Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pornographic Politics: Did the Daily Caller ‘Pull a Media Matters’ on Rick Santorum?
The Other McCain ^ | March 15, 2012 | Robert Stacy McCain

Posted on 03/15/2012 8:33:43 PM PDT by God'sgrrl

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-114 last
To: Danae; MD Expat in PA
I want to vote for the man! I cannot do that if he isn’t a Natural Born Citizen!

You are staking the utterly absurd position that the administrative and bureaucratic process to finalize his citizenship matters more than the oath Aldo Santorum took and his service to this country that made him automatically eligible, by U.S. Code and long-standing tradition, to be a citizen in the first place.

What if a bureacratic snarl had tied up finalizing Aldo's citizenship to a time after Rick Santorum's birth, as what happened with MD Expat in PA's father? Would that matter more to you than the fact that Aldo served? Do you want to declare MD Expat in PA ineligible to seek the presidency, using your own absurdly stringent definition of an NBC?

Apparently so. Good ideas can be taken to the point of irrelevance and then absurdity if you refuse to factor in other points of view. You have clearly gone well past irrelevance and into abject absurdity.

101 posted on 03/18/2012 6:05:04 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy; MD Expat in PA; Jim Robinson; Jean S

Ok, you all win.

I concede the field to you.


102 posted on 03/18/2012 6:08:20 PM PDT by Danae (Anail nathrach, ortha bhais is beatha, do cheal deanaimh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Jean S; Danae; Jim Robinson
I thought this was settled a long time ago when this was revealed. (This is Aldo's citizenship registration card from Italy, note that his Italian citizenship was 'eliminated from the registry' in 1930 when it was noted he immigrated to the US.)

In other words, Italy recognized his transferring citizenship to the US, August 31st, 1930. Two decades before Rick was born.

Can this stupid theory be put to rest now?

103 posted on 03/18/2012 7:20:32 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

YES! Thank GOD!

Seriously, Mnering! Thank you! That’s all I wanted!


104 posted on 03/18/2012 7:30:27 PM PDT by Danae (Anail nathrach, ortha bhais is beatha, do cheal deanaimh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
In other words, Italy recognized his transferring citizenship to the US, August 31st, 1930. Two decades before Rick was born.

Italy can't transfer his citizenship. He would have been a legal immigrant until the United States grants his citizenship.

105 posted on 03/18/2012 7:52:02 PM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes

Transfer was probably the wrong word, but it was pretty clear he was removed from their citizenship roles after he came to the US.


106 posted on 03/18/2012 8:34:50 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT; All
Ahh... More duplicity from Santorum supporters.

Santorum's argument was the laws are not being enforced. One Freeper in the bag for Rick went as far as accusing anyone critical of Santorum's statement as defending child porn.

Your Newt "quote" is that the law will be enforced. It makes no claim the laws aren't already being enforced to his liking.

The message is clearly this: Santorum doesn't think the obscenity standard used now is broad enough.

107 posted on 03/19/2012 8:33:08 AM PDT by newzjunkey (Santorum: 18-point loss, voted for Sotomayor, proposed $550M on top of $900M Amtrak budget...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Houghton M.; All
It's NOT the same statement. Santorum separates himself from the others by saying he believes current enforcement is insufficient. That is only so if he believes in a significantly broader view of "obscenity" which is the whole reason his statements are an issue.

Rather than accept he may have poorly stated his viewpoint or actually has a different take, Santorum apologists are attempting to cloud the waters with false equivalences made with other candidates' statements or attacking their supporters or anyone who dare question their golden idol.

Just yesterday on FR the attack line was anyone who questioned Santorum's perspective was a kiddie porn apologist. You lot are the worst possible advertisement for Santorum. It's the equivalent of Obama-worshipping drones: see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil with a healthy dose of shut-your-face, mind-your-place.

108 posted on 03/19/2012 9:07:35 AM PDT by newzjunkey (Who'd imagine a candidate so lacking in charisma could develop a cult of personality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

Nonsense. One can think current enforcement inadequate without calling for a broader definition of obscenity.


109 posted on 03/19/2012 9:19:08 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

“Just yesterday on FR the attack line was anyone who questioned Santorum’s perspective was a kiddie porn apologist.”

And take your strawman arguments and stuff them where the sun don’t shine.


110 posted on 03/19/2012 9:20:32 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

That would make your argument that Newt Gingrich believes Barack Obama is correctly enforcing the laws.

Since the question he was asked clearly implies that the laws are not being enforced, I don’t see how you could interpret his answer as being a “more of the same” argument.

Since I showed how both candidates used the same words as their operative plan (not the words about why, the words about what they would actually promise to do), I again don’t see how you can call this “duplicitous”.

I provided both quotes, so I’m hardly hiding anything like the people who attacked Santorum for his quote without showing the other quotes.


111 posted on 03/19/2012 11:26:25 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; Danae; dirtboy; Jean S; MD Expat in PA; mnehring
92 posted on Sunday, March 18, 2012 6:03:45 PM by Jim Robinson: “I believe Santorum is a natural born citizen and is a qualified conservative candidate. Double dog dare you to call me a sad American or a Obama supporting fool. Believe you’ve gone off the deep end with this nonsense. Seek help.”

Thank you, Jim. This birther stuff has got to stop.

Thank you especially to MNehring for providing citizenship documents. Maybe they don't show Aldo Santorum had yet become an American citizen, but they darn sure show he wasn't a loyal Italian anymore.

The way this thread was going, for a while I was wondering if someone was going to call Aldo Santorum, an honorably discharged World War II veteran and career Veterans Administration psychologist, a dirty Dago, a Mussolini lover, or some other nonsense. (And yes, my last name is Italian and my ancestors came from the same province as Aldo Santorum, though a half-century earlier, so don't accuse me of using ethnic slurs.) We've got enough problems in the conservative movement without stuff like this.

112 posted on 03/19/2012 2:01:58 PM PDT by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Please define “natural born citizen” and cite your reference.

The constitution does not define it, and the courts have danced around it.


113 posted on 03/21/2012 2:22:54 PM PDT by Not A Snowbird (Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Disregard my last, I see this has been resolved.


114 posted on 03/21/2012 2:28:36 PM PDT by Not A Snowbird (Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-114 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson