Santorum: I’m #2! I’m #2!


Rick Santorum is using some rather odd reasoning in claiming that he is the one that can beat Mitt Romney and not Newt Gingrich. After two distant third place finishes in a row, he thinks he’s clearly the stronger candidate over Newt, who has a first and a second in the last two primaries.

Despite his third-place finish in Florida’s primary, Rick Santorum says the results are further proof that he is the only candidate who can beat Mitt Romney.

That’s because Newt Gingrich, Santorum said, had his chance to become the conservative standard-bearer following his South Carolina primary win. And Gingrich couldn’t succeed.

“If you don’t want Mitt Romney, obviously Newt Gingrich doesn’t have what it takes to win this,” he told reporters here. “Let’s give someone else a shot.”

Uh, Rick. You had your shot, remember? But after Iowa, you pretty much collapsed.

Comments

  1. daved says

    He’s #2, all right. I mean, considering the definition of “santorum” and everything.

    Yeah, cheap shot. I don’t care. I despise him. The night he lost his last Senate election, that was one of the things I celebrated, and I don’t even live in Pennsylvania.

  2. d cwilson says

    I do live in Pennsylvania and his defeat was the number one thing I celebrated that month.

    Shorter version of Santorum’s remark: Pay attention to me! Pay attention to me!

  3. Reginald Selkirk says

    After two distant third place finishes in a row, he thinks he’s clearly the stronger candidate over Newt

    He could have a point in that he’s been out of the spotlight. With most of the Republican candidates, the less you have to deal with them, the more you forget just how terrible they are.
    .
    It’s going to be hard to come back from that “rape pregnancy is a gift from God” bit though.

  4. F says

    Yeah, I see what you did there. And now I’m completely off my lunch.

    Talking about Republicans. Gah!

  5. says

    Look at the averages. Santorum has finished 1st, 5th, 3rd and 3rd. That’s an average of 3. Newt on the other hand has an average of 2.75 and poor Mitt has an average of 1.5. Now would you rather have $3.00 or $2.75 or $1.50?

    If he wins the presidency do they have to scotch guard the white house?

  6. D. C. Sessions says

    It’s fun mocking Santorum’s insanity over sexual topics (which are none of his damn business anyway, but back to topic …)

    However, sometimes it gets in the way of really interesting stuff where he goes off-leash and says things the other Republicans are too well-coached to come out and say.

    Like, for instance, where he’s asked by a kid who’s being treated for cancer what he’s going to do to make the drugs more affordable and he tells the kid that we need to get government out of health care so that the Invisible Hand of the Private Market (blessed be its Name) can work its magic. And then a mother (his?) talks about other kids in treatment for cancer who can’t afford treatment and what is he going to do for them — these are children who are going to freaking die because they can’t afford treatment.

    And he goes off on her and essentially tells her that those kids should be proud to give their lives so that pharmaceutical companies can make the profits that give us the wonders of modern medicine. Like Viagra, I suppose.

  7. tubi says

    @ D. C. Sessions: Do you have a link to those comments or recall where they occurred? I have a vague memory but no specifics, and it’d be handy to have.

  8. Stevarious says

    And then a mother (his?) talks about other kids in treatment for cancer who can’t afford treatment and what is he going to do for them — these are children who are going to freaking die because they can’t afford treatment.

    Obviously they deserve to die for not being able to afford the treatment. It’s a gift from god, really, since they just go straight to heaven anyway. It’s clearly what god wants and who are we to argue?

  9. says

    And he goes off on her and essentially tells her that those kids should be proud to give their lives so that pharmaceutical companies can make the profits that give us the wonders of modern medicine. Like Viagra, I suppose.

    Or Pitocin, the drug used to induce labor in your pregnant wife at 20 weeks, so as to save her life, even though it means the death of the fetus.

  10. hunter says

    This is a man who thinks he can preach morality to everyone else? He obviously has no moral center himself, considering that morality starts with compassion and respect for others.

  11. dobby says

    http://news.yahoo.com/rick-santorum-tells-sick-kid-market-set-drug-004745094–abc-news.html

    Rick Santorum Tells Sick Kid Market Should Should Set Drug Prices

    GOP contender Rick Santorum had a heated exchange with a mother and her sick young son Wednesday, arguing that drug companies were entitled to charge whatever the market demanded for life-saving therapies.

    Santorum, himself the father of a child with a rare genetic disorder, compared buying drugs to buying an iPad, and said demand would determine the cost of medical therapies.

    “People have no problem paying $900 for an iPad,” Santorum said, “but paying $900 for a drug they have a problem with – it keeps you alive. Why? Because you’ve been conditioned to think health care is something you can get without having to pay for it.”

    The mother said the boy was on the drug Abilify, used to treat schizophrenia, and that, on paper, its costs would exceed $1 million each year.

    More at http://news.yahoo.com/rick-santorum-tells-sick-kid-market-set-drug-004745094–abc-news.html

  12. baal says

    As Rachel Maddow says so well, anyone can be the frontrunner for the republicans this year, well not you Rick Santorum, but really anyone…

  13. says

    Rick Santorum gets the Bad Lip Reading treatment. It works remarkably well in his case. “Specialty gopher meat”! “I puked on the pizza”! “I just want to practice soft algebra, please”! “Diarrhea is okay”!

  14. Artor says

    It’s not too surprising that Santorum (stinky & messy be thy name) thinks his abysmal primary showing qualifies him to lead the ticket. He’s shown many times before that as far as he’s concerned, facts & statistics mean whatever he thinks they should mean. Gawd called him to be Prez, so whatever setbacks & embarrassing failures happen, they’re all part of Gawd’s plan to turn the White House into the Brown-stained House.

  15. M Groesbeck says

    And then a mother (his?) talks about other kids in treatment for cancer who can’t afford treatment and what is he going to do for them — these are children who are going to freaking die because they can’t afford treatment.

    Isn’t that pretty fundamental to capitalism, though? There’s disagreement within capitalism, but it’s mostly a matter of whether everyone deserves (by definition) whatever they acquire from The Market or whether some sacrifices must be made to ensure the socially optimum outcome (which is likewise determined by The Market). Setting human concerns as superior to economic efficiency is anti-capitalist by definition.

    (Of course, one could always just support socialism or a social-democratic mixed economy…but that’s not feasible for a Republican like Santorum. Hell, even Democrats these days have to swear a blood oath to have no priorities above the Holy Market.)

  16. exdrone says

    The Republican Party is like a man who can’t find his keys on him and keeps checking the same suitcoat pockets over and over. Is it in this one? No that’s a Gingrich. How about here? No, Romney. I know I have a good candidate here somewhere. Oh, it’s here. No, that’s Gingrich again. I just checked there. Oh, wait …

  17. Trebuchet says

    “Let’s give someone else a shot.”

    Basically, Rick is looking for a pity fuck.

    Perhaps Dan Savage will take mercy on him….

  18. StevoR says

    “If you don’t want Mitt Romney, obviously Newt Gingrich doesn’t have what it takes to win this,” he told reporters here. “Let’s give someone else a shot.”
    Uh, Rick. You had your shot, remember?

    Maybe “Mr Stinkyfroth” has *had* too many shots and that’s *why* he can’t remember? Could explain some of the nasty drunk type rhetoric that Santorum vomits out his mouth too.

  19. dingojack says

    Intrade today
    Rick Santorum

    Head to head matchup
    Obama vs. Santorum: 99.123% vs. 0.877% [Obama leads by 99.246%]
    [Obama vs. Romney: 59.286% vs. 40.714%]

    Chance of being nominated
    Santorum: 520 to 8
    [Romney: ca. 11 to 10]

    Chance of being nominaed and elected President
    Santorum: 7410 to 1
    [Romney: ca. 27 to 10]

    Looks like you’re shit outta luck, santorum!

    Dingo
    —–
    Source

  20. mucklededun says

    The Invisible Hand does not merely set prices. If a niche drug is unprofitable, it may become impossible to obtain at any price. I have a co-worker who is going through exactly this problem finding a particular medication which was prescribed for his two-year-old son.

  21. F says

    It’s funny how the same people who go to great lengths to disbelieve that evolution could produce life as we know it also go to great lengths to believe that a “free market”* can produce the best economic outcome.

    *There’s no such thing as a free market.

  22. 'Tis Himself, OM says

    The free marketeers have only a few principles. One of them is that social problems can be resolved by creating a market. Are schools failing? Create a market in education. Is there pollution or waste of resources? Create a market in the resource or the right to pollute. Is there a shortage of human organs for transplants? Let people sell their body parts. Not enough babies for adoption? Allow people to sell their babies.

    This principle of “economic correctness” is increasingly mouthed in conservative think tanks, but its obvious long-term implications may strike ordinary Americans as horribly cruel. They need to hear this economic gibberish first-hand. Free-market rhetoric is powerfully persuasive only to a certain kind of elite audience. Uncoupled from nationalist appeals it begins to lose its power to motivate general audiences in a positive way.

    The rhetorical style of free marketeers shows how the “realist style” of economic argument works, combining the definition of any object, person or relationship as a commodity, reliance on quasi-logical argument, appeals to irony via reference to the “inevitable perversity of well-intentioned social programs”, failure to respond to opposing arguments (because “in real science, when fundamental questions are settled, only cranks dispute them”); and perhaps above all, the avoidance of empirical investigation.

    Once one decodes these devices, cracking the arguments becomes a parlor game, not more difficult than crossword puzzles nor less routine. Having once solved the sophistry of Newt Gingrich or seen the contradictions built into the speeches of Mitt Romney, you will put them down and never look at them again. The remaining mystery is only why they held up for so long.

Leave a Reply