP electorate, one that makes everybody just want to get on board when he suggests that blacks are all on welfare and taking money out of white people’s pockets? Yes.

So get it straight. My argument is that there is a lot of racially biased BS in his comments. Which is true. I don’t have to call him a racist to call out the divisive nature of what he said. You and anyone else who calls themselves a principled conservative have ZERO integrity or credibility on the topic of race if you are going to give Santorum a pass on this. If you called out Obama for bitter and clinging because of what he implied about white working class voters but you are silent on Santorum’s comments, you have zero integrity as a conservative on the subject of race. Zero.

Political Season on January 3, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Bless his/her heart, it managed to get a shot in at the South. Shouldn’t there be something about religion coming up? Step it up, people, don’t worry about being subtle.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Oh thank God, subtlety is teh suck.

How about: All white Christian American southerners are racists who harbor animosity to those of different faiths and from different regions and countries.

Do I win? I made sure to put the religion in there, as requested, and I kept it on topic, with the racism, plus I added the south, AND I put in some nationalism stuff for extra credit.

RINO in Name Only on January 3, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Political Season on January 3, 2012 at 1:20 PM

You not only do all the things I’ve already said and then some. You allude that the Tea Party is racist.

hawkdriver on January 3, 2012 at 1:22 PM

I have real problems with the racial bias in his statements, with the racially biased, prejudiced and stereotypical assumptions in his statements. The racial issues are there, point blank.

Your opinion. Period. Along with everything else you wrote.

You took one word from what Santorum said, completely out of context, and completely IGNORED the context, in order to promote this opinion. You made one assumption, that Santorum said “black,” then you embellished and embellished and embellished to support your opinion that it was “racial.”

Your post is extremely dishonest, and your claim that anyone who doesn’t agree with your opinion has “zero integrity” is the most dishonest of all. Bluntly speaking, you’re so full of crap it must be oozing from your eye sockets.

JannyMae on January 3, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Even Santorum doesn’t deny saying it. He just said he wasn’t sure of the context of why he said it.

Pretty funny that the guy doesn’t deny saying it, but so many people here insist our lying ears are deceiving us.

ButterflyDragon on January 3, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Oh please. No one on a campaign trail actually remembers offhand which things they did and didn’t say off the cuff. If someone told me I had said something like that, and they said it was a direct quote, I would figure its more likely that they took it out of context, rather than just made it up. The media does sometimes do the latter, but the former is the more common modus operande.

The lack of a denial is meaningless in this case.

RINO in Name Only on January 3, 2012 at 1:33 PM

Even Santorum doesn’t deny saying it. He just said he wasn’t sure of the context of why he said it.

Pretty funny that the guy doesn’t deny saying it, but so many people here insist our lying ears are deceiving us.

ButterflyDragon on January 3, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Where is the part where he admitted he said it? In the link I saw, he didn’t seem to remember what he said, and people were trying to morph the “lack of denial” into an “admission. ”

I’ll take my lying ears over your lying ears, after evaluating the context of what he said, when he said it. He said it in front of a group of white people, referring to them as “you.” YOU have to ignore that, in order to continue to believe what your lying ears heard.

JannyMae on January 3, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Even Santorum doesn’t deny saying it. He just said he wasn’t sure of the context of why he said it.

Pretty funny that the guy doesn’t deny saying it, but so many people here insist our lying ears are deceiving us.

ButterflyDragon on January 3, 2012 at 1:18 PM

He slipped off his mask in front of cameras for a second, I doubt he’ll want to draw any more attention to it. “I don’t want to make blaaargh peoples lives better”? lol.

mythicknight on January 3, 2012 at 1:47 PM

The stress of a political campaign can be unbelievable, and sometimes you get tired and say things that just come out wrong. It happened to me in February 1980. Ronnie’s plane was stuck in New Hampshire during a snowstorm, so I filled in for him with a speech in Chicago. A telephone hookup had been arranged, and Ronnie called me so he could say hello to the crowd. When he mentioned that he was looking out at all the beautiful white snow, I replied, “And I’m looking out at all these beautiful white faces.”

As soon as the words left my mouth, I thought, Oh my God, I didn’t mean it that way. I quickly corrected myself, but it was too late. The press took it as a racial remark, which is certainly not what I had intended. It soon blew over, but I took a lot of heat for a couple of days.

It’s incredibly easy to make this kind of mistake during a campaign. You get tired and numb, and reporters keep after you…

My Turn: The Memoirs of Nancy Reagan
Page 48

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on January 3, 2012 at 1:47 PM

RINO in Name Only on January 3, 2012 at 1:22 PM

You are an artist!

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on January 3, 2012 at 1:47 PM

The sad thing is that a gaff can now take you out of the running. I’ve had a few moments where I have over reacted myself. I get over it but the comments are already out there with no way to retrieve them. I hate when I speak before I think.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 1:51 PM

You are an artist!

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Thank you. Though I might be guilty of plagiarism now, since I’m pretty sure what I said is almost a direct quote from about 6 months ago by the late, unlamentad Narutoboy. Now there was an artist. I guess true greatness really is never recognized in its own time.

RINO in Name Only on January 3, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Did you miss the point that Iowa is in danger of being fined for not having enough of a “standard condition of a developed and civilized democratic state”? You don’t think it is odd to penalize a state for not having enough people to give “our money” to?

Yes. I did miss that point. Would you be so kind as to spell it out for me?

When I said “state”, I meant, of course, something akin to “country”. Oddly, I was making a broader point that refers to something a bit bigger than a very minor territorial division in a federal republic.

Financial transfers happen every single second of every single day, and if you (I don’t mean you personally, I mean “one”) live in the “heartland” then for the most part those transfers redound to your personal benefit.

You know why it’s a good idea for Americans to give some pitiful and paltry sum of money to god-forsaken Haiti? Well, because it’s the Christian thing to do. And apart from that, it’s because if we don’t, the beaches of Florida will be awash with Haitians both live and dead.

To reiterate my basic point from an earlier post … to think that we all have “our money” in a developed and civilized and democratic country is to be a child.

To know that this is true, and still to pander to the economically illiterate, is to be a dunce or a mindless cynic.

I don’t know which of these Mr. Santorum is. I don’t care. What does matter is that Mr. Santorum is never, ever, going to be the president of the United States.

If you like the guy, then I’m dreadfully sorry about that.

JackieB on January 3, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 1:51 PM

‘Let him who is without sin’ and all that jazz. Especially when the spotlight heat gets turned on you 24/7, something Mr. Santorum has been waiting for most of last year, there’s no whistle to call back potentially devastating flubs (ask my beloved Gov. Perry). Still, newsies will overdose on faux outrage while I pour a glass of paisano and toast Rick Santorum…”I ain’t mad at you, dude.”

:)

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on January 3, 2012 at 2:04 PM

So he did not say that he “wanted to make “black people’s lives better.”

It was strange to me how some people behaved as though he had said “I want to make black people’s lives worse.”

TigerPaw on January 3, 2012 at 2:05 PM

The Democrats in the legislature want to see more of the state’s rainy day fund used to support education. [31] Gov. Perry is opposed to tapping the state’s rainy day fund, which has approximately $9.7 billion.

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/Texas_state_budget

workingclass artist on January 3, 2012 at 1:02 PM

http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com/2011/08/05/governor-palin-leading-the-fight-on-debt-and-liabilities/

LevinFan on January 3, 2012 at 2:27 PM

A Split in the Santorum Clan

JohnGalt23 on January 3, 2012 at 2:30 PM

As a Pennsylvanian and someone who has followed Rick’s career closely and having met and spoken with him on several occasions, I know that Rick is not a racist or a bigot. He stumbled over “people’s lives” and it came out “pligh… people’s lives.” Say what you will about him, but there is no denying that he is a rock-solid person – which is to say that he clearly loves everyone and wants only the best for people, black, white, gay, muslim, etc. That’s what conservatism is. He is what we conservatives say we want – someone who doesn’t pander to interest groups but tells it like it is. He certainly inflames the gay mafia and Paulites who are represented in this thread, but that is what the Truth has a tendency to do.

TheTownsman on January 3, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5