Into the [Nittany] Lions Den

| | Comments (3)

Rick Santorum on NPR's Morning Edition.

Rick comes off very, very well on individualism (of both the left and the right), teaching intelligent design, religion in the public square, John Roberts and precendents.

UPDATE: I forgot to cite the quotation below. It comes from this piece on Santorum by Maggie Gallagher.

The rigidly predictable response to Rick's latest defense of the family among the village elders he critiques has been a stunning and vituperative series of attacks, in which (yes) some fair-minded folks quote and criticize what the good senator actually wrote, but more "summarize" it in ways that wildly distort his views. Bob Casey Jr., the Democrat who hopes to unseat Rick in the 2006 election cycle, falsely accused Sen. Santorum of calling working mothers "selfish and bad budgeters," and said Santorum was "out of touch" with economic realities.

But this over-the-top attack by Democrats and their sympathizers may backfire.

Much of the fire in the family debate has centered on Rick Santorum's call for parents to cut back on work, if possible, to spend more time with their kids. But as writer Danielle Crittenden told a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reporter: "(Rick Santorum) is not saying anything different from what most American women themselves would say or express. Do we think children are better off with a parent at home? Of course we do."

Indeed most working moms think working less sounds pretty good, according to a recent nationally representative survey of mothers by Greenberg, Quinlan, Rosner Research Inc. reported in The Boston Globe. Only 10 percent of working mothers say they would prefer to work full time; 30 percent would prefer to be home full-time, and 59 percent want part-time work. Both working and stay-at-home moms also agree with Rick's other point: Moms at home raising kids don't get enough respect. Sixty-two percent of at-home mothers and 55 percent of working mothers agree that society values working mothers more than mothers who stay at home.

I don't always agree with Rick, and even when I do, I don't always agree with how he says a thing or two, or three. But one thing I do know: In these days when politicians' pronouncements are mostly the focus-grouped bland hoping to (mis)lead the voting blind, Rick Santorum dares to try to say something that actually matters. (This is known in Washington as a "gaffe.")

He's by no means perfect, but really, given the choice between him and my current gruesome two-some of Durbin and O'Bama, give me Rick anyday.

Bookmark and Share


I wouldn't get too excited about an endorsement from Danielle Crittenden, who is about as awful as a writer can be without actually being illiterate. Ever read her stuff at Huffington Post? Ghastly.

The poll you quote from asks women if they would "prefer" to stay at home. It doesn't surprise me that many women would "prefer" to stay at home with their kids. But the economic reality for many families make their preferences (and Santorum's) irrelevent. Just as Santorum's preferences should be irrelevent if a woman DOES prefer to work. The sudden interest among conservatives in government to dictate how citizens live their lives proves the old saying that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Conservatism used to celebrate the rights of the individual, that the People should establish the rights of the State, not the other way around. It's sad (and scary) to see so many conservatives eschewing their "principles" as they try to grab more and more power, and so many voters willing to give up their rights and freedom to a small group of loathsome politicians.

Economic necessity is one thing, and if a family has a true economic need (i.e. they need to work to get by, not to afford their half a million dollar house), then the point is moot. The debate over the proper care and raising of our nation's children, however, is not and can never be reduced to a matter of "preference." The fact is that children benefit from having a parent home with them.

I must have missed the part where anything was "dictated" to anybody. People are free to reject the good of children for a "preference," but should they be congratulated?

It's sad (and scary) to see so many conservatives eschewing their "principles"...

Again, where is this coming from. One Republican senator wrote a book discussing common sense about the family and what is good for children. If conservatives formerly stood on the principle that harming children is a good thing, then I for one am ready to throw a party for the abandonment of that particular principle.

He's by no means perfect, but really, given the choice between him and my current gruesome two-some of Durbin and O'Bama, give me Rick anyday.

Sharing your senatorial "representation", I couldn't agree more!


Mama-Lu's Etsy Shop

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Papa-Lu published on August 5, 2005 7:44 AM.

More on that Hitchens piece was the previous entry in this blog.

An unfortunate thing is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.