Skip to comments.Pornographic Politics: Did the Daily Caller ‘Pull a Media Matters’ on Rick Santorum?
Posted on 03/15/2012 8:33:43 PM PDT by God'sgrrl
Today I noticed a thread at Memeorandum aggregating commentary on an article by Daily Caller associate editor Steven Nelson: Vigorous Santorum crackdown may catch Internet porn viewers with pants down I sort of shrugged that off, and then a I saw this Tweet by Jedediah Bila: Didnt tweet about this today, but if its accurate, I find it absolutely insane.Santorum Promises Broad War on Porn: more...
Scared? No, I think amused is a better word.
Is Santorum afraid he doesn’t already have the church lady vote locked up?
1. Pick a controversial issue
2. Make up a “news” story about it and the candidate you want to smear and toss it to the MSM
3. Watch the candidate squirm
Santorum is damned if he confirms and damned if he denies it.
Earlier today Gingrich folks were claiming that it disqualified a candidate to suggest they'd enforce existing pornography laws.
I wonder if they think Newt Gingrich should be disqualified?
Former Speaker Newt Gingrich in a face-to-face meeting: When MIMs Executive Director Dawn Hawkins asked former Speaker Gingrich if he will enforce existing laws that make distribution of hard-core adult pornography illegal, he responded: Yes, I will appoint an Attorney General who will enforce these laws.Oops. Romney said the same thing.
So today, the Gingrich folks got punked by the liberal media. It's not hard, because they are desparate.
since he has already spoken about how important it is for the role of government watching over our lives. Newt, I could trust to work within the laws as Ricky seems to want to make new laws. FYI. Tucker is a Romney supporter.
Why is Santorum bothering with this crap? Alberto Gonzalez spent far too much time on porn also. Leave people alone. Leave online alone, so long as it is not breaking any laws (eg. children). Americans don’t want a “Universal Daddy”.
In other words, pure, raw prejudice governs you. You just admitted it. You already are against Santorum so you have to make up a reason why the same position held by all three would be bad in his case but good in the other two.
You are the worst possible advertisement for Gingrich. Pure, raw prejudice.
Remember when you asked about when Santorum made this statement on the enforcing internet porn laws? It wasn’t recent. Looks like it was months ago when Romney and Gingrich put out similar statements. News story in this thread.
A. Gingrich didn’t post a policy paper on pornography as a CENTRAL THEME of his campaign for President. Santorum did.
B. Gingrich was answering a follow up question from a reporter. Not making it a central campaign issue as Santorum did.
C. Perhaps you would LIKE Obama for another 4 years. Polls show even GOP don’t want anymore RELIGIOUS and social values talk. But if you want to hand the election to Obama - by all means. Support the guy who claims to be “adamantly prolife” then campaigns for a PRO-partial birth abortion candidate. Support the guy who claims to care about family values then covers up the affair of a fellow Senator who is sleeping with the wife of his staffer and who dismisses homosexual priests and who wouldn’t condemn Foley for whom HE recruited the victims. (stats on how voters of all sides view the religion in politics debate here: http://www.politijim.com/2012/03/interest-in-voters-and-social-issues.html)
All other documented verified stories on PolitiJim.com
I’m not much interested in that, but am looking forward to hearing more about this eligibility thing.
Oh, so Gingrich has the same position as Santorum, but Santorum bothers you because he wrote it down, while Gingrich just said it to an interest group that would like his answer?
Santorum has a lot if things he wrote on his issues page. That doesn’t make them the “central issue”, any more than Gingrich making a policy speech in which he promoted a moon colony make that a “central campaign issue”.
The point is that several Newt supporters claimed that a plan to enforce pornography laws made Santorum unacceptable as a candidate. There was talk about this being a sign of legislating morality, and a religious takeover.
But Gingrich has exactly the SAME plan, he simply doesn’t have it listed as an item on his campaign web site. But unless you are saying Gingrich lied to the reporters, and won’t actually do what he promised, he will do the same enforcement Santorum was attacked for.
Anyway, it seems you are just upset that Santorum says what he will do, and doesn’t try to hide it. I like candidates who come out and tell the truth. I appreciate that Gingrich has the same plans, because I think if there are laws on the books, we should enforce them, and if we don’t like them, we should repeal them.
And as I said before, if you want to lead an effort to repeal the pornography laws, go right ahead, but I’d check the site owner first before doing it here.
Just for the sheer hell of it, read the article.
All 3 candidtes were asked this same question. All 3 responded bascially the same.
So, what the article says is that Daily Caller didn’t bother to report that.
I think you will be contradicting yourself, frequently, as there is barely any daylight between the views of Gingrich and the views of Santorum.
You really need to tone it down a bit. Santorum is talking about laws already on the books.
Don't take the bait from Leftists, OK? Santorum says something MONTHS ago, and the MSM runs with it, now, and like Pavlov's dogs you salivate?
Don't let yourself get played so easy.
If a candidate really wants to do something worthwhile to clean up internet porn, than I suggest they win the presidency first. Don’t go tipping your hand and scaring an “industry” that has billions into donating millions to your opponent. I mean he’s already got the church vote locked up right? This also scares off the independent and libertarian voters. The voters he would need in November.
Although I agree that obscenity laws should be enforced this is a loser strategy, IMO. And it makes me question Rick’s judgement.
Do you work for Obama DOJ.. because I don't agree with your views. No answer required. Now, run along and find another person to chat with whom agrees with you...
I have met the man, more than once, ate lunch with him at the San Diego Convention, he visited frequently with the Kansas Caucus, there.
I also talked to Newt when he came to Kansas, more than once.
You do Newt a great disservice.
MOST of the people associated with Newt present themselves much better than you have, on this thread.
HIGH FIVES!!! The Newt cheerleaders in here would highly disappoint him. They are supporting Newt with a foul attitude. Bully-like.
Count on it...first time/last time......
You have never run a successful campaign for anything, in your entire life.
That is evident from your tone.
Gingrich will, eventually, endorse someone else.
THEN what will you do?
Christie for President as a third party candidate. She has my vote.
Former Senator Rick Santorum in a written statement: Federal obscenity laws should be vigorously enforced. If elected President, I will appoint an Attorney General who will do so.
Former Governor Mitt Romney in a written statement: (I)t is imperative that we cultivate the promotion of fundamental family values. This can be accomplished with increased parental involvement and enhanced supervision of our children. It includes strict enforcement of our nations obscenity laws, as well as the promotion of parental software controls that guard our children from Internet pornography.
Former Speaker Newt Gingrich in a face-to-face meeting: When MIMs Executive Director Dawn Hawkins asked former Speaker Gingrich if he will enforce existing laws that make distribution of hard-core adult pornography illegal, he responded: Yes, I will appoint an Attorney General who will enforce these laws.
How do you know what Christie has or hasn’t done. At least Newt has supporters who are loyal to him. We don’t switch at the drop of a hat.If GOD be for NEWT who can be against him. Go Newt.
Alinsky is about deceit. This is a legitimate issue.
Santorum is not exactly forthcoming about his intentions of regulating the Internet.
It is easy to tell.
Winning candidates recruit team builders and people with winning personalities.
The catty, snippy, arrogant personalities tend to really suck, at political organizing.
I can tell.
She sucks at this.
Get a clue.
Read between the lines.
Newt does not expect to win.
Newt just does not want Romney to win!
All media hype. Even Obama will make a statement during an election season on every issue.
Haven’t you ever heard “It’s a woman’s prerogative to change her mind? It is America, and we’re free to choose.
It’a all in the LORD’S hands.
Choose who you will.My comments weren’t directed to you.
The Democrats and MSM want Romney, Santorum and Gingrich to keep talking about contraception, abortion and porn instead of the economy, gas prices, domestic energy or Obamacare. All three seem happy to oblige, and Obama can fill out his NCAA brackets in peace.
Just making a comment. With a bit of humor. :-)
Sorry if I took it the wrong way.
Yep, and unfortunately he chose UNC. Although I support Duke and Henson injured his wrist, so I’m good.
No problem :-)
“...am looking forward to hearing more about this eligibility thing.”
What would you like to know?
The truth! We don’t need another non-citizen president.
I would like to know how two FReepers can sink so low as to call into question the citizenship of an immigrant who served honorably in WWII and therefor earned his US citizenship the hard way.
Aldo Santorum was NOTHING like Obama's father. He wasn't Muslim. He didn't abandon his wife and child. He served his country and earned his citizenship.
Your birther attacks on Santorum are pathetic.
Uh, yeah, it did. As it still does today.
Are you really such a jackass that you want to pursue this line of attack on Santorum?
Do you want to call into question the citizenship of someone who received an honorable discharge for military service during WWII?
Because, quite frankly, you can kiss my ass if that is your position. And you are an utter disgrace to this website if that is your position.
Oh, that's rich. You think I'm gonna get zotted for defending military service for citizenship?
Methinks you should be the one watching for lighting, a-hole.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.