White House & RNC Issue Gag Order on Santorum Issue

Harrisburg News and the Hotline ^ | April 24, 2003 | Chuck Todd and Vaughn Ververs

[ewing]

The Harrisburg Patriot News Decoursey reports that Senator Rick Santorums (R-PA) defenders are now under gag order.

White House and Republican National Committee officials told GOP insiders yesterday by conference call, voice mail and e-mail not to comment about Santorum's comments letting them speak for himself.

[justshe]

A good, sane, politically astute observation, Gretchen!

And the pubbies are also saying, IMO, There's no need for Santorum to apologize. Let the outrage die its own death by starvation.

[CyberAnt]

Yes, I'm focusing on that ONE WORD because that one word was NOT said by Santorum - and it was written into the report for the sole purpose of creating an incident.

And ... as several people have pointed out - Santorum has a right to say what he believes; and the fact he was stating almost word for word what Justice White said, makes it even more irritating that the dems would add the word (Gay) just to stir the pot.

[VRWC_minion]

A minor cannot, by definition, consent.

What is a "minor" ? People disagree.

Our divisions between acceptable and unaceptable behaviors are by their nature arbitrary. If we throw a blanket statement out their that the state may not define any behavior as unaceptable because of privacy then we throw out any way of the state establishing norms of any kind.

This may be where you want to go but its not where I want to go. I'm happy letting each state be subject to the will of the people in determing what restrictions shall be placed on behaviors and leave it to the majority.

[SunStar]

But hey, people were only too happy to let Trent Lott get thrown to the wolves.

Sodomy is not a racial component. We should be promoting government colorblindness. However, when it comes to homosexual acts, we should be promoting family values, rather than gutter values.

[mdmathis6]

Thanks for the info....I sent out e-mails to the AP chief and to the reporter. Hope they got thru!

[sinkspur]

If we throw a blanket statement out their that the state may not define any behavior as unaceptable because of privacy

I don't know anybody who's arguing that. Clearly the state can define unacceptable behavior, in spite of privacy.

The question is, just which behavior should qualify as unacceptable enough for the state to intervene.

That's the crux of the whole matter.

[sinkspur]

Yes, I'm focusing on that ONE WORD because that one word was NOT said by Santorum - and it was written into the report for the sole purpose of creating an incident.

That's not the word that created "the incident."

Santorum might, in the future, not give an interview he was clearly not prepared for, or better prepare for it if he's going to be using terms like bestiality and incest in the same sentence with actions performed by gays.

Or, better yet, take a cue from the Bush administration and just not talk about cases before the Supreme Court.

[CyberAnt]

Well ... I still don't think Santorum said anything wrong, but you can believe whatever you want.

[Jhoffa_]

Well ... I still don't think Santorum said anything wrong..

I don't either.

It's amazing to me that someone can't make these kinds of comparisons without being scorned.

They (the aforementioned acts) are in the same category, imo.

How this became a political third rail I have no idea.

[js1138]

I think you're wrong about the importance of the inserted word. The intention was to make a legal point that if sex could not be regulated due to privacy, then incest and other forms of sex could not be regulated. The wording was clumsy and the guy will pay for it. I think it's a shame that pubbies can't anticipate the effects of their statements any better than the blixy chicks.

[CyberAnt]

"how this became a political 3rd rail"

The only reason I can think of is the reporter just happened to be the wife of the campaign manager for John Kerry - and like Rush said - these people are LOOKING for anything (however small) to diss the repubs - so ardent is their hatred for the Bush group.

[Jorge]

I think you're wrong about the importance of the inserted word. The intention was to make a legal point that if sex could not be regulated due to privacy, then incest and other forms of sex could not be regulated. The wording was clumsy and the guy will pay for it. I think it's a shame that pubbies can't anticipate the effects of their statements any better than the blixy chicks.

I actually agree with what you say. Sorry if I didn't make myself clear.

[Salvation]

Because you have stood with us to protect families from the
radical homosexual agenda, we want to ALERT you to a situation
involving Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum that is growing
more critical with each passing hour.

Homosexual activists are calling on Sen. Santorum to be removed
from his leadership post as Republican Conference Committee
Chair (3rd ranking Republican post) because of comments the
senator made regarding a Supreme Court Case.

Now the Democratic Senatorial Committee has joined in.

* * * * * HERE IS WHAT HAPPENED...

This firestorm erupted in response to Sen. Santorum's comments
on a case involving a Texas law that bans acts of sodomy.
Sen. Santorum said that if the Court overturns that law,
it could open the door to a "right" to sodomy, bigamy,
and polygamy.

Like many Americans, Sen. Santorum does not want the courts
to create a constitutional right to homosexual sex. If this
happens, our families and our children will be in permanent
jeopardy, especially in the courts.

Now, homosexual activists are calling for Sen. Santorum
to be removed from his leadership post!

* * * * * IMMEDIATE ACTION NEEDED

We are encouraging our Center Alert friends to contact
Sen. Santorum's office right now and encourage him to
"stay at his post".

Sen. Santorum's phone number: 202-224-6324

Also, call Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and let him
know that you believe Sen. Santorum should not be removed
from his position as Conference Committee Chair:

Majority Leader Frist's number: 202-224-3344

Finally, let the Ethics Committee Chair, Sen. Voinovich,
know that you support Sen. Santorum:

Sen. Voinovich's number: 202-224-3353
Senate Ethics Committee: 202-224-2981

* * * * * ALERT YOUR FRIENDS

[Salvation]

Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA), an innocent victim of a deceitful ambush,
finds himself amid a concocted firestorm just for speaking the truth
about the ramifications of an upcoming Supreme Court case. Please go to
ConservativePetitions.com and read what is at stake. Here's the address:
http://www.conservativepetitions.com/petitions/php?id=187

Homosexual and Democrat Party groups are seeking to use Senate
Republican Conference chairman's remarks to force his resignation like
with former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott. And the Democrat-
dominated media is fueling what it hopes will be a feeding frenzy.

Sen. Santorum's comments were made during an April 7 interview with
Associate Press reporter Lara Jakes Jordan, wife of Jim Jordan, a former
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee official who now manages Sen.
John Kerry's presidential campaign. The DSCC, naturally, called for Sen.
Santorum to resign his leadership position after the Human Rights
Campaign and the Pennsylvania chapter of the Log Cabin Republicans
squealed in alleged outrage.

Fearless on matters of morality, Sen. Santorum said what the Bible
teaches is correct to believe, and he did so in the context of
discussing the implications of a Supreme Court case. He has done nothing
wrong. In fact, he has done something right by inadvertently bringing a
crucial issue to light.

Sen. Santorum needs to hear from the American public in impressive
numbers. Here's your chance stand up for this courageous leader who has
been standing up for the sanctity of marriage and traditional family
values. Go to ConservativePetitions.com and sign the petition in support
of him and the truth he speaks. Then email everyone you know to help
generate additional support. Here again is where to act:
http://www.conservativepetitions.com/petitions/php?id=187

[SendShaqtoIraq]

"Santorum got heard. His message wasn't liked.

By whom?"

By a bunch of queers who are trying to push legislation that guarantees them the right to do anything they want with anyone they want. Why do you think they're trying so hard to get into the Boy Scouts?(Girl Scouts already allow lesbians to be troop leaders-I would never let my daughter in that organization) Why do you think they force themselves into our schools to teach? Why do you think there are so many gay priests? Why do you think they want to force churches into allowing them to preach/teach Sunday School? It puts them in close contact, in positons of trust, with our CHILDREN, that's why. Their behavior is disgusting, their agenda more so.

[WOSG]

This is good political wisdom. Shut up if it is not helping you. This is a left-wing media assault trying to create an issue out of nothing.
I am glad we have a White House with political smarts. The WH press corps asked leading question after question on this issue, with their only goal to drive a wedge between the President and santorum. Ari didnt bite once.

[WOSG]

how is saying nothing pandering to anyone?

[FirstTomato]

The liberals evidently don't think Santorum has a right to free speech, and want to punish him for even discussing an issue.

I applaud Santorum for standing tall and resisting the attempt by the extremist sodomy lobby to suppress his free speech.