Posted on 02/09/2012 8:03:54 PM PST by true believer forever
“I think that could be a very compromising situation, where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interest of the mission because of other types of emotions that are involved. It already happens, of course, with the camaraderie of men in combat, but I think it would be even more unique if women were in combat,” Santorum added. “And I think that’s not in the best interests of men, women or the mission.”
Such remarks may please some social conservatives who were never that keen on women serving in the military, but this may not sit well with women who work, sometimes in male-dominated jobs.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Republican Presidential Candidate Senator Rick Santorum Debating to Ban Partial Birth Abortions 1999
Rubin is a Romney bot and this troll post nothing but Rick hate!
NO, I’m not for women in combat. That’s not why I posted it. I am from a military family and I have lots of reasons for believing women shouldn’t be in combat frontline positins. My point in posting was, there are just a lot of people here, who don’t know how weird and hateful, how pious and self-righteous Sanctimonium sounds to everyday people, even a lot of everyday republicans and especially young republicans...
Especially his remarks later on in the article about working women, many of whom are stuck in deadend jobs, and would much rather stay home than work, and can’t afford to... Sanctimonium preaches at people from some lofty perch that bespeaks him no understanding or compassion for what flawed humans living a difficult life are all about. And judging by the responses on this thread, I am right.
“WE NEED HIM MORE THAN EVER: www.newt.org/donate “
Yes! vote for Newt the feminist! Vote for Newt for his humane policy on illegals who stayed for over 25 years! Vote for Newt because he’ll show up those Wall Street fat cats!
How about vote for Newt because he’s a conservative? Could work, you know.
It’s called the romantic element, and it doesn’t belong on the combat team.
Irrelevant whether he’s right or not, this stuff will cause him to lose an election against Obama much worse than he would have previously.
It’s not a good strategy to run candidates that most of half the electorate now hate. Goes for Gingrich as well.
What matters is that this meme that is now emerging on Santorum as a fringe kook...mean to boot...will soon be dominant.
Additionally, as contributors and potential contributors judge how this is being played in the press they will hold their money close and start looking for another bet to place.
Rick is not a very good communicator on important issues and does APPEAR strident and/or mean to many people.
The Israelis confirmed this experiencein 1948. Females are used in other capacities and in motivating young male recruits..
He didn’t say it was the WOMEN’S emotions!
(It is logically the men’s protective - or jealous, or competitive - emotions toward women that can compromise battle effectiveness.)
So we should be for Romney then, huh? He knows how to play it safe because he’s not so conservative.
If Jennifer Rubin is where you're going for your political discourse now, you just may stand to learn a thing or two by studying Rick.
But before you speak so ardently about "another disgusting liberal attack on a conservative" - remember this?:
"Can one really complain about Romney's attack ads, slanted though they may be, when Newt sends out robocalls to Florida seniors telling them Mitt forced Holocaust survivors to eat non-Kosher food?
You actually defended Willard Your Worst Nightmare's attacks on Newt, and more, the calls you talked about were made by a rogue group, which Newt nothing about...
Yep, you're a Sanctimonium supporter, all right.
Santorum may be right, but this won’t play well for soundbites if he gets the nom. It just won’t.
I agree this wasn't Rick at his most eloquent, but he's basically saying no women in combat because their emotions would cause men to do militarily dumb things trying to protect their women. I thought that was one of the more common arguments made against having women in combat. I've never served in the military - never figured I had a chance to with uncorrected vision that couldn't see the eye chart much less read any line on it - so I'm willing to defer to the many freepers who have served if I'm wrong on this. I agree that Newt would probably have said this better, but I think he'd accept Rick as being on the proper side of the argument.
Eloquence isn't required for election of Republican presidents, at least not if you give the right answer and are sincere about it. W proved that. I'm not saying it doesn't hurt to be eloquent, but Rick's average remains well about W's reputation... and "corpsman" Obama's reality.
I like Santorum, but he really needs to STFU sometimes. This should not be a trick question: It’s an iron, universal demographic law that women of childbearing age have to be protected, otherwise there won’t be a next generation. Biologically speaking, men are expendable, women are not.
I would expect a concise, powerful, emotionless and totally logical response from the usual vacuum headed media madams.
Better turn your volume down.
And I, for one, like men’s natural protective instincts towards women, I count on them, and evoke them when I can :). I replied to someone earlier, I am from a military family, and don’t support women in combat frontline positions for lots of reasons.
But there are a million more things like this that are out there, some worse, much worse from Sanctimonium. He turns a lot of republicans off with his holier-than-thou, strident rigidity and judgmentalness... the general public is going to consider him some sort of bizarre monster.
The cry here when Newt was getting sliced and diced was let
him get vetted - we need strong candidates who can withstand what obama will throw at them. It didn’t matter if most of the stuff was totally false or extremely misrepresentative...
And what this thread proves, is when Santorum supporters get the kind of stuff thrown at them that was thrown at Newt for weeks at a time, while he stayed positive, they respond with you hate, you ugly, head up your ass... this does not bode well...
I sometimes cried at the mean stuff posted here about Newt, I probably shouldn’t admit to that, but unless I was called a name first, or several times, I defended him with facts and ideas and arguments... Sanctimonium supports, most of them, can’t do that. They just fling...
As I'm sure you know but have chosen to ignore, the robocalls in question were, in fact, put out by the Gingrich campaign. To their credit, they said the robocall had not been properly vetted and would never be repeated.
So when you complain that I call certain people ignorant...
Yes, you are right. Even the most professionally-dedicated women realize at some point, as they age, that their biological imperative, motherhood, those emotions and stipulations in their DNA, truly are their prime defining properties, what makes them who they are. But they will not abide for a moment, this kind of stuff coming from a man who judges everybody else as a sinner, not on a par with his quality character, and sometimes just plain mean, or seemingly so... I disagreed with you, men are NOT expendable, they fix cars really well, and almost always volunteer to go out after midnight for Chinese food, even on a weeknight. We need them, we love them. :)
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.