Rick Santorum And The Traditional Justice System

Posted on | April 1, 2012 | 16 Comments

by Smitty

Jeffery Levin on Twitter points to The Hill, where Rick Santorum seems strangely unconvinced about the wisdom of a national conference on race in the era of Hope’n’Change:

The question. . .was posed to Santorum by talk radio host Laura Ingraham Monday.
“Absolutely not,” Santorum said. “This is either a very disturbed man or circumstances that we’re not aware of that may or may not come out of this case. Let the case play out, and let’s find out what the facts are. As I’ve said—I’ve condemned this. It looks to me as a heinous act. But you know what, let the process work. Let’s find out what’s really going on here. And let’s just focus on the people who are involved.”

In other words, crowd-sourcing our legal system is possibly not the swiftest idea. This whole ‘conversation on race’ piffle is merely a distractor from actual national issues. The propaganda nature of the idea of a ‘conversation on race’ is so blatantly obvious that the World’s Youngest Blogger can hardly halt himself from matching it bile for bile:

Fortunately, the sweater vest helped him hold it together.

As is often the case, Rick seems to have more backbone on the topic than the alternatives.

Update: linked by the Catholic Bandita

Update II: Daily Pundit is having none of Santorum.

Category: Racism, Rick Santorum

Comments

16 Responses to “Rick Santorum And The Traditional Justice System”

Lisa Graas
April 1st, 2012 @ 5:36 pm

While I feel for the families involved on both sides, this is an anecdote. We shouldn’t make judgments about entire communities of people based on an anecdote, and the media coverage of this is mind-boggling to me.

Nice picture. 🙂
Lisa Graas
April 1st, 2012 @ 5:38 pm

P.S. Rick knows about anecodotes and how the Left overplays them constantly to try to make some kind of point. He refers to that here. http://youtu.be/pFxA_HSRKJE
MrPaulRevere
April 1st, 2012 @ 5:40 pm

The inevitable conclusion of a ‘national conversation on race’ would be to have…you guessed it, another national conversation on race.
Understanding Rick Santorum’s Passion and Temperament
April 1st, 2012 @ 6:00 pm

[…] Smitty gave me the idea to write about this by referring to a story dealing with an anecdote. […]
Charles
April 1st, 2012 @ 6:31 pm

We should have a national conversation on race, but part of that conversation should be a discussion of whether it is time for some of the most divisive activists to shut up. I am thinking of activitists of a certain generation, the ones that came after TM and MLK and before BHO. (Those who also want BHO to shut up will get their chance in November.)

A good date for that conversation would be April 16, 2012 on the 150th anniversary of the District of Columbia Compensated Emancipation Act.

The conversation can be led by Clarence Thomas and Herman Cain, both who I’m sure will be able to speak to their admiration of Abraham Lincoln and all the good the Republican Party has done down through the years for the aspirations of and opportunities for black Americans.

Perhaps Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice would also like to speak. And, of course, Allen West and Ali Akbar can address the terrible scourge of tea party racism, that is, racism directed toward tea party conservatives.
genmar
April 1st, 2012 @ 6:48 pm

WE SHOULD ALWAYS SAY WHAT WE MEAN AND DISREGARD WHATEVER THE LEFT RESPONDS WITH.
THEY WILL ALWAYS COUNTER US BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THEY DO.
THEY ONLY WANT TO DESTROY AMERICA.
THEY LOVE RUSSIA, CUBA . NKOREA. VENEZUELA AND THE ISLAMIST KORAN,(QURAN), KILLERS.
MAKE A CHOICE FOLKS.
Shelleys Playtime
April 1st, 2012 @ 7:05 pm

Let’s not forget:

Kevin Jackson,”The Big Black Lie”
Alfonzo Rachel, PJTV
Sonja Schmidt, PJTV

and all those involved with Project 21 and NBRA…
William T Quick
April 1st, 2012 @ 8:42 pm

As I’ve said—I’ve condemned this. It looks to me as a heinous act.

Yeah, right, fatmouth. But you’re willing to let the process work for the “disturbed man” who committed a “heinous act.”

Big of you. Thanks for nothing.
Santorum Graciously Willing to Permit Process to Work For Disturbed Man Who Committed Heinous Act | Daily Pundit
April 1st, 2012 @ 8:47 pm

[…] For Disturbed Man Who Committed Heinous Act Posted on April 1, 2012 5:47 pm by Bill Quick Rick Santorum And The Traditional Justice System : The Other McCain “Absolutely not,” Santorum said. “This is either a very disturbed man or circumstances that […]
The Wondering Jew
April 1st, 2012 @ 10:55 pm

I agree– Santorum is throwing this guy under the bus way more thant he facts possibly justify. If this is what passes for “Courage” these days on the right, then God help us.
Adobe_Walls
April 1st, 2012 @ 11:20 pm

Amen but I suspect we’ll have to help ourselves.
richard mcenroe
April 1st, 2012 @ 11:24 pm

By the way, if you look in the dictionary for “dapper”, that picture is the illustration.
Adobe_Walls
April 1st, 2012 @ 11:25 pm

The reason there are periodic calls for “conferences” on race is because they invariably lead to more drawing from the well of special preferences.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
April 2nd, 2012 @ 12:20 am

Smitty: You and Bitty Smitty look great (and Bitty is not that bitty any more).

I agree a national conference on race is stupid for this case. This case is complicated, but I am pretty sure race was secondary over what happened that night. As far as Rick Santorum, his first statement on the Martin-Zimmerman matter was prejudging it, he is trying to sound reasonable without admitting he was wrong in the first place. Rick was pandering in his first statement. If Romney did this, he would be vilified by many of the people defending Santorum. And I am not saying that is a Romney supporter, that is just the way it is.

I have no idea still what really happened that night. I just hope justice is done. And the death of a 17 year old is tragic, regardless of what happened.
Adjoran
April 2nd, 2012 @ 1:14 am

hei·nous? ?[hey-nuhs] adjective hateful; odious; abominable; totally reprehensible: a heinous offense.

Way to keep open mind – “Let’s have a fair trial before we hang this murderer” is hardly any different.

Santorum is hardly alone in moral cowardice in this case – the “due process of law” would be to treat it like any other homicide: the police investigate and, if they lack probable cause to make an arrest on their own, refer the evidence to the prosecutor who is authorized to prefer charges on his own if evidence warrants or present the case to a grand jury if it is a close call. We grant prosecutors this discretion routinely every single day – which is why it is called “prosecutorial discretion” in the first place.

Folks, that IS “due process.” Conservatives who cower behind calls for a “full investigation” are already caving to the cries of the mob. The ONLY reason a Special Prosecutor has been appointed is political, to defuse the threatened violence, and NOT because any shred of evidence has yet come forth suggesting the prosecutor in this case failed to exercise his discretion with all due diligence.

Now, the courageous stand is not always the wise one politically, and Governor Scott’s action, with the potential for wanton mayhem focused in his state on his watch, is understandable. Other politicians would be best advised to offer sympathy to the bereaved and shut the heck up. That would surely be the smart course politically, without bowing to the mob.

But when a candidate whose supporters claim is such a moral stalwart starts capitulating to the bellowing horde, it is certainly worthy of note for future reference, if nothing else.
SDN
April 2nd, 2012 @ 6:42 am

As I’ve said on earlier threads, at this point Zimmerman’s indictment is certain and his conviction likely. Even if FL does the right thing and says the evidence is insufficient (which is what it looks like right now), the Feds will simply bring civil rights charges.

Santorum should have used this to talk about the failure of the civil rights industry, the corruption of the justice system, etc. OTOH, I haven’t noticed Romney’s leadership on this issue, either.