Posted on 11/12/2006 10:48:17 AM PST by Matchett-PI
Reason Magazine Blogger Finds Pleasure in Tears of Rick Santorum's 8-year-old Daughter
Because the libertarian universe has no place for the vulnerable, weak, or the dependent--since none are autonomous adult-choosers in search of virtual kiddie porn--it has no qualms in providing a forum in which children and their families can be verbally abused and have profanities hurled at them. Read and weep Julian Sanchez's "Your Tears Are So Yummy and Sweet" in which the writer says he finds joy in the tears of Rick Santorum's eight-year-old daughter, who is pictured crying next to her father as he gives his concession speech on Tuesday night, November 7. Most of the comments that follow celebrate and contribute to Mr. Sanchez's meanness. In fact, one commentator, named Jon H., makes sarcastic reference to the Santorums' newborn child who died in 1996. ~ Posted by Francis J. Beckwith at 11:25 PM
Your Tears Are So Yummy and Sweet
Julian Sanchez | November 8, 2006, 2:44pm
Man, I haven't taken this much pleasure in the suffering of a small child in days.
Click link to read other like-minded comments.
Nice leftie argument....blame others for GOP failings.
Just because Soros was able to exploit GOP failure to uphold principles of our Founding Fathers doesn't make it the fault of those who support our government being closer to the Constitution. Likewise, even if Soros joined evangelical Christian organizations in an attempt to split a coalition, that doesn't mean evangelical Christians are wrong.
The author of this article is as bad as Sanchez. Reason magazine does not provide a forum for such vile postings. Libertarian theory and libertarians also do not hold to the things claimed by Beckwith. Beckwith is simply a liar. He's a liar, because there's no mistaking the url for sanchez's crap with reason's site. THere is also no mistaking the idea of liberty with lack of repect and hurtful condescending treatment and comment.
Irrelevant nonsense.
"Of course, in a moral relativist framework you're right."
I am right. Men are simple rational agents with Free will. Your claim otherwise that men are inherently corrupted by evil is false and can only be supported by anecdotal evidence.
"As I believe in a higher law, you and I will have to be at loggerheads."
You have no higher authority that claims otherwise. You simply have the word of men, such as yourself.
You've got mail......a while ago!!
What's up with what? I think you need to re-read what I posted. Beckwith isn't the one who made those comments, he is the one who is bringing our attention to the comments Sanchez and his friends made on that blog I linked you to.
"The author of this article is as bad as Sanchez. Reason magazine does not provide a forum for such vile postings. Libertarian theory and libertarians also do not hold to the things claimed by Beckwith. Beckwith is simply a liar. He's a liar, because there's no mistaking the url for sanchez's crap with reason's site. THere is also no mistaking the idea of liberty with lack of repect and hurtful condescending treatment and comment." ~ Spunkets
You're embarrassing yourself.
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/116602.html
Grampa Dave; jan in Colorado...Your thoughts ?
REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS POSITION STATEMENT
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-rlc/721810/posts
Posted on 07/24/2002 3:47:01 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
And now you do!!
Bless you, "melancholy"!!
Nancee
As far as Beckwith's comments go, I stand by what I said. Clearly the other posters don't agree with Sanchez and rebuked him for the his post. That is reality and that is what Beckwith should have contained in his article. I've seen the same on FR regarding Chelsea Clinton. someone makes a garbage post and others rebuke them. Instead, Beckwith chose to ignore the bulk of the responses to associate Reason and libertarians with sanchez's vile ocmment. Beckwith was extremely dishonest, just as the typical lib media whore is.
Here's an example of what Beckwith ignored. The bulk of the comments contain the equivalent of, "you should be ashamed of yourself." That is true!
" aaa aaa | November 8, 2006, 3:24pm | # That's his daughter Sarah, she's 8 years old. So basically because her father has different political views than yours and has been voted out of office after 12 years in the US Senate, you're happy to see her "suffering"? Eight years old is too old to have a doll, especially if that comforts her during a tough time? An eight-year old girl should "blanking" grow up"? When did this web site turn into DailyKos?"
" I can blame her parents for putting her out on stage as a prop, but going after an eight year old girl for petty partisan reasons is messed up. Man, I hope you guys never have kids of your own."
Reason #23,543 not be be a Libertarian.
Jake got lucky after he threw three *3* interceptions.
Lucky because he has a defense and a field goal kicker who are decent.
We need a real quarterback...IMO
The whole quote from Reason didn't show up in post 190. I didn't notice it contained the meaningless intensive F word. Sorry about that. I changed it in post 192.
BUMP!!!
I agree. Rick does have his honor, which is better than some of the Democrats who ran the stem cell research ads. Those were some of the most factually inaccurate, shameless, most repulsive ads I've ever seen. And that's saying a lot.
BUMP!!!
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.