Prosecute the torture.

October 27, 2006

Santorum: "A Disaster for the Future of The World"

That's what he said. That's what Rick Santorum, candidate for the US Senate, said this week about a Democratic victory in the November elections.
U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum last night urged the GOP faithful in Lebanon County to man the phones, knock on doors, take time off from work and do everything they can to help re-elect him Nov. 7. The future of the country is at stake, he said.

"I don't want to win this race for me, but for this country. All I ask for is two weeks of sacrifice. ... I need a huge vote out of this county," Santorum told an audience of about 200 at the party's annual fundraising dinner at the Lantern Lodge.

Santorum said as he was leaving the dinner that a Democratic win could be "a disaster for the future of the world."
He seemed to be playing the "Vote for the Democrats and DIE" school of thinking:
"I want to be senator because this is an important point in our nation's history," he said.

He painted a frightening picture of what would happen should he lose, warning of "Islamic fascism."

Islamic fascists don't mind dying to destroy the United States and "we need the courage to name our enemy. ... But because we're dealing with religion, we cower away," he said.
The York Dispatch, rightly, called this line of "reasoning" silly.
Rick Santorum is running scared in his battle to keep his Senate seat and he is trying to scare the hell out of Pennsylvanians in the process.

With less than two weeks until Election Day, it's Santorum's desperation and over-the-top vision of what citizens in the state and the nation may face if he loses -- and if Republicans lose a majority in either house of Congress -- that's truly scary.

According to Santorum, a Democratic victory on Nov. 7 would be "a disaster for the future of the world." That's what he told a Lebanon fund-raising crowd Monday.
And
To Santorum's discredit, he's sounding like that poll-predicted takedown will be a tragedy for mankind. That's silly.
See? I wouldn't steer you wrong. Lil Ricky's still playing the last (non-racist) card left to the Republicans: National Security. From the AP in today's P-G:
For the first time in his fight for a third term, U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., directly questioned his opponent's ability to make the right decisions on national security at a time when "our enemies are fully committed to our destruction."
But take a look at this poll. I found it via this page at RealClearPolitics. The "R" next to the name means, I guess, that the folks at Real Clear Politics consider the polling company, Strategic Vision to be Republican pollsters.

Even after asking a number of questions about Iraq and terrorism, for instance:
4. Do you approve or disapprove of President Bush's handling of the war on terrorism?
Approve 49%
Disapprove 42%
Undecided 9%
And
9. Do you expect another terrorist attack in the United States within the next six months?
Yes 78%
No 8%
Undecided 14%
Rick STILL can't get out of the lower 40s.
18. If the election for United States Senate were held today, and the choice was between Robert Casey, Jr. the Democrat, or Rick Santorum the Republican, whom would you vote for?
Robert Casey, Jr. 49%
Rick Santorum 42%
Undecided 9%
And remember, the undecideds almost always break to the challenger.

- Grasping. Desperate. But at least he's (and good for him on this) not playing the race card.

2 comments:

John Schutrick said...

Rick shouldn't worry. The Democrats are falling all over themselves embracing the right-wing philosophy. In a few years, we could easily have a majority of the Democratic caucus in the Senate eager to confirm the next Alito and to legislate Constitutional civil liberties out of existence. These guys are all likely to be Democratic Senators: Nelson, Casey, Ford, Lieberman. One of them was even the Democratic candidate for VP, remember?

Look, the purpose of political debate in this country is now to determine which gang of conservative thugs has power. It has ceased to be about whether gays are people. That's been decided: they're not. It's not about whether citizens have judicial redress. That's been decided: they don't. It's not about whether whether the the weak should be protected. That's been decided: they shouldn't.

The leadership in the Democratic Party nominates righties to run because when they win, it increases the power of the leadership. The old Democratic idea -- that the government should do things for people that they can't do for themselves -- that idea is gone. That became a losing proposition when Reagan came in.

There's not much we can do about it. Personally, I'm writing in my own name for Senate. Several of my friends and relatives are writing me in, too. Others are supporting Yoda. (An excellent candidate he is.) If you think America was a better place when habeas corpus was alive, write in one of our names on election day -- or your own. It won't help, but you will have the satisfaction of knowing that you did not contribute to the decline and fall of the American "shining city on the hill. "

Vanna said...

I am waiting for whomever is campaigning on the terror card in Lancaster to hold up a picture of the guy that mowed down the Amish kids and state that he was a registered Democrat.