Apparently, last June a Rick Santorum staffer sent a private e-mail from his personal e-mail account to a friend. The e-mail questioned if there was a Biblical basis for the stance that a woman should not be president. (Not a stance I share, personally.)
Now the left is claiming that since Santorum did not immediately and publicly denounce a private e-mail that wasn't even sent to him, and that there is no proof he ever saw, it means he shares and celebrates this staffer's opinion.
The hell? Are they holding Obama to the same standard of analyzing his employees' personal e-mails and publicly denouncing any personal viewpoints with which he disagrees?
8 comments:
Please be respectful and courteous, and I will reciprocate.
Note to commenters: sometimes long comments, or comments that contain links, are sent to the comment moderation folder (or sometimes the spam folder). If you comment and it doesn't show up right away, chances are it went to comment moderation or spam. Rather than re-posting your comment, please e-mail me and ask me to check these folders. Thanks!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
It's frustrating to "like" a pro-life Facebook page, only to later read a post that directly attacks my Church, my faith and m... -
I was disappointed (but not altogether surprised) to read a post at The American Catholic today in which blogger Donald McCleary agrees wi...
-
Emerging from my blogging hiatus to address a particularly tiresome article from the "holier-than-thou" Church brigade. This tim...
They're grasping for straws. That, and they're total nutbars.
ReplyDelete"They" NEVER hold Obama to any standards, because he'd fail every time.
ReplyDeleteThis is just crazy. Did you hear though that Santorum has now officially beat Romney in Iowa? :)
Of course they're not. Obama does stuff that any Republican president (or candidate for president) would get raked over the coals for doing. It's SO unbelievably biased.
ReplyDeletethis is why I just can't pay very close attention- politics is so frustrating
ReplyDeleteby the way- your children's names are beautiful!
Of course they hold Obama to the same standard, at least if "they" is referring to the media. Republican-based media are just as harsh on Obama as Democrat-based media are on Republican presidential candidates.
ReplyDeleteConsider one issue that will never die: Obama's birth certificate. The only reason this has become a big button issue for so called "birthers" is because his name is Barack Obama, a foreign name, indicating their thought that he could not possibly be American borne. (To me, it screams RACISM, but that's my opinion.) Whether or not you agree with the birth certificate, the fact that they continuously hammer that issue out shows just how harsh they are on Obama.
The media on both sides are going to be harsh on their opponents (and the liberal media, especially Huffington Post, does not let Obama off the hook for his moderate tendencies). That's the name of the game. And if a candidate can't stand the pressure, or if their campaign tanks because they weren't prepared for onslaught of scrutiny (think Al Gore, McCain, Edwards, etc), then they probably weren't ready anyway.
Politics are harsh. Do I agree with the pressure placed on candidates? No, but that's the current system and there is plenty of proof that harsh criticism goes both ways.
Actually, Amber, you just proved me correct. You haven't been able to provide any examples of how the Left holds Obama accountable for analyzing his employees' personal e-mails and publicly denouncing any personal viewpoints with which he disagrees.. That is the standard Rick Santorum is being held to; why not Obama as well?
DeleteAnd don't get me started about how the right-wing media is fawning over Romney (ugh) to the exclusion of all other GOP candidates.
Let me share a FB exchange I had on with another person on a friend's link the other day (the link about this story, as a matter of fact):
Her: "Did you know Karen Santorum shacked up with an abortionist 30 years her senior before she met Rick? What a hypocrite."
Me: "Actually, [Name], there's no proof of that."
Her: "Well, it's all over the internet!"
Me: "...that doesn't make it true."
By her standards, Obama is indeed a foreign citizen because "it's all over the internet!" Give me a break. So, there are nutjobs on the left, too.
All I ask is that the media hold all candidates to the same standards, but they're not.
Well, since you asked, Obama was heavily criticized for his pastor's remarks. HIS PASTOR. This wasn't even a person in his employ, he was a religious leader of the church Obama attended. (See: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/DemocraticDebate/story?id=4443788&page=1#.TxmqJ29SQrU and http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/15/us/politics/15wright.html) (He also denounced these views, btw.) If Rick Santorum's employee is saying something disturbing, someone that he hired, then how is it not similar or even worse that Obama was criticized for things his pastor said, someone who isn't in his family or in his employ?
DeleteSo, of course Obama was scrutinized while he was running for president. Currently, the scrutiny has died down primarily because the race for republican nominees is HOT and the better story.
I am not arguing over the validity of charging Santorum with anti-women sentiment, I am arguing over your assertion that Obama was/is not as heavily scrutinized. I listen to actual liberal podcasts and read liberal blogs (b/c those media outlets people criticize as being left-leaning are not liberal) and can tell you that Obama is getting heavily hit over his public policies (that as liberals we are disgusted with) and his appointments to positions within the government (see Larry Summbers: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/18/obama-larry-summers-world-bank_n_1214625.html) because of THEIR memos/e-mails.
So, yes, Obama goes through the same process.
Well, given that Obama (assumedly) receives (or received) moral direction from his pastor, I think it's very relevant since it could influence what moral decisions he makes in his capacity as president. If he found what his pastor had to say abhorrent, why didn't he leave the church? That indicates one of two things: (1) Either he didn't find what his pastor had to say abhorrent, which is worrisome, or (2) he sat in a man's church for TWENTY YEARS and didn't listen to a word he said, which indicates he doesn't take his faith seriously - also worrisome.
DeleteBut we're talking about an employee's private e-mail to someone who is not Santorum, not a spiritual director's public and repeated statements to the congregation at large, of which Obama was a member.
If Obama's pastor sent a private e-mail to another person about his private views, and Obama was lambasted over that, I would damn well think it was both ludicrous and unfair.