Sanctorum Dislike that "Professional Accomplishments" are Key to Happiness for Women

• BobYoMeowMeow wrote on 2012-02-16 10:04

  WASHINGTON — Only days after having to explain a comment about women in the military and emotions in combat, Rick Santorum seemed to struggle a bit on Sunday to explain a remark in his book “It Takes a Family” that accuses “radical feminists” of undermining families and trying to convince women that they could find fulfillment only in the workplace.
  
  Asked by George Stephanopoulos about that remark on ABC’s “This Week,” Mr. Santorum said that his wife, Karen, had written that section of the 2005 book — though only his name is on the cover and he does not list her, in his acknowledgements, among those “who assisted me in the writing of this book.” He said that when Ms. Santorum, a nurse and a lawyer, had quit her job to raise the couple’s children, she felt that many people “looked down their nose at that decision.”
  
  “Sadly the propaganda campaign launched in the 1960s has taken root,” Mr. Santorum, or his wife, wrote in the book. “The radical feminists succeeded in undermining the traditional family and convincing women that professional accomplishments are the key to happiness.”
  
  In the interview Sunday with Mr. Stephanopoulos, Mr. Santorum pleaded unfamiliarity with the citation, saying, “I don’t know — that’s a new quote for me,” before adding that “the bottom line is that people should have equal opportunity to rise in the work force.”
  
  But criticism of his argument that more women should perhaps stay home should not have come as news to Mr. Santorum as he seeks the Republican presidential nomination. The book was sharply debated during his unsuccessful 2006 bid for re-election as a senator from Pennsylvania, drawing pointed criticism from women’s groups and Democratic officials at the time.
  
  Mr. Santorum argues in the book that many of the problems facing the poor could be solved by building stronger families and communities, including by making divorce more difficult and providing fatherhood training programs.
  
  His fundamental point, he said on Sunday, was that there should be a strong “affirmation of whatever decision women decide to make.”
  
  Last week, Mr. Santorum faced a brief storm of criticism after saying in a CNN interview that to put more women in combat roles “could be a very compromising situation, where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interest of the mission because of other types of emotions that are involved.”
  
  He managed to quell some of the criticism — if not all — by saying later that he was referring to the emotional reactions of male soldiers. “Men have emotions when you see a woman in harm’s way,” he said Friday on NBC, adding that it was a “natural inclination to not focus on the mission but to try to be in a position where you might want to protect someone.”
  
  There is another reason Mr. Santorum, in his interview Sunday, should not have been surprised by the line of questioning he got Sunday. Mr. Stephanopoulos had asked him about the same quote in 2005, pressing him to identify those he said were creating pressure for women to work:
  
  Asked by Mr. Stephanopoulos, “Where are these radical feminists?” Mr. Santorum had replied, “It comes from an elite culture, dictated, again, from academia, dictated, again, from the Hollywood culture and the news media, that says, ‘The only thing that’s affirming, the only thing that really counts is what you do at work.’ ”
  
  He then added: “And that goes for men and women. And it’s wrong. It’s wrong to tell that to fathers. It’s wrong to tell that to mothers. And we need to value mothers and fathers spending time with their children much more than we do in America.”
  

  
  http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/13/us/politics/santorum-faces-questions-on-women-in-work-force.html
  yes Mr. Sanctorum
  its the feminists' fault women want to become doctors, and lawyers instead of being a mother
  
  /sarcasm
• EndlessDreams wrote on 2012-02-16 10:37
  But there are doctors/lawyers who are also mothers...
• Hiccup wrote on 2012-02-16 10:38
  Republicans.
  
  
  Always making a worse name for themselves.
  
  Does he really think he's going to win when he says stupid **** like this? [SIZE="1"][S]Don't answer that.[/S][/SIZE]
• EndlessDreams wrote on 2012-02-16 11:05

  Quote from Hiccup;776335:

  Republicans.
  Always making a worse name for themselves.
  
  Does he really think he's going to win when he says stupid **** like this? [SIZE="1"][S]Don't answer that.[/S][/SIZE]

  
  
  Actually, he probably does have a chance to win. He is Republican.
• Hiccup wrote on 2012-02-16 11:06

  Quote from EndlessDreams;776371:

  Actually, he probably does have a chance to win. He is Republican.

  
  
  I KNOW! Ugh....... makes me wanna puke. This guy lives in the 1920's. It's terrible.
• Cucurbita wrote on 2012-02-16 18:06
  I can't believe a public candidate has the balls to say something like this. Wow.
  
  Not sure if trolling or just stupid.
• BobYoMeowMeow wrote on 2012-02-16 18:12

  Quote from The Hero Luka;776477:

  I can't believe a public candidate has the balls to say something like this. Wow.
  
  Not sure if trolling or just stupid.

  
  
  He's trying to win neoconservative votes
  1. His Iran policy is extremely aggressive
  2. Against the "war on religion" in America
  3. Rabid capitalism
  
  He's the worst kind of Christian
  who gives himself to corporation, wants full capitalism, and bombing the hell out of Muslims.
  oh and this too
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santorum_amendment
  basically a failed amendment to the No Child Left Behind bill that promotes Creationism while discouraging teaching evolution in U.S. public schools.
• BobYoMeowMeow wrote on 2012-02-16 18:13

  Quote from The Hero Luka;776477:

  I can't believe a public candidate has the balls to say something like this. Wow.
  
  Not sure if trolling or just stupid.

  
  
  He's trying to win neoconservative votes
  1. His Iran policy is extremely aggressive
  2. Against the "war on religion" in America
  3. Rabid capitalism
  
  He's the worst kind of Christian
  who gives himself to corporation, wants full capitalism, and bombing the hell out of Muslims.
  oh and this too
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santorum_amendment
  basically a failed amendment to the No Child Left Behind bill that promotes Creationism while discouraging teaching evolution in U.S. public schools.
• Claudia wrote on 2012-02-16 19:01
  And I used to like him and his sweatervests.
• Kaeporo wrote on 2012-02-16 19:05

  Quote from BobYoMeowMeow;776297:

  “The radical feminists succeeded in undermining the traditional family and convincing women that professional accomplishments are the key to happiness.”

  
  
  Professional accomplishments are the key to happiness for men but not women? This guy would see every women in America condemned to the role of housewife.
  
  -1 for gender equality
  
  Next i'm sure he'll try to make it unlawful for anyone to practice any religious belief that's not his own. He'll also reinstate the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and probably annul homosexual marriages in America. What a god damn waste of resources, debating this ****.
  
  I personally cannot stand Sanctorum.
• Cucurbita wrote on 2012-02-16 19:09

  Quote from BobYoMeowMeow:

  basically a failed amendment to the No Child Left Behind bill that promotes Creationism while discouraging teaching evolution in U.S. public schools.

  
  
  Trying to pull such a thing at this day and age... sigh...
  
  

  [Image: http://i.minus.com/iyOcajgpPlBFV.gif]
• Cynic wrote on 2012-02-16 19:19
  The fact that he considers any woman who wants to make a decent living for herself and doesn't want to be stuck as a repressed house wife a feminist is frickin' hysterical.
• Rin wrote on 2012-02-16 21:03

  He said that when Ms. Santorum, a nurse and a lawyer, had quit her job to raise the couple’s children, she felt that many people “looked down their nose at that decision.”
  
  In the interview Sunday with Mr. Stephanopoulos, Mr. Santorum pleaded unfamiliarity with the citation, saying, “I don’t know — that’s a new quote for me,” before adding that “the bottom line is that people should have equal opportunity to rise in the work force.”
  
  His fundamental point, he said on Sunday, was that there should be a strong “affirmation of whatever decision women decide to make.”

  
  
  Probably the reason why the book had that statement. The whole "You should be happy doing what you want, regardless of what people think of you."
  
  There's also...
  
  

  There is another reason Mr. Santorum, in his interview Sunday, should not have been surprised by the line of questioning he got Sunday. Mr. Stephanopoulos had asked him about the same quote in 2005, pressing him to identify those he said were creating pressure for women to work:
  
  Asked by Mr. Stephanopoulos, “Where are these radical feminists?” Mr. Santorum had replied, “It comes from an elite culture, dictated, again, from academia, dictated, again, from the Hollywood culture and the news media, that says, ‘The only thing that’s affirming, the only thing that really counts is what you do at work.’ ”
  
  He then added: “And that goes for men and women. And it’s wrong. It’s wrong to tell that to fathers. It’s wrong to tell that to mothers. And we need to value mothers and fathers spending time with their children much more than we do in America.”

  
  
  Where he believes there should be more emphasis on family by both sex.
  
  Still, the rest of his argument is terribad. Very.
  
  

  Last week, Mr. Santorum faced a brief storm of criticism after saying in a CNN interview that to put more women in combat roles “could be a very compromising situation, where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interest of the mission because of other types of emotions that are involved.”
  
  He managed to quell some of the criticism — if not all — by saying later that he was referring to the emotional reactions of male soldiers. “Men have emotions when you see a woman in harm’s way,” he said Friday on NBC, adding that it was a “natural inclination to not focus on the mission but to try to be in a position where you might want to protect someone.”

  
  
  I'm pretty sure military men are trained to tune their emotions and have equal regards for everybody, regardless of sex.
• Rin wrote on 2012-02-16 21:03

  He said that when Ms. Santorum, a nurse and a lawyer, had quit her job to raise the couple’s children, she felt that many people “looked down their nose at that decision.”
  
  In the interview Sunday with Mr. Stephanopoulos, Mr. Santorum pleaded unfamiliarity with the citation, saying, “I don’t know — that’s a new quote for me,” before adding that “the bottom line is that people should have equal opportunity to rise in the work force.”
  
  His fundamental point, he said on Sunday, was that there should be a strong “affirmation of whatever decision women decide to make.”

  
  
  Probably the reason why the book had that statement. The whole "You should be happy doing what you want, regardless of what people think of you."
  
  There's also...
  
  

  There is another reason Mr. Santorum, in his interview Sunday, should not have been surprised by the line of questioning he got Sunday. Mr. Stephanopoulos had asked him about the same quote in 2005, pressing him to identify those he said were creating pressure for women to work:
  
  Asked by Mr. Stephanopoulos, “Where are these radical feminists?” Mr. Santorum had replied, “It comes from an elite culture, dictated, again, from academia, dictated, again, from the Hollywood culture and the news media, that says, ‘The only thing that’s affirming, the only thing that really counts is what you do at work.’ ”
  
  He then added: “And that goes for men and women. And it’s wrong. It’s wrong to tell that to fathers. It’s wrong to tell that to mothers. And we need to value mothers and fathers spending time with their children much more than we do in America.”

  
  
  Where he believes there should be more emphasis on family by both sex.
  
  Still, the rest of his argument is terribad. Very.
  
  

  Last week, Mr. Santorum faced a brief storm of criticism after saying in a CNN interview that to put more women in combat roles “could be a very compromising situation, where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interest of the mission because of other types of emotions that are involved.”
  
  He managed to quell some of the criticism — if not all — by saying later that he was referring to the emotional reactions of male soldiers. “Men have emotions when you see a woman in harm’s way,” he said Friday on NBC, adding that it was a “natural inclination to not focus on the mission but to try to be in a position where you might want to protect someone.”

  
  
  I'm pretty sure military men are trained to tune their emotions and have equal regards for everybody, regardless of sex.
• ValkyrieHamster wrote on 2012-02-16 23:40
  Ah good ol Santorum, proving everyday that he indeed is a frothy mix of absolute bull****