Posted on 02/09/2012 8:25:12 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Rick Santorum, in an interview with CNN's John King a bit ago, was asked whether he thinks it's a good idea or a bad idea for the Pentagon to relax some of the rules about women taking frontline roles in combat, "perhaps opening the door to a broader role for, ultimately, women in combat."
His answer was both praising of women serving the country, and as a part of the armed services, but he went on to explain why he would take issue with women on the front lines.
"Look, I want to create every opportunity for women to be able to serve this country, and they do so in an amazing and wonderful way. They're a great addition to the - and have been for a long time - to the armed services of our country," Santorum said. "But I do have concerns about women in frontline combat."
He added, "I think that can be a very compromising situation, where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interests of the mission because of other types of emotions that are involved. And I think that's probably - you know, it already happens, of course, with the camaraderie of men in combat. But I think it would be even more unique if women were in combat. I think that's probably not in the best interests of men, women or the mission."
It's not clear exactly what Santorum meant by "other types of emotions that are involved" for women who would be serving in frontline situations. I've emailed a spokesman for a clarification, but haven't heard back yet.
You’re smoking some serious crack if you think Joe Is a Maddow fan Newb.
Are you a DU troll too ??
Donald is that you?
Romney attacks areunleashed now !!!
This same tired story had been posted twice from the
Usual Dem party front groups !!!!
And Romney bots are posting here now !
The real issue here is that of physical strength; which is an important factor directly related to survival in a combat environment. Of course, it is possible strength will not be required due to the advent of modern equipment/weaponry; however, when things go wrong or equipment breaks down; physical strength can mean the difference between success and failure ...or even life and death.
Of course the real reason for all this is to allow more females to be able to document some sort of combat experience; thus “getting their tickets punched” and giving them greater potential for promotion.
Knock off the ad hominem attacks and stick to the article.
If you dislike all of the choices, then why do you want a brokered convention? One of these four dudes is going to be picked by the delegates if there is one.
The last hit piece on conservatives he posted was from Rachael Maddow's blog.
While the slant of the article implied it was female emotions, it was clear from the context of his actual quote that Santorum was referring to either the protective instincts of men toward women or possibly to romantic feelings, which involve the emotions of both.
Don't buy the spin.
“Some of us remember how Newt stepped in it, when he pronounced women would get infections in the trench on a monthly basis.”
I remember that. I guess he’ll also lose the bra burner vote.
Your one to talk about attacks !
Your tired comments are full of threats and put downs .
Get a grip .
So he posted an article that highlights how Santorum pissed Maddow off.
So what?
Because I'm a hopeless dreamer. If none of the four can get a majority, maybe, just maybe, the convention will pick a compromise choice that everyone can live with.
While I'm dreaming, wouldn't Gen. McChrystal be an interesting choice? I have no idea if he's even a Republican, but it would be a real slap to Obama. Middle America would love it.
He's posting liberal spin attacking Santorum, some from extremist liberal sources. Probably just a bitter Newt fan.
Santorum was referring to either the protective instincts of men toward women or possibly to romantic feelings, which involve the emotions of both.
*********************
With the repeal of DADT, doesn’t that leave the possibility that there could be fella for fella romantic feelings?
This DADT repeal really has made a mess of things.
“He’s posting liberal spin attacking Santorum, some from extremist liberal sources. Probably just a bitter Newt fan.”
But once you go that route, you can come up with all kinds of fun things that Newt said about orphanages, monthly infections, moonbases, etc.
Santorum wants to revert that policy.
I take your point; but, I’m really not “buying” the “spin” I just honestly believe that using the term “emotions” in this context will create a negative connotation in the minds of most women. Rick is trying to “skirt” the issue (no pun intended) and, in doing so, he only makes it worse.
So you want the party bosses to choose the nominee for you? You do know that that's what a brokered convention entails, right?
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.