Politics

Sex, Lies, and Rick Santorum

Bill McGurn’s column in WSJ knocks it out of the park. He hammers one of the most glaring double standards in politics:

When Barack Obama was campaigning for president in 2008, he declared that marriage is between a man and a woman. For the most part, his position was treated as a nonissue.

Now Rick Santorum is campaigning for president. He too says that marriage is between a man and a woman. What a different reaction he gets.

There’s no mystery why. Mr. Santorum is attacked because everyone understands that he means what he says.

President Obama, by contrast, gets a pass because everyone understandsβ€”nudge nudge, wink winkβ€”that he’s not telling the truth. The press understands that this is just one of those things a Democratic candidate has to say so he doesn’t rile up the great unwashed.

Yes, there’s a glaring inconsistency, but somehow no one seems to notice. Or perhaps they just don’t care. I’m not sure which is worse.

I would add another example of this double standard that just occurred this past week. When President Obama recently spoke at the national prayer breakfast, he argued that the rich should pay a higher tax rate based on Luke 12:48. When Senator Santorum made a reference to “theology” last week, the press pounces on him for questioning the President’s Christianity and for being too extreme. I could multiply examples, but I will resist. You get the point.

Read the rest of McGurn’s column here.

5 Comments

  • JStanton

    Are you saying that Obama should have been criticized for his using the Bible to justify his tax policy or that Santorum was unfairly criticized for his comments about Obama’s theology? I don’t see the equivalence between the two.

    • Christiane

      CNN’s Wolf Blitzer had a lot to say today about Santorum’s weekend comments about Obama’s ‘theology’ . . .

      the mainstream media did not take Santorum’s comments lightly, but examined them in detail, now that he is the ‘front-runner’.

      If the conservative movement values him as their candidate, I can see why. He apparently is solidly ‘the same’ on social issues all the time.
      But, because, until now, he was not ‘front-runner’,
      the rest of the country did not pay him much mind.

      His comments this weekend changed all that.
      From now on, mainstream and left-leaning media will be all over his comments and he may be asked to explain or clarify some of them, like he was asked about the ‘that leader over in Europe’ comments. He did not handle that questioning very well, I’m afraid.

      • Christiane

        Update: the liberal media has it that Santorum self-destructed in his chances with the national voters thanks to the comments he made publicly this past weekend.

        Now, the liberal media is talking about the possibility of a ‘broken’ Republican convention, and a possible acclamation vote for Jeb Bush.

        Hmmm . . . Romney running out of money, and Santorum not running out of comments that have alarmed moderate women voters (especially the younger women) . . . maybe Jeb Bush might come to the rescue . . .

        curiouser and curiouser . . . don’t you just love election year πŸ™‚

  • donsands

    .β€œHe [Santorum] voted to raise the debt ceiling, I believe, five different times to a tune of about an additional $3.5 trillion,” Romney

    Rick is most likely a fine Catholic man, husband and dad. But he sure doesn’t “not” vote for spending money. He’s another weak person who can’t admit he’s wrong, and change. Politicians have a way of staying the same, and trying to make you think they are this way or that way.
    Sad.

    And the one man with integrity, Ron Paul, is considered a loon. Wow. Not that he doesn’t have his weaknesses, but at least he does vote NO. And he is what he is.

    Hope you don’t mind me sharing that.

    Santorum would be better than Obama in some ways, but for our debt, he would make little difference, sad to say.

Leave a Reply to ChristianeCancel reply