‘News’ From the Liberal Media Meme Factory: Women Hate Rick Santorum

Posted on | February 18, 2012 | 54 Comments

You may have already seen this Rick Santorum campaign ad, but I ask you to take 30 seconds to click and play the video again. Try to watch it while asking yourself, “Will women vote for this guy?”

Sure! Why the heck not? Maybe he’s not movie-star handsome like Mitt Romney, but you can’t say that Rick Santorum is a bad-looking guy.

He is the youngest of the four remaining candidates in the GOP field, and looks even younger than his 53 years. He’s energetic and vigorous, he has an attractive young family — seven kids! — and the ad shows him as quite an ideal father: He smiles at his wife, he hugs his daughters, he plays football with his sons. What’s not to like?

Permit me to testify here that this is a rare instance where the advertising image remarkably reflects the reality. Having followed Santorum around on the campaign trail since August, I have often observed the close-knit nature of the Santorum family. His wife and children have been an integral part of his campaign from the start, and there were times — during those long months when he was stumping around Iowa, at rock bottom in the polls — that there would have been no Santorum campaign without the hard work his family put into it.

Knowing this, and having seen with my own eyes how Santorum’s appeal as a family man has been a crucial element of his success, I shake my head in astonishment that any Republican might be deceived by the propaganda published by Politico:

Rick Santorum: Will women vote for him?
. . . Gender issues have taken center stage in recent days as Santorum has made incendiary comments suggesting women not be allowed to serve in combat roles in the military (he later said he was concerned men would want to protect them). Santorum has also stood by his opposition to contraception, reiterating his position that it shouldn’t be covered by the national health-care law because it is “inexpensive.” While the ex-senator doesn’t favor outlawing birth control, he is personally opposed to it. . . .
“He constantly says things that are offensive to women,” said Kim Gandy, former president of the National Organization for Women. “Regardless of whether Republican women like some of his policies, I think they’re going to be so turned off by his judgmental stand on the independence and essential rights of women that they won’t be able to vote for him.” . . .

Are you buying this? If so, please click this link to purchase a certain bridge in Brooklyn. Slightly used, but what a bargain!

Our liberal friends very much want to believe — and more importantly, they want Republican primary voters to believe — that Rick Santorum’s social conservatism is an insuperable handicap, and that if the GOP nominates Santorum, the party will be doomed to defeat in November because of the “gender gap.” But is this belief really true?

Isn’t it possible that the very qualities that have taken Rick Santorum from the bottom to the top of the Republican primary field might also be enough to win over independent voters (including women voters) in the general election? Are women voters really so keenly attuned to the kind of “gender issues” that Kim Gandy cares about? And will their devotion to these issues be so fanatical that these women will overlook everything admirable about Rick Santorum?

You can answer those questions for yourself, dear reader. But the very fact that liberals so clearly want us to believe this meme — Women Hate Rick Santorum! — is reason enough to make me suspect that it’s just another damned liberal lie.

Of course, maybe you believe it. If so, be sure to click the donate button below and I’ll send you that bridge right away. Remember, I’m a professional journalist: Trust me!

Category: Election 2012, Feminism, Liberals, Media Bias, Rick Santorum

Comments

54 Responses to “‘News’ From the Liberal Media Meme Factory: Women Hate Rick Santorum”

Paul Zummo
February 18th, 2012 @ 1:54 pm

I was telling my wife, after she had a very trying week dealing with some of her liberal friends on facebook, that we’re headed towards an era where conservative women are going to be treated like conservative blacks. It’ll be the Aunt Theresa era. (I couldn’t think of the female equivalent of Tom.)
arturo_ui
February 18th, 2012 @ 2:00 pm

You’re right, Robert. Issues of personal autonomy, reproductive rights, and gender equality in the workplace have never been of much concern to women. Most women look at Karen Santorum popping out 7 children and are simply overcome with feelings of jealousy.
Adjoran
February 18th, 2012 @ 2:05 pm

I’m not certain Kim Gandy is even female.

I’m not asking for proof, though – please!
Stan
February 18th, 2012 @ 2:10 pm

Not only do the commies want Santorum to be the Republican nominee, neither do the beltway big government Republicans want him.. They want Mitt to be the nominee, so they could get a cushy White House or Administration job. Karl Rove was angling for the same spot he had with George W Bush. With Santorum, this guys would be left out in the cold.
rjacobse
February 18th, 2012 @ 2:12 pm

The real joke here is the notion that Kim Gandy or anyone else with the NAGs is representative of American women.
Andrew
February 18th, 2012 @ 2:34 pm

I’d say that the issue of Santorum wanting to force rape victims to give birth is kind of important to women.
robertstacymccain
February 18th, 2012 @ 2:39 pm

Your Disqus profile is interesting:

http://disqus.com/arturo_ui/

More than 250 comments (generally pro-Obama, anti-Republican) at NoQuarterUSA, then six months of silence, then you show up here.
elaine
February 18th, 2012 @ 2:59 pm

As the first female commenter on this post, allow me to share the female perspective…

I agree with some of what he says regarding women, including that they shouldn’t serve on the front lines — for much the same reasons he cites. There’s plenty of work women can do which helps the military’s efforts without doing that particular job.

As a younger person, I would’ve vehemently disagreed with Santorum on matters of birth control, but as a more mature woman, I can see his point. Don’t always agree with it, but I respect his beliefs.

I’m not one to get all bent out of shape over a politician having certain beliefs in private while realizing he probably can’t impose those beliefs legislatively onto others. Which is where I think he stands on birth control; or more importantly, where the matter would stand, were he elected. As my hubby would say, “On the things I don’t agree with him on, he doesn’t stand much chance of getting his way.” So in that regard, I really don’t see his attitudes on birth control as an issue.

He’s correct in that birth control is widely available and very cheap, so what’s the deal with the dems insisting we all pay for everyone else’s?

As to his appearance and such: I find him to be an attractive and “real” guy. Romney comes off as slick, like a used car salesman; I don’t like that at all. Clearly, Santorum loves his wife and kids, and that’s all to the good.

NOW hasn’t spoken for me since they sided with Bill Clinton against his female accusers; and I can assure you there are vast swaths of women who don’t give a rat’s behind what NOW’s take on anything might be.

What NOW and the feminist movement in American don’t want to believe is that the attitudes of most women regarding birth control, abortion, and women’s rights are extremely nuanced; more so than NOW’s beliefs. We don’t all have a knee jerk reaction the second NOW tells us some politician is anti-choice. For my own beliefs: I think there ought to be options available, including abortion — it’s not an option I’d use except in an extreme instance. I think most pro-choice women in flyover country agree…

Do we need to do a better job of telling women there are other options between having a child and aborting it? Yes. (Adoption, anyone?) Would I prefer women who don’t want to keep a baby select option C? Sure! But I don’t want that legislated, any more than I want the government to force companies to have to pay for birth control…

Like I said, where I disagree with Santorum, I doubt he’ll get his way legislatively, which makes it a non-issue.
arturo_ui
February 18th, 2012 @ 3:22 pm

Hah! Well, I don’t comment much on threads anymore these days, and don’t see myself leaving 250+ here ;). I just wanted to offer my deep skepticism that Santorum will have any luck with the female vote, for the reasons stated. For what it’s worth, I actually read your blog a lot and find your writing informed, fair, and entertaining, even though I disagree with probably 95% of the opinions within.
elaine
February 18th, 2012 @ 3:33 pm

Allow me to add a couple of points:

If you read articles over at The Frisky (I see the links from Instapundit), you’ll find that young women are taking a pretty cavalier attitude regarding birth control. I’m not talking the pill or condoms here; I’m talking the morning after pill, the Plan B pill, and abortion are more and more commonly used.

For some women, the Plan B pill is their Plan A — their first line of defense in avoiding pregnancy.

In spite of the fact that the pill and condoms are widely available and cheaply obtained, young women can’t be bothered to actually use these items to avoid unwanted pregnancy. Instead, they go to more expensive methods as their first choice. (A month’s supply of the pill costs $9. One morning after pill costs $20-30.)

Making birth control “free” would mean you’d see even more waste as women skipped past effective and cheap options (the pill and condoms) for those which are more expensive. There have been no studies indicating what potential health hazards could result from repeated use of emergency birth control options. What we do know that is that the Plan B pill is less effective every time you use it. So at some point, if women are overusing this option, they’re going to find themselves pregnant anyway. Or possibly infertile.

Rather than making Plan B or the morning after pill available over the counter to anyone, we should keep it as a prescription only option which is only prescribed after the doctor warns patients about the dangers of overuse. Currently, I don’t think that’s being done.
elaine
February 18th, 2012 @ 3:35 pm

Sorry, arturo… you’re wrong about Santorum’s luck with female voters. It’s clear the left is trying to tarnish him, in much the same way they tried to ruin Palin.

Not. Going. To. Work.
Shawn Gillogly
February 18th, 2012 @ 3:49 pm

All I can say is women must have been voting for him, or he wouldn’t be the guy who’s making Romney’s campaign implode.
Adjoran
February 18th, 2012 @ 3:58 pm

The feminazis have been trying to get that done for decades. Unfortunately, it seems to work with single women.
Adjoran
February 18th, 2012 @ 3:59 pm

Really? What do you base that upon?

Check your house for fumes.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
February 18th, 2012 @ 4:00 pm

Rick Santorum can do fine if he fights back effectively. I like that he called out Charlie Rose on contraception questions, but Bill Jacobson (even if he is a Newt guy) is right: Santorum should not have even conceded that Foster Friess’ joke was even wrong. It was not. It was a mildly funny old joke and had a certain truth to it. To even allow it to be treated as comparable with Jerimiah Wright’s vileness is incorrect. http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/02/santorum-was-wrong-about-the-wright-obama-double-standard/
SDN
February 18th, 2012 @ 4:02 pm

That would be the track record and the endorsement list. John McCain?!? Please…
SDN
February 18th, 2012 @ 4:03 pm

And I’m sure in your universe that’s true…. right after he makes Spock shave….
arturo_ui
February 18th, 2012 @ 4:22 pm

It sure worked with Palin.
ShankedPanda
February 18th, 2012 @ 4:27 pm

That does seem to be the entire point of this post. If we just believe hard enough we can convince ourselves of anything.

Those liberals are so crazy that they think opposing contraception and abortion even in the case of rape would turn women off Santorum.
That’s such a crazy idea, you could sell them a bridge.

Just keep repeating it to yourself I guess, see how it works out.

Who would have guessed that when 98% of Catholic women use contraception, the GOP would willingly alienate 51% of the electorate fighting the issue on behalf of literally nobody….. and convince themselves this was an awesome idea. Sheesh.

Talk about needing a pill the morning after you make terrible decisions when drunk.
Paul Zummo
February 18th, 2012 @ 4:34 pm

Who would have guessed that when 98% of Catholic women use contraception,

You do know that this percentage is complete crap, right?
ShankedPanda
February 18th, 2012 @ 4:39 pm

“He’s correct in that birth control is widely available and very cheap,
so what’s the deal with the dems insisting we all pay for everyone
else’s?”

It was ruled descrimination against women to exclude it from coverage back in 2000. So what’s with the Dems is the same as what was with the Republican 2 term president who was in office when those huge Catholic Universities were forced to abide by this.

“Do we need to do a better job of telling women there are other options
between having a child and aborting it? Yes. (Adoption, anyone?)
Would I prefer women who don’t want to keep a baby select option C?
Sure! But I don’t want that legislated, any more than I want the
government to force companies to have to pay for birth control…”

…..the undisputed, leading method for prevention of abortions.
Yeah, I’m sure that little bit of logic was just so hard to stumble on for you….. a completely plausible mature woman.

Much like the part where no government has forced companies to pay for contraception, they just ruled that excluding it is discriminatory against women, who still have the option to use it or not. Just like men aren’t forced to use the Viagra that is covered.

98% of Catholic women. Are you even convincing yourself with this act?
PhillyCon
February 18th, 2012 @ 4:44 pm

Its right up there with number of uninsured the Left kept touting in order to ram through Obamacare.
libertyftw
February 18th, 2012 @ 4:48 pm

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/resources/Religion-FP-tables.html

I don’t have a dog in this race as social issues should stay as far away from intelligent voters as possible, but you called out his statistic without providing one of your own.

This is why we can’t have nice things.
Brad Schlitz
February 18th, 2012 @ 4:56 pm

One of the things I will talk about that no president has talked
about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country,
the whole sexual libertine idea. ~ Rick Santorum,

This isn’t going to fly at all in the general election, and I don’t need any expensive polling done to figure that out.

99% of sexually active people use some form of birth control, and the 1% that don’t are weirdos.

This GOP, “sexually libertine” family of four plans on voting 3rd Party
if Sanotrum is the nominee. I’m not going to be insulted by some
moralizing b@stard who’s own spouse has far more disturbing skeletons
than my wife being on the pill.
ShankedPanda
February 18th, 2012 @ 5:42 pm

Okay. That’s great news for his campaign to be the most conservative GOP nominee.

On the other hand, in a general election, this strategy involves winning the vote of strict religious adherents who somehow weren’t already voting GOP, at the expense of 51% of the electorate.

It’s the same strategy as railing against the Mexican scourge threatening your country. Works great if there’s a massive untapped reservoir of people who share that view but somehow reached voting age without registering as republicans. Or if existing GOP voters are so impressed they just can’t help voting for you more than once.

Otherwise it’s just a message for a particular demographic to run the hell away from your party.
ShankedPanda
February 18th, 2012 @ 5:47 pm

Well I could imagine it’s probably 100% and there’s a 2% margin of error.

Is that what you were hinting at?

It’s 2012 buddy. If you think the percentage of Catholic men abiding by the “shall not spill his seed” provision is reaching 1%, nobody can help you come to terms with why Narnia isn’t real.
ShankedPanda
February 18th, 2012 @ 5:51 pm

Yeah, the commies are real worried about one candidate. Pay no attention to the fact that the entire GOP race has been an exercise in ridiculous options that their establishment is embarassed by. Just keep telling yourself that Herman Cain dropping out let the real GOP star shine through.
ShankedPanda
February 18th, 2012 @ 6:03 pm

” There have been no studies indicating what potential health hazards
could result from repeated use of emergency birth control options. ”

Do you really believe this is an accurate statement or just that it sounded really good?

Do you really think this drug has been approved and subsidised by governments all over the world without the testing which applies to every drug legally allowed to go on sale?

That’s something you actually believe, rather than just want to believe is it?
Paul Zummo
February 18th, 2012 @ 6:04 pm

Hahahaha, the Guttmacher study. How cute.
http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2012/02/statistics-obamas-and-internet-memes.html
Paul Zummo
February 18th, 2012 @ 6:06 pm

I love how you idiots swallow liberal media propaganda, cite bogus studies already disproven, and yet we’re the ones living in fantasy land.
Paul Zummo
February 18th, 2012 @ 6:11 pm

I’m not going to be insulted by some

moralizing b@stard who’s own spouse has far more disturbing skeletons than my wife being on the pill.
So you would allow Barack Obama to have a second term because the person he’s running against has a different view of contraception, and on occasion would so state. Meanwhile, Obama is forcing religious institutions to cover contraception against their will, is investigating what kids have in their lunch box, and is essentially violating the Constitution every other.

But can’t have that weirdo who doesn’t contracept.

I seriously wonder how people this dumb actually manage to function on a day-to-day basis.
SDN
February 18th, 2012 @ 6:32 pm

Pick your sample well enough and you can pretty much prove anything.

You know, like Saddam getting re-elected with 98% of the vote.
richard mcenroe
February 18th, 2012 @ 6:33 pm

You don’t have to be a strict religious conservative to find Santorum’s message appealing. Having daughters will do that all by itself.
Brad Schlitz
February 18th, 2012 @ 6:46 pm

Who said I support Obama? The owner of this site voted 3rd Party for President in 2008, am I not allowed to?

Moving along, I really don’t have much sympathy for the Catholic Church on this issue, they were the biggest cheerleaders for ObamaCare and big government solutions, it’s just finally bit them. Of all the things for the Catholic bishops to get angry at towards Obama, this seems the most trivial. How much outrage have they expressed at the funding of Planned Parenthood?

As far as my voting decision, I wouldn’t mind one bit seeing the Religious Right/Pat Robertson wing of this Party run out on a rail once and for all. I can put up with the zealotry on many of these dumb issues, but if you want to make birth control among married people an actual campaign issue, I’ll vote “none of the above” and watch with glee as the Theocrats have to pack it up and go home for good. And this is coming from a Baptist.
Pathfinder's wife
February 18th, 2012 @ 7:01 pm

A lot of women will buy the media hype; this is true and should not be denied (otherwise there will be no counter for it).

But…but…if he plays his cards right he can pick up women voters — for every woman who still wears feminism like a badge there is at least one other who is very sick of the sort of society that feminism (in its current form) has given them. They don’t want to be June Cleaver, but they do want a society that gives them more in the way of roles than Brittany or Hillary, the country club mom or the single mom/welfare queen.
If Santorum can speak of the need to see women as individuals who have real lives and deserve human dignity (the same as men do), then he can get their ear — even some of the young ones.

And contraception, abortion, and all that icky social stuff plays a large part in this — sexual libertine appetites play a large part in this, and who pays the biggest price for this sort of thing? Women…because they are the ones who get pregnant and all the consequences of that. Listen to some of the music on the radio: women take a real beating (literally) in some of the lyrics — an anything goes sort of society is not a good one for women or children, neither is a totalitarian one, and I think deep down the majority of women know this, whether or not they will acknowledge it is open for debate.
So, here’s Santorum’s opening with women; if he plays his cards right, it will be tough but he’ll do ok.
Kathy Kattenburg
February 18th, 2012 @ 7:49 pm

Thank you, arturo, for saving me the angst of having to respond to Robert Stacy McCain’s obvious disdain for the intelligence of American women (not to mention disdain for the seriousness of the issues women care about).
Kathy Kattenburg
February 18th, 2012 @ 7:52 pm

Yes, how rude of “the Left” to point that out.
Roxeanne de Luca
February 18th, 2012 @ 7:53 pm

So you’ll concede that the 99% of abortions that are neither the result of rape or to save the life of a mother should be outlawed? Now, in the spirit of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, let’s go with that – stop about 1.2 million abortions a year.
Kathy Kattenburg
February 18th, 2012 @ 7:58 pm

It’s not crap at all. The overwhelming majority of Catholic women, as women in general, either use contraception or have used it at some point in their lives. If it’s not 98 percent, it’s certainly close. But say rather than 98% it’s 75%. Would that make you feel better? The point is that the Catholic Church is completely out of step with the realities of how most Catholics, and Americans in general, live. Contraception is simply a non-issue for just about everyone except the Bishops.
Roxeanne de Luca
February 18th, 2012 @ 8:09 pm

Santorum’s problem with women is that what he says and what women hear are two different things. When he came out against Griwsold, a lot of women heard, “States should ban birth control,” not a nuanced discussion of the Constitution and the sad reality that Griswold paved the way for Roe.

He has a tremendous opportunity to expose the harm that liberalism has done to women. As but one example, the feminisation of poverty is directly related to the decline in marriage. If Santorum were to say, “Setting aside 40-year-old teachers, doctors, and stockbrokers who adopt kids because they never met the right guy, single motherhood is horrible for women” and then proceeded to talk about how hundreds of billions in government money and child support aren’t enough to help women build wealth, and how we live longer, so we’re doubly screwed, he would get women lining up to vote for him.

Likewise, if he talked about how it’s almost impossible to raise your baby and go to college – harder than in the evil 1950s, even – precisely because abortion is so available, he would dilute a lot of the “anti-woman” venom thrown at him.
Wombat_socho
February 18th, 2012 @ 11:11 pm

The fish rots from the head.
Wombat_socho
February 18th, 2012 @ 11:13 pm

You keep repeating that phony statistic. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Wombat_socho
February 18th, 2012 @ 11:15 pm

You must be one of the more stupid Baptists out there, since you managed to miss the point that this whole issue was ginned up by the White House and the media as a distraction from the wretched economy.
Wombat_socho
February 18th, 2012 @ 11:16 pm

Stacy respects the intelligence of American women. Except yours, because you’re not showing any to respect.
Wombat_socho
February 18th, 2012 @ 11:17 pm

Man, look at all the concern trolls.
Might be time to bust out the banhammer.
Micha_Elyi
February 19th, 2012 @ 2:06 am

For some women, the Plan B pill is their Plan A — their first line of defense in avoiding pregnancy.-elaine

Alas, the habit of lying to herself – “I didn’t really intend to sex him but I was swept away by passion…” – remains oh so common among sexually active females. Thus, the Plan B pill is over-relied upon.

The female who chooses to use a contraceptive method, is a female who finds denying that she’s planning to have sex is difficult.
Micha_Elyi
February 19th, 2012 @ 2:14 am

Are you really that uninformed about the history of the birth control pill? Many females wanted it right now so “governments all over the world” rushed approval of the early, high-dose Pill. When its side effects, including heart disease and cancer, were identified the feminist story quickly changed from “the patriarchy-dominated government is keeping girls from having fun” to “the patriarchy is using girls like guinea pigs.”
ThePaganTemple
February 19th, 2012 @ 7:23 am

No it didn’t. A lot of us, me included, didn’t like John McCain. The only reason I relented and voted for him in the end was because of Palin. A lot of Republicans held their noses and voted for him because of her. But there were many who just couldn’t bring themselves to go that route. If Palin had not been on the ticket McCain would have lost by a larger margin that what he did. Especially if he had chosen another moderate like himself.
Quartermaster
February 19th, 2012 @ 11:05 am

The ratio of Feminazi to normal woman, is probably much, much larger than 1 to 1. It’s probably somewhere north of 1:2.
Pathfinder's wife
February 19th, 2012 @ 11:55 am

How many times have drugs been approved after testing that upon further study do have negative health consequences for at least some people?

Testing can winnow out some potentially harmful results which could lead to a drug not being produced for consumption, but the proof of its outcomes only results from tracking it with time — and by then it has done at least some damage.
And some drugs are more potentially dangerous than others — that’s why it’s a bad idea to make availability to them free and easy. The Plan B options have not been around long enough to track what sort of negative results they might potentially manifest — that’s why it’s a bad idea to see them handed out like aspirin (irregardless of the sort of society you are giving implicit approval to).

And then there is the cost analysis — by providing contraception (which can already be easily partaken of with cheap condoms and even cheaper abstinence) there will have to be a necessary allocation of funds for that…taking funds away from afflictions that don’t have cheap and easy remedies already in existence.
And this too is irregardless of the sort of society you give implicit approval to — which is a society that doesn’t seem to put much value on an individual’s life or dignity, which is pretty antithetical to what America is supposed to be about).