Santorum is trying to argue against the idea that laws are only to protect us from trespasses and actual harm.
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
He wants to postulate some situation in which there is no clear criminal harm and yet we would all agree we need moral scolding.
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
His moronic attempt at this is conjuring a non-rape Priest sex situation and claiming "Well that's still bad right? So we need laws."
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
But it is outstanding that at a time when we're 16 trillion in debt with 8.5% unemploy. and a lawless executive...
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
...we'll be focusing our firepower on the pressing issues of the moral decay caused by The Pill and buttsex.
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
Santorum's retarded idea is that since it's harder to fight gay marriage if there are no anti-sodomy laws...
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
...then we should fight for the anti-sodomy laws so we can have that fight with that in our quiver.
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
He doesn't seem to understand that one of those is a winnable fight and the other one isn't. Because he's dumb.
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
For those of us who are not retarded: Santorum has his idea of the laws necessary for "civil society."
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
Some of us, OTOH, do not have his faith in the munificence of Government. Some of us think civil society is best served by modest government
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
That is the discussion. Not whether or not someone has the right to argue in favor of Bigger, More Intrusive Government.
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
I think, @danriehl, that it's rather dumb to take a 10/85 loser position and be so aggressive about it. What do you think?
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
I think it's also rather dumb to try to win the 50/50 abortion argument --- 50% opposed, 50% support...
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
a winnable situation: Roe, 50/50.Not winnable: Griswold, 8/85.
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
But Rick "Braniac" Santorum's Path to Victory somehow involves first winning the 8/85 issue then moving to the 50/50 one.Huh?!?
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
sometime in December, someone will have to explain to me the political logic behind a push to deligitimize birth control..
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
...which everyone pre-concedes is futile ("don't worry, it'll never happen anyway") and therefore has no policy heft...
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012
...but only serves to remind voters why they get a Freaky Deaky feeling about pulling the lever for Republicans.
— Ace of Spades (@AceofSpadesHQ) February 16, 2012