Santorum Land lacks economic realities
Sen. Rick Santorum's new book, "It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good," shows him only tenuously grounded in reality. He characterizes two-worker families as greedy. In Santorum Land, jobs pay enough for moms to stay home.
In the Triad, however, a living wage -- enough for a $400 apartment, a car (paid for) and groceries -- is $10 an hour. Santorum must support a living wage so that mothers can stay at home, right?
In March, Santorum pushed for a bill that would have raised the minimum wage to $6.25 but would also have exempted any business with revenues of $1 million or less.
Santorum's book repeatedly targets "liberals" who "advocate freedom without responsibility." He must have been thinking of Robert Kennedy, who said, "We have often seen more emphasis put on the rights of citizenship than on its responsibilities. And … responsibility is the greatest right of citizenship."
Santorum, who favors home schooling, says that schools are not mentioned in the Constitution. I don't feel qualified to teach my child the advanced mathematics, computer technology, language skills and complexities of critical thinking that children need today.
Santorum insists he's not running for president. One can only hope.
Beth M. Woodard
Jamestown
Comments (5)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Santorum likes home schooling AND avoids paying his bills for the Internet(s) hookups for his many kids to the school data to the tune of $100,000. See the Pittsburgh paper here and here about his family's residency requirements.
Home school isn't free, not the Santorum way. He just doesn't think he should pay for it if there's a loophole he can squiggle through.
Is this the "responsibility" he espouses? If so, I think we're all sliding down a slippery moral slope.
Posted on August 3, 2005 8:47 AM
And would all those surprised by this please stand!
Posted on August 3, 2005 9:56 AM
Hey beth, he also supports lower taxes so people won't have to give 40% of their earnings to government and thereby may be able to educate their own children. "In home" education is not the only option to public schools. If government would stop confiscating our money,then perhaps we could afford a private school where they are educated and not submited to political correct classes day in and day out.
Posted on August 3, 2005 1:04 PM
Again, would all those surprised by Santorum's antics please rise!
Posted on August 3, 2005 3:42 PM
What Santorum calls "freedom without responsibility" could be seen as Cathoic intolerance. It's not enough for him to believe in church teachings about marriage and sex. He thinks governments should make sure everone else does the same. In the same interview, last year, in which Santorum said that states should have the power to jail consenting adults for private acts he also criticized a 1960s Supreme Court decision that legalized contraception. You don't have to be vehemently pro-choice to be uneasy about that view.
Please note: I am not attacking Catholicism, only the idea that government can be used to force people to comply with religious teachings. That goes for any religion, including Baptist blue laws. I don't care if Mr. and Mrs. Santorum follow their church's teaching in their personal lives. I support their right to do so. But it's another matter when he says government can be used to force Protestants, Jews, atheists, etc. to do the same.
Posted on August 3, 2005 4:00 PM