« The Art of Rhetoric | Main | Democrats in Disarray »

Friday, July 15, 2005

Liberalism and Pedophilia

Isn't it fun to hate Rick Santorum?  Here's his latest inanity:

Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, the third-ranking Republican in the Senate, refused yesterday to back off on his earlier statements connecting Boston's ''liberalism" with the Roman Catholic Church pedophile scandal, saying that the city's ''sexual license" and ''sexual freedom" nurtured an environment where sexual abuse would occur.

Thanks to Professor Bainbridge for pointing it out--and for putting me on high pedophilia alert for San Francisco, my new liberal home.  Thankfully, I have no kids, only a dog.  But liberalism also probably leads to beastiality, right?  I better let Zeke know.

Slow news day, huh?

Posted by Ethan Leib on July 15, 2005 at 10:27 PM in Current Affairs | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c6a7953ef00d8344db05b53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Liberalism and Pedophilia:

Comments

The problem, NK, is that Matt (and others) gave specific arguments as to why Santorum was wrong about Boston and the Catholic Church, and in response you avoided all those points and went on a mini-rant about the entirely unrelated subject of Clinton and Lewinsky. All internet discussion groups have trolls, but don't expect to be one and not be called on it.

Posted by: Joseph Slater | Jul 20, 2005 11:56:38 AM

You see, NK, you can't even tell when an argument is being offered. (Perhaps that's why you mistake your own idiotic remarks for one.) I wasn't attempting to _argue_ with you, since I think you are quite clearly too dumb to argue with. In such cases there's no point in arguing. Rather, I was _insulting_ you and _calling you names_. The two, of course, are quite different, even if you can't tell them apart.

Posted by: Matt | Jul 19, 2005 12:17:04 PM

Who can possibly respond to the brilliance of such arguments as "moron" and "dumb"?

Posted by: nk | Jul 18, 2005 10:53:40 PM

Yes, nk, it's true. You are just too dumb to reason with. I wish it were not so, but it is.

Posted by: Matt | Jul 18, 2005 12:59:13 PM

You have convinced me. I freely admit that I am a moron for not recognizing that President Clinton's and Monica Lewinski's relationship was a deeply spiritual one based solely on mutual admiration of character and intellect and the fact that she was approximately one-third his age was irrelevant. Also, only a moron would remember the late Michael Kennedy's "affair" with his children's 14-year old babysitter. And gee, how stupid do you have to be to jump to the wrong conclusions, like I did, about NARAL'S "Screw Abstinence" campaign?

Posted by: nk | Jul 18, 2005 10:27:54 AM

Riiiight, because just like Professor Santorum said, (1) the Church really is closely tied to the liberal counterculture, (2) the priest sex abuse phenomenon was limited to Boston and other liberal cities and blue states, and (3) liberals were really the ones to rally around the church when the church came under siege....

A good guide: You know you're off the edge of the political spectrum when you blame the other side for completely unrelated phenonema (e.g., conservatives say liberalism was the underlying cause of 9/11, and liberals say conservatism was....).

Posted by: Scott Moss | Jul 17, 2005 10:31:46 PM

Dan and nk,
I must say that I shudder to think at what passes for reasoning with you. "liberals did it!" Well, no. If you'd look, you'd notice that the heirarcy of the Catholic Church knew of these priests for years, and kept passing them on to different parishes rather than punishing them or expelling them. Why? They didn't wan the Church to look bad, it seems. Was this the work of liberals? No, not outside of some sort of fantasy world. The lack of sympathy for the victims and lack of desire tp punish the priests came _from the church_ (hardly a bunch of liberals- Cardinal Law being one of the main ones involved in this shameful display!) And, of course, the idea that liberals are "people controlled by the urgings of their gonads" marks you as a moron of the first degree.

Posted by: Matt | Jul 16, 2005 11:36:26 PM

Perverts network. That is a fact. Liberals these days are defined as people controlled by the urgings of their gonads. That is also a fact. I do not think that Senator Santorum was that far off the mark. The pervert priests got away with it for so long because of protection from other perverts and liberal fellow travelers. Moreover, I did not see a concern for the victims and realistic efforts to punish pedophiles during the scandal. I saw a vicious, concerted attack against the whole Catholic church which I attribute to the hatred liberals have for the Catholic Church.

Posted by: nk | Jul 16, 2005 11:15:02 PM

Well, I agree wholeheartedly with Santorum. Does that makes me an idiot and a conservative wingnut? ;)

Let's see if I can think of something positive that liberalism has brought forth to America...none at all, sad, isn't it? Hehe...

Posted by: Dan | Jul 16, 2005 7:09:08 PM

I can't tell if that dog looks ashamed or if he's about to attack. Maybe a bit of both. But, the sad thing w/ Santorum is that all indicators point to him actually believing the outragous things he says, rather than just trying to score points in some unpleasent way. It's quite terrifying to have such a fool as a senator. Let's hope Casey can beat him!

Posted by: Matt | Jul 16, 2005 1:17:59 PM

That is the cutest dog, ever.

Posted by: P | Jul 16, 2005 12:17:04 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.