Santorum Exposed: The Blog - Entries from June 2005

Quicksearch

Calendar

Syndicate This Blog

RSS 0.91 feed

RSS 1.0 feed

RSS 2.0 feed

ATOM 1.0 feed

RSS 2.0 Comments

OPML 1.0 feed

Thursday, June 30. 2005

Rick supports veterans... this week at least.

The Senate unanimously approved yesterday $1.5 billion in emergency funds for the Department of Veterans Affairs' health care programs. The bill's main sponsor was Rick Santorum, and we commend him for that.

So why is this post in the "Rick's Hypocrisy" category? Well the problem is Rick had previously voted against increased funding for the Department of Veteran's Affairs at least 3 times. So why did he suddenly change his tune? From the Washington Post:

The Senate vote yesterday was on a bill sponsored by Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), who had opposed a past Democratic amendment to raise VA spending. He was given the honor of becoming lead sponsor because he faces one of the toughest reelection fights next year among incumbent Republicans.

Senate Democratic leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.), who is orchestrating the party's campaign efforts, refused to give Santorum a free ride, noting that on three previous occasions, "Senate Republicans, including the lead sponsor [Santorum] . . . voted no. No to additional funding for our veterans. No to giving them the quality health care they have earned. No to keeping our nation's commitments to those who have served."

I guess the real question is, why did he vote against increased funding 3 times? Was it based on any sort of principle? If it was, he certainly seems to have abandoned it for expediency's sake.

Sound hypocritical?

Posted by Brian in Santorum's Hypocrisy at 13:59 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (6)

Wednesday, June 29. 2005

Culture of life, huh?

Today, the Senate approved a bill that would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from using tests that intentionally expose people to pesticides when considering permits for pest Killers. As the AP reports:

New EPA rules under development envision permitting the agency to accept data from human tests on children, pregnant women, newborns, infants and fetuses. Even newborns of "uncertain viability" could be tested under the draft EPA rule.

This bill is meant to stop those human tests from happening.

Guess who voted against the bill... That's right, Rick Santorum!

Judging from today's vote, Rick doesn't have a problem with pregnant women, newborns or even fetuses being exposed to pesticides that are not known to be safe. So fetal stem-cell research is wrong, but testing potentially dangerous chemicals on fetuses is okay?

Anyone else smell hypocrisy?

David Sirota has more on this...

Posted by Brian in Santorum's Hypocrisy at 16:37 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0)

Rick clarifies Hitler remark

Rick says Hitler comment was a joke

Imus recently asked Rick about comparing his Democratic colleagues to Adolf Hitler. Rick was quick to correct Imus and clarify that he did not compare the Democratic filibuster to something that Hitler did, but rather to something he didn't do.

So, by his own admission, what Rick said was that Democrats were doing something that not even Hitler would have had the audacity to do. Hmmmm, does that mean that he was really saying that Democrats were behaving worse than Adolf Hitler?

Rick went on to tell Imus that he was just trying to make a joke. Somehow it must have gone over our heads.

Watch the video.

Posted by Brian in Santorum's Hypocrisy at 10:37 | Comments (4) | Trackbacks (0)

Rick's latest hypocrisy caught on tape

Click to watch Rick on Imus

Last Thursday, Rick made an appearance on "Imus in the Morning" to discuss whether Senator Dick Durbin had properly apologized for his recent remarks regarding possible prisoner abuse at Guantanamo Bay. In a stunning show of hypocrisy, Rick told Imus that Durbin had not apologized satisfactorily and used his own "apology" for his recent remarks comparing democrats to Hitler as an example of how to say you're sorry.

Let's look at the two apologies, shall we?

Senator Durbin put his statement of regret on his Senate web site and read it on the floor of the Senate. Here is an excerpt:

“Mr. President, it is very clear that even though I thought I had said something that clarified the situation, to many people it was still unclear. I'm sorry if anything that I said caused any offense or pain to those who have such bitter memories of the Holocaust, the greatest moral tragedy of our time. Nothing, nothing should ever be said to demean or diminish that moral tragedy.”

“I'm also sorry if anything I said in any way cast a negative light on our fine men and women in the military. I went to Iraq just a few months ago with Senator Harry Reid and a bipartisan Senate delegation. When you look in the eyes of the soldiers you see your son and daughter. They are the best. I never, ever intended any disrespect for them.”

So how did Rick "apologize"? He released a statement to the media in which he said that his comment "was a mistake and I meant no offense."

Which of these two statements seems like an honest, heartfelt apology to you? In the future, Rick might want to leave etiquette advice to Emily Post.

Posted by Brian in Santorum's Hypocrisy at 09:55 | Comments (0) | Trackback (1)

(Page 1 of 1, totaling 4 entries)