A Palin Protege:
Ricky Insane-torum
Expert in Stupidity

Rick Santorum's Math Fail:
Blasts Obama For Creating 'Only 240 Million Jobs'

By Pat Garofalo

2012 GOP presidential hopeful Rick Santorum continued his long-shot campaign this morning with an appearance on CNN. During the interview, Santorum attempted to criticize the Obama administration's record on jobs, but inadvertently revealed his complete ignorance regarding the American labor force.

Last Friday, the administration's Council of Economic Advisers released a report showing the effects of the 2009 Recovery Act, which to date has raised employment by between 2.4 and 3.6 million jobs. Santorum cited the report while trying to attack the administration.

However, he completely bungled it: Santorum said the Obama administration claimed to have created 280 million jobs last December, and is now claiming to have created 240 million jobs, thus proving that the Recovery Act somehow destroyed jobs:

SANTORUM: [Obama] passed a huge stimulus package that now we know, over the past two quarters, has actually cost American jobs, and that's from the report of his own administration. They claimed in December that, uh, by the end of last year that they created 280 million jobs, and now they're saying that they created only 240 million jobs. So look, in this, you're talking about huge increases in spending.

ALI VELSHI: Senator, I'm going to ask you to restate that, I've never heard that in my life. Tell me again, what you just said.

SANTORUM: If you look at the report that came out on Friday, the President's own economic advisers said that the jobs stimulus package actually created fewer jobs over the period of time, since the uh, since the stimulus package went in place than it did when they reported back in December. In other words, there's 30 million less jobs as a result of the stimulus package.

VELSHI: That's not a loss of jobs, Senator, that's a smaller aggregation of jobs. You can't go on a campaign, a national campaign with this kind of math Senator. It's just incorrect…I know you've got a lot of interviews to do. You might want to check that math.

Watch it:

Velshi is absolutely correct that Santorum needs to check his math, but he missed the huge problem with Santorum's numbers. The entire American civilian labor force is about 153 million people. There are currently 13.9 million people unemployed. If the Obama administration had created 240 to 280 million jobs, the unemployment crisis would have been solved several times over, and America would have so many jobs that it would need to start employing workers from all over the world just to fill all the available positions.

Santorum was evidently trying to repeat this absurd claim made by the Weekly Standard about the cost per job of the stimulus. (The Associated Press has rightly called the sort of math the Weekly Standard used “highly misleading.”) However, his attack attempt totally backfired, and he gave the administration credit for engineering what would be the single greatest economic feat in American history.

Source: http://thinkprogress.org



Rick Santorum - Certifiably Insane

Last week Rick Santorum announced that he has formed a new PAC in Iowa, and surely this can only mean one thing -- he's running for president.

Curiously, the former senator from Pennsylvania appears to have decided to throw caution to the wind and will run on a platform of embracing George W. Bush early and often. Last week, during an appearance on Fox News, he claimed that...

...under the Bush administration, welfare -- I mean, excuse me, poverty among African Americans and among single unmarried women, poverty was at the lowest rate ever in the history of this country. So Obama's policies are not working, Bush polices worked! For long a time as a matter of fact.

Those are some heavyweight claims from a heavyweight Republican -- so let's put them up against another heavyweight: the research team at Think Progress.

THINK PROGRESS VS. SANTORUM: ROUND ONE

There's one small problem with Santorum's claim - it's completely false. In fact, while the Bush years were disastrous for the economy as a whole, they were particularly devastating for the poorest Americans. Under Bush, the number of Americans living in poverty jumped an astonishing 26.1 percent. When President Clinton left office in 2000, there were about 31.6 million Americans living in poverty, according to the Census Bureau. When Bush left office in 2008, that number had jumped to 39.8 million - the largest number in absolute terms since 1960.

THINK PROGRESS VS. SANTORUM: ROUND TWO

As for Santorum's claims about Africans Americans, he is dead wrong. A Center for American Progress report found, "The percent of African Americans living in poverty increased from 2000 to 2006 by an average of 0.82 percent per year, after having declined by an average of 1.25 percent per year in the 1990s" - and that was before the recession. Poverty rates among African Americans climbed even higher in the last two years of the Bush administration, reaching an astonishing 24.7 percent in 2008.

THINK PROGRESS VS. SANTORUM: ROUND THREE

And despite Santorum's claims, the poverty rates for unmarried women also climbed under Bush. As a Center for American Progress report on single women found, single mothers were particularly hard hit, with nearly 30 percent living in poverty in 2008 - "a significant increase" over 2000 when fewer than than 26 percent were impoverished. And not only did the rate increase, but the gap between married and unmarried women grew: "The poverty rate of unmarried women was 13.4 percentage points higher than married women in 2000, but it was 14.6 percentage points higher in 2008," the report found. Not surprisingly, that gap was even wider for women of color.

Stop the fight! Somebody call a doctor!

Source: democraticunderground.com



GOP Presidential Wannabe Rick Santorum To Glenn Beck:
States Should Be Able To Criminalize Gay Sex

Rick "Man on Dog" Santorum is at it again.

This time Roll Over Rover Rick went on Glenn Beck's radio show yesterday to renew his call to criminalize gay sex and respond to former Sen. Alan Simpson's attack of homophobic Republicans and Rick Santorum specifically.

All I can ponder is that Alan Simpson is talking about a comment that I made, which I paraphrased, almost word for word, but paraphrased a Supreme Court justice in a case called Lawrence v. Texas, before that case came out, which had to do with, as you know, a Supreme Court case on the issue of sodomy, and I said that if you have -- if the Supreme Court changes the legal standard to say that sexual -- consensual sexual activity is now a constitutional right, then we open up the gates for all sorts of consensual activity. It's not homophobic. It's a legal argument, and it's a correct legal argument. In fact, that's exactly what's happening. We went from Lawrence v. Texas to now a constitutional right to same-sex marriage and they're going into a constitutional right to polyamorous relationships. This is the slippery slope that we're heading down, and I stand by it.

Hey Rover Rick! What does "fighting for" mean? I can't think of any practically attainable path to legal recognition of polyamorous relationships. Are you so stupid that you think "Big Love" on HBO was a documentary? ANYONE who calls themselves a Republican should be ashamed. Anyone who calls themselves a "gay republican" should be outcast.

Source: http://www.back2stonewall.com



Rick Santorum is a Loser

Ok. We edited that title like 12 times because we really wanted to call him a douchebag, asshole, slack-bloated spunkwagger, wet-balled carrotjockey and a gummy-balled socksmuggler*.

Rick "I'm a gay basher because the bible tells me so" Santorum had nerve to tell the world that John "POW" McCain doesn't understand enhanced interrogation techniques.

WHA WHA WHAT!

We would never have voted for McCain, we think he's a asshole too, but to say that a man that was held in a POW camp for almost 6 years and tortured on a daily basis does not understand what that means, implies or stands for? What are you Rick Santorum, a fucking idiot?

Alright, we already knew that but this is a new low.

"Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum on Tuesday accused Sen. John McCain of not understanding "how enhanced interrogation works," and Santorum reiterated his support for the use of so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques" and argued that such tactics had been crucial in tracking down Osama bin Laden."

Really, Rick? You are a moron, a putz and a slack-livered sausageberry*.

Arizona Sen. John McCain has spoken out in recent days against the use of torture as an interrogation technique, citing information from CIA chief Leon Panetta to argue that enhanced interrogation was not responsible for the discovery of Osama bin Laden, and that, in fact, using such methods could come back to hurt Americans.

"I opposed waterboarding and similar so-called 'enhanced interrogation techniques' before Osama bin Laden was brought to justice. And I oppose them now," McCain said in a speech on the Senate floor last week. "I do not believe they are necessary to our success in our war against terrorists, as the advocates of these techniques claim they are."

"Even more importantly, I believe that if America uses torture, it could someday result in the torture of American combatants."

We know that is true.

Does everyone forget the Geneva Conventions for God's sake? We know that technically this pertains to prisoners of war, but what else do you call the Guantanamo and other black ops prison detainees? Aren't we in the middle of a "War on Terror"? And so wouldn't those rules apply?

McCain is right on this one and don't ever tell a guy that was tortured for 6 years that he doesn't understand it.

What you don't understand Mr. Santorum...is everything.

Source: http://theomnireport.blogspot.com



many in the 'know' say Santorum is a homophobic closeted gay,
like his favorite preacher Ted Haggard
Look at his stereotyped 'gay' apparel
and the words of his campaign 'confidant'..
You Decide!







Table of Contents

To HiddenMysteries Internet Book Store



Prepared by © TGS HiddenMysteries.com

Notice: TGS HiddenMysteries and/or the donor of this material may or may not agree with all the data or conclusions of this data. It is presented here 'as is' for your benefit and research. Material for these pages are sent from around the world. If by chance there is a copyrighted article posted which the author does not want read, email the webmaster and it will be removed. If proper credit for authorship is not noted please email the webmaster for corrections to be posted.

We welcome challenging viewpoints from all sources...even opposing viewpoints. In diversity of views we can still find the research and documentation valuable, whether we agree with the views of the author or not.


HiddenMysteries.org is a publication of TGS Services
Please direct all correspondence to
TGS HiddenMysteries, c/o TGS Services,
22241 Pinedale Lane, Frankston, Texas, 75763


All Original Content and Design © HiddenMysteries - TGS (1997-2007)
HiddenMysteries.com Internet Store ~ HiddenMysteries Information Central
Texas National Press ~ TGS Publishers Dealers Site

All Rights Reserved