Monday, December 12, 2011


Poor Rick Santorum.  Guilt by association has reared its ugly head.  As the former senator and current sex-act by-product namesake used to represent the state that houses Penn State University, which employed Jerry Sandusky, currently under indictment for multiple counts of child sexual abuse and rape, it was going to happen sooner or later that someone tried to tie the two of them together.

At a "presidential candidate education forum" hosted by the University of Northern Iowa last Friday, an audience member questioned the candidate about Sandusky, whom the candidate awarded with the "Angels in Adoption Award."  Santorum explained that he hadn't known about the details of Sandusky's alleged activities at the time and noted that the award has since been withdrawn.  Well, fair enough, of course.  But, the audience member's follow up was, "So we shouldn't trust Obama with our kids, but we can trust you?"  The article offered no response from Santorum (if indeed there was one).

Santorum, who prides himself as a champion of "family values" and returning morality to the forefront of American society, might not be totally innocent in the process.  As we all know, the Sandusky scandal claimed the jobs of legendary Penn State coach Joe Paterno and the university's president.  The whole scandal stinks of cover up.  It's not inconceivable that Santorum could actually have known what was up at the time (although there is absolutely NO proof, and I am not suggesting otherwise). 

The forum shone a spotlight on Santorum's idiotic ideas about public education.  Money quote:
It's now run by states and the federal government. The government has taken over and we have government-run education in this country.  Pretty soon, (the government will) be lifting (children) out of the nursery and putting them into school because the government needs to get in as soon as they can to influence the educational lives of your children.
He sounds positively Bachmann-esque, no?  These nutty conspiracy hypotheses have no place in a presidential election, whether they're just rhetorical flourishes or attempts at serious debate.

No comments: