I saw a talkshow with Rick Santorum the republican candidate for the white house.
One way or another he has picked out my country as the one to blame.
He was talking like he knew he was talking about, the only minor thing was that all the things he was referring to were not true.
For example our euthanasia laws, he claimed that people here are wearing bracelets which says, don't euthanize me or elderly people who won't go to the hospital because they should be euthanized.

I have never heard so much crap in such a short time.
I mean we have a lot of things that the American people only can dream about.
We do have health insurance, everyone who comes to the hospital, will get treatment, no big bills after it.
We have srs for free, hrt for free and yes we do have euthanasia but only when the one who is suffering too much and there is not the slightest change for recovery and painkillers won't help anymore, that person can ask for it.
It will always be checked by another doctor and a DA.
A doctor can always refuse to give euthanasia because of his conscience or religion, that's something the patient and doctor has to discuss.

The fact is that the US is the most powerfull country in the world, their politics has a lot of influence in the world.
Shouldn't it be nice if the people who run the white house or want to run it know the facts or stop lying.
Anyway, in dutch eyes it looks like a very dumb performance of mister Santorum.
I wonder how many Americans will believe what he has said.

As an American, I'm truly ashamed that the candidates running for office are the best people for the job that we were able to find in a country of 300,000 million people.

That said, right now the Republicans are trying to get a nominee for office.  The people who are sure to show up and vote are the people who hold very strong viewpoints - moderate voters don't show up all that much.  So, if you want to sway people with strong views, you need to say you have strong views yourself.

Personally, I can't stand Santorum.  I hope others can't either, but we'll see come election day.  One thing is for certain though: If he wins the Republican nomination, he's going to have to become more moderate to win in an election that doesn't just include extremist voters (such as the general election).

As for whether or not Americans believe him, I suspect a minority does.  I also suspect most people don't.  We have a saying: "How do you know a politician is lying?  His lips are moving."

I know your topic is about politics, but here in the United States we do have euthanasia. It isn't legal, and it doesn't happen out in the open, but people are euthanized in terminal care facilities every day. When my Dad was dying of lung cancer and the end was near, a compassionate nurse gave him an overdose. It was the best thing that happened to him in a long time. Sorry for derailing the thread. Hugs, Devlyn

QuoteI mean we have a lot of things that the American people only can dream about.
We do have health insurance, everyone who comes to the hospital, will get treatment, no big bills after it.
We have srs for free, hrt for free and yes we do have euthanasia but only when the one who is suffering too much and there is not the slightest change for recovery and painkillers won't help anymore, that person can ask for it.
It will always be checked by another doctor and a DA.
A doctor can always refuse to give euthanasia because of his conscience or religion, that's something the patient and doctor has to discuss.

Yes you do have many things I wish we had here.  Our country which was partly founded on the separation of church and state but is controlled by the religious right.  And I'm not just referring to the christian fundamentalists but  religious conservatives of all faiths.  It's why things that make sense like euthanasia remain illegal.  I think most people are open to the idea but getting that law passed is all but impossible.  Why?  Religion.  Religious conservatives find it objectionable and have enough clout to stop it.  It's also why gays can't marry most places in this country. 

Rick Santorum view: "I don't believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute.  The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country," said Santorum.

"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual [gay] sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution. In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing."
~Rick Santorum, comparing homosexuality to bestiality, and saying that we don't have the right to have consensual sex. He's also saying we don't have the right to privacy.

Are you kidding?  I think this man is dangerous.

I'm glad with all your input.
Tracy, you don't derailing, contrary, it is exactly the point I'm talking about.
A shame that the act to stop the suffering of your father is illegal, I mean what's the point to let a man suffer for another week or so, there was no future beside more pain for him.

Here in Holland, the doctor listen to the wishes of the patient, is consulting another doctor who doesn't know the patient, when the other doctor has the same conclusion that the patient is suffering too much and has a wish for a more humanity death, they call the DA, when the DA finds out it's all in the lines of the law, the doctor will make an appointment for the day and time with the patient, so the patient has time to say farewell to his relatives.
After the euthanasia the DA will always examine or everything is done by the rules of the law, otherwise the doctor will be prosecuted.
Mister Santorum gives with his words the impression that we kill everybody who is old and has the guts to go to a hospital.

For gay marriage, we do have it here for more than ten years, it's just a marriage just like man and woman, with the same rules as any other marriage.
I don't see how it will ruin society when people of the same sex just love eachother, living together, go to work, pay their taxes and so on.
It's time mister Santorum goes to Holland for a visit and see with his very own eyes that the things he is talking about are a big difference with the reality.

But I think it's a shame that people with so very little knowledge are running for a place in the White House.
Suppose he will be chosen by the bible belt people and knows no facts about foreign countries?
America needs a wise man or woman to run the place, the country is too powerfull to leave that to biblefanatics.

Thanks for all your input, you're wonderful people

hugs
Annette

But I think it's a shame that people with so very little knowledge are running for a place in the White House.

Oh it's OK that they run - they can be amusing at times.  It's insane that other people (in pretty large amounts) support and agree with them.

Quote from: JulieC. on February 27, 2012, 05:51:15 PM

Rick Santorum view: "It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution."

In one breath these people say government should get out of our lives and in the next say things like the above..

Tekla, as always, your comments are priceless, great.

  I'm not too hot on Santorum either.  He's about as bad as Palin.  As with Romney's Mormon faith I find that not as threatening.  It was said the JFK's Roman Catholicism would change the government back in 1960, but it didn't.  JFK said that there should be a distinct separation of church and state during his campaign.  Santorum said that the passage that Kennedy spoke about the separation of church and state made him throw up.  Santorum did retract that statement later. 
  Joelene

  BTW, I just read my local paper and found this cartoon: http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20120229/OPINION03/302290057/John-Cole-Eternal
  Joelene

Santorum was correct about the so-called "right to privacy" not being found in the US Constitution.

In the Griswald v Connecticut case, Justice William O. Douglas writing for the majority stated:

The foregoing cases suggest that specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance.

So the "right to privacy" is found in the penumbras of the emanations from actual rights. 

Douglas was always good for a chuckle.

Ahh yes, the hearty chuckle of the majority opinion.  Nobody laughs like the winners do.  The madcap mirth of not one, not two, but three - THREE - concurring opinions.  I mean you got 4 out of the 7 votes writing on it - they knew it was important.  BTW both - yeah both - of the dissenters wrote on it too.  They knew it was important too.  It's one mofo commented upon decision.

You do realize that the decision was a huge victory for those who favor a smaller government with fewer intrusive powers?  Wasn't your side in favor of that at one point?  I know, hard to tell with all the amazing tone deaf statements winging around those guys anymore.



Hey Annette, to answer the question?  Which is
a) Is Frothy lying, deliberately telling a known falsehood to make a point in his favor?
2) Is Frothy really that dumb?
3) Will Frothy's supporters believe all kinds of mind-numbing stupidity?

Well, the answer to all those questions is YES.  Look, we got 300Million+ people here, that's a lot of stupid just based on the law of averages.  Since it's so huge - and empty to an amazing degree - people here tend not to travel outside the country.  Hell, it's a flat-out 48+ hours, at 60mph, no-sleep-till-Brooklyn drive from here to the other side, so going to another country tends to be rare, not common.  So he's able to get away with some of it.  Is someone who was the top student at his law school, got an MBA with honors too, and that's after having an undergraduate career on the honor role too - is someone like that, REALLY that dumb?  Nah.  But he's the kind of dick who always knows he's right, and bothering to investigate something is really not what he does.  Hell, I'm sure that he thinks that if the Netherlands doesn't operate that way, they still would like to and that's close enough to be propaganda worthy.

On the other hand, he's not exactly representative

He's a total tool.  Really if you were fired from your last job as a dishwasher would you go back and apply to be the boss?  Because that's what Rick is doing.  He lost his Senate seat (almost impossible to do BTW) by 17/18% - HUGE.  Now, having lost that government job he thinks he's ready to be the big boss.  But if these long elections tell us anything it's who is, and who is not, ready for prime time and old Rick had his meltdown - as most of them do, while he was on his couple week long winning streak.

But he has an appeal with a very core group of Republicans - the bible-crazy right wing - and they have glommed onto him as the Not Romney, which is what they are reduced to, supporting someone they really don't love (They LOVE Sara Palin) just to try to stop the RINO Mitt.  There is a lot of anti-religious hate mixed in (Romeny is a Mormon), lot's of that crazy American Religious Fundamentalism (and there is a huge right-wing, ultra-conservative bunch of American Catholics, just like there is a huge left-wing, radical liberation theology bunch of Catholics), some populist racism all mixed together with this insane economic theory --- and those people support him, but in reality it's say 10% of the people, 20 tops, that really feel that way, and they are geographically concentrated.  That's why who wins changes so often.

Quote from: Jamie D on March 01, 2012, 05:43:06 AM
Santorum was correct about the so-called "right to privacy" not being found in the US Constitution.

Sorry but I am not going to agree with this moron that right to privacy is something we should ignore as needed.

Being in the UK, coverage of current US politics frightens me.  We already have the beginnings of a neo con tea party in the UK with an in house magazine (the Daily Mail).  What America has now, we get in a few years.  It seems the most important thing about running for office in the states is money.  It doesn't matter how much of a lunatic you are, if your rich enough you can buy the ticket.

Obama must be odds on for re-election as the opposition is splintered, extreme and an accident waiting to happen

Quote from: tekla on March 01, 2012, 08:41:39 AM
Ahh yes, the hearty chuckle of the majority opinion.  Nobody laughs like the winners do.  The madcap mirth of not one, not two, but three - THREE - concurring opinions.  I mean you got 4 out of the 7 votes writing on it - they knew it was important.  BTW both - yeah both - of the dissenters wrote on it too.  They knew it was important too.  It's one mofo commented upon decision.

You do realize that the decision was a huge victory for those who favor a smaller government with fewer intrusive powers?  Wasn't your side in favor of that at one point?  I know, hard to tell with all the amazing tone deaf statements winging around those guys anymore....

Whether or not it constrains government is debatable (Patriot Act, anyone?),  Griswold was yet another case in a long line of judicial activist results.

Want a "right to privacy"?  Legislate one!  Many states already had privacy laws when Griswold was decided.  Justice Potter Stewart on point in his dissent.

Since 1879, Connecticut has had on its books a law which forbids the use of contraceptives by anyone. I think this is an uncommonly silly law. As a practical matter, the law is obviously unenforceable, except in the oblique context of the present case. As a philosophical matter, I believe the use of contraceptives in the relationship of marriage should be left to personal and private choice, based upon each individual's moral, ethical, and religious beliefs. As a matter of social policy, I think professional counsel about methods of birth control should be available to all, so that each individual's choice can be meaningfully made. But we are not asked in this case to say whether we think this law is unwise, or even asinine. We are asked to hold that it violates the United States Constitution. And that I cannot do....

What provision of the Constitution, then, does make this state law invalid? The Court says it is the right of privacy "created by several fundamental constitutional guarantees." With all deference, I can find no such general right of privacy in the Bill of Rights, in any other part of the Constitution, or in any case ever before decided by this Court.

At the oral argument in this case, we were told that the Connecticut law does not "conform to current community standards." But it is not the function of this Court to decide cases on the basis of community standards.

Quote from: Pippa on March 01, 2012, 10:16:32 AM
Being in the UK, coverage of current US politics frightens me.  We already have the beginnings of a neo con tea party in the UK with an in house magazine (the Daily Mail).  What America has now, we get in a few years.  It seems the most important thing about running for office in the states is money.  It doesn't matter how much of a lunatic you are, if your rich enough you can buy the ticket.

Obama must be odds on for re-election as the opposition is splintered, extreme and an accident waiting to happen

Then why does he feel the need to raise and spend $1 BILLION?

If Old Potter there was so 'on point' why did he only find one other person to agree with him, but 7 to oppose him?


Then why does he feel the need to raise and spend $1 BILLION?
Because you don't want to leave it to chance?  And opposed to the 'Pubs, he doesn't depend on a couple of rich people, he is depending on lots of smaller contributions and swag sales.  Personally I think all the 'BO' dog merch is awesome considering the Romney story and all.

I can not judge which candidate is best for America, I have my thoughts about it but I am not an American citizen so I don't have the right to vote, that is to the American people.

What does surprise me is that so many Americans believe that nonsense that someone can seriously compete for the presidency.
I mean, it's a population that has opportunities to develop themselves through education, we're not talking about a Third World country with illiteracy, where people have to believe those who just are able to read.

When I look at Michigan where he narrowly lost, he has many supporters.
Still I hope for common sense when it comes to choose, now of course, it is also strategically chosen, not the for one to win but for the another to lose, or for making it a longer competition so the winning candidate will have less money, when the real elections start.

I have often visited the U.S. and I met some great people there with good common sense, who were able to form an informed opinion.
Your discussion and input are proof that this is true.
Thanks for your opinions and input, my friends

Quote from: tekla on March 01, 2012, 10:57:30 AM
If Old Potter there was so 'on point' why did he only find one other person to agree with him, but 7 to oppose him?

I can produce a long list of majority opinions that aren't worth the paper they were printed on.  Douglas was part of the particularly activist Warren Court, as you well know.

Then why does he feel the need to raise and spend $1 BILLION?

Because you don't want to leave it to chance?  And opposed to the 'Pubs, he doesn't depend on a couple of rich people, he is depending on lots of smaller contributions and swag sales.  Personally I think all the 'BO' dog merch is awesome considering the Romney story and all.

You're a natural born comedian. 

Two words: Goldman Sachs

I am not too hot on Mr. Santorum, I don't really think he cares if the facts or correct or not, because he knows that a majority of people will believe what he said without looking into it. 

I am honestly fascinated by the Republican party candidates this year, it is like watching a circus with no ringmaster!