Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn Santorums. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng
Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn Santorums. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng

Thứ Sáu, 24 tháng 2, 2012

If Santorum's faith is fair game, why isn't Romney's?

Aides to Rick Santorum say it's unfair to question his beliefs without also targeting Mitt Romney's Mormonism Rick Santorum, a devout Catholic, has recently been forced to defend his religious beliefs on the GOP presidential campaign trail. First he took flak for suggesting that "liberal Christian" is an oxymoron, then he had to deflect criticism this week over his 2008 warning that "Satan has his sights on the United States of America." Noting that Santorum's chief rival, Mitt Romney, has not faced similar grilling about his faith, a frustrated Santorum aide asked the Washington Examiner: "Why is Mormonism off limits?" Is it fair to make Santorum's religion a campaign issue, but not Romney's?

Santorum brought this on himself: Rick Santorum should stop "whining" about being persecuted, says Ed Kilgore at Washington Monthly. "Mitt Romney is not on record suggesting that his campaign is part of God's Own Resistance to the takeover of America by Satan," or that President Obama is "trying to abolish Christianity in the pursuit of a secularist 'phony theology.'" If Santorum wants to attack Romney's Mormonism, he should do so at his own risk — and not expect the media to do it for him.
"Never mind Satan: How about the angel Moroni?

Actually, Team Santorum has a point: "Specifically religious questioning of Romney" has indeed been rare, says Byron York at the Washington Examiner. And that may be because he hasn't broadcast his religious beliefs the way Santorum has, but it's easy to understand why Santorum's advisers are "frustrated and angry." Critics used his Satan remark, for example, to cast him as a crank outsider, yet a 2007 Gallup poll found that 70 percent of Americans believe in the devil.
"Team Santorum: U.S. is with Rick on devil belief"

Hey, Romney has taken his lumps, too: Romney's rivals have mostly evaded the topic of his Mormonism, says David A. Graham at The Atlantic, but "the same cannot be said for pundits and voters, both Republican and Democrat." An erstwhile supporter of Rick Perry once flatly dismissed Mormonism as a "cult." But if Santorum's "picking a fight about Romney's faith," he'll regret it. He'll only taint his campaign, damage his party, and save Democrats "the trouble (and risk) of dog-whistling on Mormonism later on."
"Does Santorum really want to make a stand on Mormonism?"

View this article on TheWeek.com Get 4 Free Issues of The Week

Other stories from this topic:

Like on Facebook - Follow on Twitter - Sign-up for Daily Newsletter

View the original article here

Thứ Năm, 23 tháng 2, 2012

Dutch Puzzled by Santorum's False Claim of Forced Euthanasia

A video of Rick Santorum’s comments on euthanasia in the Netherlands earlier this month.

The Dutch Embassy in Washington declined to comment on Wednesday on recent remarks by Rick Santorum, the Republican presidential candidate, in which he claimed, falsely, that forced euthanasia accounts for 5 percent of all deaths in the Netherlands.

An embassy spokeswoman, Carla Bundy, explained that the Dutch government preferred not to intervene in an American political campaign. But Ms. Bundy did provide The Lede with documents and official statistics showing that there are no provisions of Dutch law that permit forced euthanasia. Voluntary euthanasia, http://www.houseofrepresentatives.nl/dossiers/euthanasia">which has been legal since 2002, accounted for about 2 percent of deaths in the Netherlands in 2010.

As Jonathan Turley, a legal blogger, explained on Monday, the Dutch law permitting euthanasia is unambiguous about the requirement that it be voluntary, and lawmakers mandated that each case be carefully reviewed by an expert panel.

It not only requires consent but a waiting period. If a doctor dispatches someone without their consent or satisfying the tight controls, he is charged with murder.

The doctor must document that he or she confirmed that the patient requesting euthanasia or assisted suicide is making a voluntary and informed request. The record must also show that the patient was suffering unbearably and was fully informed about the prospects. Then a second doctor must examine the patient and supply a second written opinion on the satisfaction of the criteria.

According to a Dutch government report, experts who reviewed 2,667 requests for euthanasia in 2010 “found in nine cases that the physician had not acted in accordance with the due care criteria. In five of these cases, it was the way in which the euthanasia or assisted-suicide procedure was performed that was deemed not to comply with the criteria.”

As the Web site Buzzfeed reported, Mr. Santorum’s erroneous comments, made at a public forum hosted by the conservative leader James Dobson on Feb. 3, failed to attract much notice until they were fact-checked, and mocked, in the Dutch press last weekend.

Mr. Santorum’s remarks were not audible in video highlights of the “American Heartland” forum in Columbia, Miss., on his official YouTube channel — edited, music video style, to a driving rock beat. But his claims about the Netherlands were posted on YouTube by Right Wing Watch, a project of People for the American Way. That video showed Mr. Santorum claiming that elderly Dutch people wear a bracelet reading “Do not euthanize me.” Over audible gasps from the audience, he continued:

Because they have voluntary euthanasia in the Netherlands, but half the people who are euthanized every year — and it’s 10 percent of all deaths for the Netherlands — half of those people are euthanized involuntarily, at hospitals, because they are older and sick. And so elderly people in the Netherlands don’t go to the hospital, they go to another country, because they’re afraid because of budget purposes that they will not come out of that hospital if they go into it with sickness.

As Buzzfeed noted, Dutch journalists found it easy to refute Mr. Santorum’s statistics, and made fun of his “fact-free” claim that euthanasia was forced on anyone, but they had no idea where he got the idea that the nation’s elderly wear “Do not euthanize me” bracelets.

Ms. Bundy, the embassy spokeswoman, told The Washington Post, “According to the Ministry of Health, ‘Do not euthanize me’ bracelets do not exist in the Netherlands.”

Mr. Santorum’s campaign did not respond to a request to explain who or what the candidate’s sources were. Glenn Kessler, who writes The Washington Post’s Fact Checker blog, suggested on Wednesday that the candidate was repeating unsubstantiated rumors found online.

A Web site known as Right Wing News last year published an article which asserted that “over 10,000 (Dutch) citizens carry ‘Do not euthanize me’ cards in case they are ever admitted to a hospital unexpectedly.” The source was the Louisiana Right to Life Federation, which in turn cited no specific source except possibly the Nightingale Alliance, which opposes euthanasia. But this group does not appear to have published any actual figures.

In a letter to The British Medical Journal last year, a Dutch euthanasia specialist wrote that such cards do not exist. “What does exist is a living will (the levenswensverklaring), which is distributed by the Christian Dutch Patient Association,” in which people can “state that active life termination is not an acceptable option.” He wrote that it is unclear how many people had completed such a living will.

At the end of his post, Mr. Turley, the legal blogger, concluded: “Putting aside these tiny factual disagreements, it is good to finally see a politician willing to take on our greatest threat: the Dutch. Dutch propagandists like Rembrandt, Vermeer and Van Gogh have already infiltrated our schools and museums. Our leaders (expect Santorum) are deaf to the growing sound of their wooden-shoe stomping, marzipan-eating hordes.”


View the original article here

Will Rick Santorum's 2008 'Satan warning' haunt him in 2012?

The conservative presidential hopeful once said that "Satan has his sights on the United States." Now the political world has its sights on that comment Four years ago at Catholic Ave Maria University in Florida, Rick Santorum warned an audience that "Satan has his sights on the United States of America." The former Pennsylvania senator argued that in this "spiritual war," Satan was attacking politics and government — and was winning. Today, of course, Santorum is a surging presidential hopeful, and when these comments resurfaced Tuesday on The Drudge Report, pundits began feverishly speculating whether their extremely religious nature would harm Santorum's campaign. Even Rush Limbaugh conceded that Santorum will "have to deal with it. He'll have to answer to it." Santorum himself maintains that the comments are "not relevant" to the presidential race. Will this years-old "Satan warning" damage his campaign?

Obviously, this hurts his campaign: "Santorum is animated and motivated by an unpleasantly bleak outlook on the morals and manners of the country he now says he wishes to lead," says John Podhoretz at the New York Post. But Americans don't want a "culture warrior" who is "disappointed by America and its failings." Mitt Romney may be flawed, but at least he doesn't think the U.S. "is teetering on the brink of a moral cesspool." It's no secret that America is "in a dour condition." But voters aren't "going to elect a dour president" who warns of Satan at the door.
"Rick Santorum's real problem"

This faux-controversy can't bring Santorum down: Let's not discount Santorum's "unsurpassed diligence as a candidate," says Robert Stacy McCain at the American Spectator. The media may be trying to "gin up new controversies" that paint Santorum as a "scary religious kook," but in the real world, the Pennsylvanian has climbed to the top of the polls by routinely appearing at more campaign events than his two chief rivals combined. I have faith that "hard-working voters" will see through the latest round of media theatrics and "ultimately choose the Republican who is working harder than any other candidate to win their votes."
"Santorum's winning work ethic"

It all depends how Santorum handles this: Santorum will feel the heat at Thursday's debate, says Jed Lewison at Daily Kos. And how he answers the inevitable "are you a religious fanatic and/or would you govern as one?" question will dictate the future of his campaign. "If Santorum betrays even a hint of defensiveness in his answer, it could be a disaster for his candidacy." But launching a well-planned attack against his critics could lead to a breakthrough moment. It "could be the difference between the end of his surge — or the beginning of yet another wave of support."
"Easy prediction: Rick Santorum's answer to the religion question will define Wednesday's debate"

SEE MORE: 5 reasons the Santorum surge won't last

View this article on TheWeek.com Get 4 Free Issues of The Week

Other stories from this topic:

Like on Facebook - Follow on Twitter - Sign-up for Daily Newsletter

View the original article here

Chủ Nhật, 19 tháng 2, 2012

Rick Santorum's tax returns: Will they help him beat Romney?

The conservative Pennsylvanian earned $3.6 million from 2007 to 2010, while super-rich rival Mitt Romney hauled in $21.6 million in 2010 alone GOP presidential frontrunner Rick Santorum is a millionaire, according to the four years of tax documents he released Thursday. Santorum has earned between $659,000 (in 2007) and $1.1 million (in 2009) in every year since he left the Senate, easily putting him in the top 1 percent of U.S. earners. (Much of Santorum's money came from media, consulting, and speaking fees.) But Santorum's income "looks like a rounding error" compared to GOP presidential rival Mitt Romney's $21.6 million haul in 2010, says Bruce Watson at DailyFinance. Santorum, of course, was quick to contrast his income with Romney's: "I don't have wealth. I don't have investments. I don't have capital gains." Will Santorum's tax filings be an asset on the trail?

This hits Romney where it hurts: Santorum "may have finally found a way to soar over Romney," says Dan Rackley at Yahoo News. Releasing four years of tax returns, versus Romney's one year, will be "taken as a sign of good faith by voters." Plus, Santorum forks over 28 percent of his income to Uncle Sam, not-so-subtly reminding everyone of "the paltry 13 percent Romney paid." Whatever you think of Santorum's socially conservative views, "at least he pays what most would consider his fair share."
"Santorum scoring points by releasing tax returns"

But it kills Santorum's blue-collar image: Now that we know Santorum earned a whopping $3.6 million since voters "unceremoniously bounced" him from the Senate in November 2006, can the pundits stop blathering on about "Santorum's bond with the working man"? says Will Bunch at the Philadelphia Daily News. "Clearly, he doesn't feel their pain." And while Santorum is less wealthy than Romney, there's really only one thing "the ex-Pennsylvania senator has in common with the working class: He knows what it's like to lose a job."
"Santorum releases his income taxes"

And reveals his hypocrisy on charity: Santorum has given "a shockingly tiny amount to charity," says Jennifer Rubin at The Washington Post. In the last four years, he's never given away more than 3 percent of his income. Romney, by contrast, gave away roughly 16 percent. "Much of Santorum's career and a good deal of his writing focus on faith-based charities. So why did he personally give so little to the groups he lauds?" You can bet Santorum will be scrutinized for this "glaring inconsistency." Apparently, Santorum "believes in church doctrine about contraception, but not about tithing."
"Santorum is wealthy, but stingy with charitable giving"

View this article on TheWeek.com Get 4 Free Issues of The Week

Other stories from this topic:

Like on Facebook - Follow on Twitter - Sign-up for Daily Newsletter

View the original article here