• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Rick Santorum wrong again - now fighting President Kennedy on religion

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/06/029308.php

Sanders pandering. Of course you can disagree that this is pandering, but it's pandering to me, and it's things like this that I am talking about.

It's not really any trouble to find such about any politician.

I actually had barely heard of Sanders until you mentioned him, but he seems to fit right in as I look around on the web.

You're the one making a false statement - or by your standards, lying. You can't back it up, and you aren't honest enough to admit it. So, this discussion is over.
 
Kennedy hit the nail right on the head, obviously. Santorum is a fool, and should he by some chance get the GOP nom, these words will come back to hurt him in the general election. It isn't just the "throw up" remark. Worse still is his mis-charactization of the Kennedy's remarks, saying that he believes that "people of faith do not belong in the public square." Kennedy said the opposite. This is a speech Santorum claims to have read, and he can only site the first sentence. What an asshole.

JFK is one of these political figures, like Reagan, that you don't mess with, particularly on issues with which the vast majority of voters agree.
 
Last edited:
I'm 95% sure that Santorum is a Democratic sleeper candidate that they activated to effectively destroy the Republican party. Santorum scares the hell out of me, someone said it best already "Christian Taliban". That about sums it up.
 
So is Reagan but the Right can't let him go either...

😉

AFAIK, Reagan is not fighting anyone either.

EDIT: But if I had to lay money on it, I would give Reagan the odds of beating Kennedy in a fight. I think Reagan probably packed heat.
 
AFAIK, Reagan is not fighting anyone either.

EDIT: But if I had to lay money on it, I would give Reagan the odds of beating Kennedy in a fight. I think Reagan probably packed heat.

In fairness Kennedy was a bona fide war hero while Reagan was in Hollywood playing one in the movies. Curiously, Reagan used to tell a story about having been one of the American troops to liberate Buchenwald - he repeated this more than once, including telling it to Yitzhak Shamir and Simon Wiesenthal. Unfortunately the story was completely false.
 
Last edited:
AFAIK, Reagan is not fighting anyone either.

EDIT: But if I had to lay money on it, I would give Reagan the odds of beating Kennedy in a fight. I think Reagan probably packed heat.

In your tinsel-town dreamworld, sparky.

Reagan hid in Hollywood and only played at being a soldier, while JFK signed-up, fought for his country, and was a genuine combat war hero.

It figures you'd back the big, lying blowhard phony.
 
I agree, Craig. Santorum is not only a complete moron, he is also a religion fundamentalist hellbent on forcing the most right-wing version of Christianity possible upon the entire nation and every person that votes for him ought not to call themselves an American.
 
Next conservatives are going to claim Rush Limbaugh's a war hero even though he dodged Vietnam because of 'anal cysts'.

Reagan was a pussy.
 
I agree, Craig. Santorum is not only a complete moron, he is also a religion fundamentalist hellbent on forcing the most right-wing version of Christianity possible upon the entire nation and every person that votes for him ought not to call themselves an American.

Same thing as Perry was.
 
To be fair, Santorum seems to have taken note of a particular portion of Kennedy's speech and is fighting hard for the proposition in the quote:

I would not look with favor upon a president working to subvert the First Amendment's guarantees of religious liberty. Nor would our system of checks and balances permit him to do so. And neither do I look with favor upon those who would work to subvert Article VI of the Constitution by requiring a religious test — even by indirection — for it. If they disagree with that safeguard, they should be out openly working to repeal it.
 
Last edited:
In fairness Kennedy was a bona fide war hero while Reagan was in Hollywood playing one in the movies.

Agreed. But of the two, I could see Reagan packing heat while Kennedy would not. If a death match between them suddenly broke out...well, having a gun gives you a big advantage.

It is like asking who would win in a match between Picard and Kirk. Kirk would, obviously. Picard would not get out two words before Kirk pulled out a phaser and blasted him down.

A lot of people do not realize how important movies were to the homefront during WW2. While it was a MUCH MUCH safer thing to do, it was still very important. Then you have people like Bob Hope who did so much more...he did amazing things for the troops.
 
Agreed. But of the two, I could see Reagan packing heat while Kennedy would not. If a death match between them suddenly broke out...well, having a gun gives you a big advantage...
The only problem with that scenario is that they would only trust Reagan with a prop gun.
 
The only problem with that scenario is that they would only trust Reagan with a prop gun.

I wouldn't have a problem giving Ronnie a real gun with real bullets 'cuz he'd have to figure out how to use it first, and if he did figure it out, he'd miss whatever he was shooting at anyway, including his own forehead.
 
Back
Top