I'll have to find where I read about the details as to what happened exactly (I'm scared to Google Santorum), but IIRC, there were issues with the pregnancy and his wife was given drugs that basically ended it. Given his abortion stance, it seems pretty hypocritical. That said, when my sister lost her baby at 8 months, a lot of time was spent with the family and the baby after she gave birth to him. I don't think they should be criticized for that part of it.
Agree completely. How you grieve is your own business. Taking a policy stance that you yourself are unwilling to follow makes you a hypocritical douchecanoe worthy of intense scorn. Hypocrisy is one of those things I really can't stomach very well.
did anyone see cnbc when the current ceo of bain capital didn't back romney a couple of days ago. they asked him straight up does he support him. the guy wouldn't say he supported romney, he said something like he will back whomever the winner is. it was in the morning and they analysts were really bugging about it after the interview
Because he's killing them; private equity is built on a tax loophole that really ought to be closed; they survived last time a few years ago, but with the heat he's generating for the carried-interest exception, even Republicans are starting to hate it. It's definitely back on the chopping block if a tax bill ever gets passed again.
republicans have been using the religious right to cut the capital gains tax for years. they don't care about abortions, gays, etc. they use the base for votes and then fight for tax cuts. i told this guy at the bar i don't care that romney's rate is the capital gains tax. that's the problem. he only paid 13.9%
From reading the post that you quoted when you claimed that's what medical and mental health experts recommended. Here's what glynch said. I know that you had some vision problems, are they getting worse? Or was this just a reading error on your part? I've done some web design, and know some tricks to make text on the screen magnified pretty easily. Let me know if you'd like help with any of it. I'm serious. If that wasn't the problem, then why the hell were you responding to a post you obviously hadn't read, and didn't bother to reread after it became an issue. If you're going to stick by your statement that this is what the experts recommend please show us the credible articles where mental health experts recommend having children play with a dead fetus.
The "tolerant" liberals laugh and scorn at how someone handles the death of a child (if they are even capable of seeing the child as a person) to further their thieving agenda. The childbirth in 1996 was a source of terrible heartbreak — the couple were told by doctors early in the pregnancy that the baby Karen was carrying had a fatal defect and would survive only for a short time outside the womb. According to Karen Santorum’s book, ”Letters to Gabriel: The True Story of Gabriel Michael Santorum,” she later developed a life-threatening intrauterine infection and a fever that reached nearly 105 degrees. She went into labor when she was 20 weeks pregnant. After resisting at first, she allowed doctors to give her the drug Pitocin to speed the birth. Gabriel lived just two hours. In another era the child would have been born at home and the family could have had it's bonding moment. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...aby--and-mine/2011/03/04/gIQA0uH1eP_blog.html The latest intra-pundit flap of Campaign 2012: a couple of my liberal colleagues have called Rick and Karen Santorum “crazy,” or “very weird” for wrapping and caressing the body of their baby, who died only two hours after emerging from 20 weeks in utero -- and taking it home for their children to see. These opinions provoked a conservative backlash. (One liberal later apologized.) Maybe it’s not too late for a teachable moment about neonatal death and stillbirth — and the special grief that these not-uncommon, but obviously insufficiently understood, tragedies inflict upon parents. Nine years ago, my son Jonathan’s heart mysteriously stopped in utero — two hours prior to a scheduled c-section that would have brought him out after 33 weeks. Next came hours of induced labor so that my wife could produce a lifeless child. I cannot describe the anxiety, emotional pain, and physical horror. And then there was the question: what about the corpse? Fortunately for us, our hospital’s nurses were trained to deal with infant death. They washed the baby, wrapped him in a blanket and put a little cotton cap on his head, just as they would have done if he had been born alive. They then recommended that we spend as much time with him as we wanted. My wife held Jonathan for a long while. I hesitated to do so. At the urging of the nurses and my wife, I summoned the courage to cradle Jonathan’s body, long enough to get a good look at his face and to muse how much he looked like his brother -- then say goodbye. I am glad that my love for him overcame my fear of the dead. We, like the Santorums, took a photograph of the baby -- lying, as if asleep, in my wife’s arms. We have a framed copy in our bedroom. It’s beautiful. Jonathan’s body was prepared according to Jewish law, including circumcision, and buried after a religious service. Clergy and friends gathered at our home to support us. I regret that, unlike the Santorums, who presented the body of their child to their children, we did not show Jonathan’s body to our other son, who was six years old at the time. When I told him what had happened, his first question was, “Well, where is the baby?” I tried to explain what a morgue is, and why the baby went there. It was awkward and unsatisfactory -- too abstract. In hindsight, I was not protecting my son from a difficult conversation, I was protecting myself. I’m not defending Rick Santorum the presidential candidate. From what little I know about him, he seems to have his own issues with moralizing and judging. To the extent he has used his family’s experience to make a point about abortion, I object. But I am defending the right of the Santorums and all families to grieve an infant’s death in accordance with their personal needs and beliefs. My plea is for a little more respect regarding the way people deal with loss, and a little more maturity about physical contact with the dead. If that puts me in sympathy, for a moment, with this right-wing politician, so be it. Jonathan’s death was probably the hardest moment of my life. But actually touching his body was a source of comfort and the first step in going on with life. Not weird.
“I believe in an America where millions of US Americans...umuh.. believe in an America that’s the America millions of US Americans believe in. Most Americans don't have nukes. Such as the Iran.”
If it weren't for PACs and a crazy couple from Vagas, Newt would be dead in the water. Crazy how he's jumped like he has. Whoever said it was right. The right doesn't want a reasoned conversation about the direction of the country. They want to, as Newt says, "I don't want to bloody his nose, I want to knock him out."
This debate is freaking hilarious. Romney and Newt will physically attack each other at this rate. Wolf Blitzer's horrible moderating is just fueling this nonsense.
He slapped him the f*** down on at least 3 separate occasions. I like this Romney, aggressive. I'm thinking it might be that Coca-cola he had this afternoon, got him fired up.
Read this and weep, Republicans. The latest poll: Mr. Obama's approval rating nudged up to 48%, while 46% disapprove of the job he is doing, the first time the reading has moved into positive territory for the president since June. Mr. Obama was losing to a generic Republican candidate last month, but the new survey finds him beating an unnamed Republican 47% to 42%, his best margin in seven months. Specifically, Mr. Obama tops both of the leading GOP candidates, but is far stronger against Mr. Gingrich. When Americans were asked how they would vote today, the president surpasses Mr. Romney by a 49% to 43% margin. Against Mr. Gingrich, his margin swells to 55% to 37%. .................. The poll of 1,000 adults was conducted between Jan. 22 and 24, after Mr. Gingrich's surprisingly strong victory in South Carolina's primary. Among the other two GOP contestants still in the race, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum garnered 18% support among GOP primary voters, while Texas Rep. Ron Paul got 12%. When winnowed down to just the two front-runners, 52% of Republicans picked Mr. Gingrich, compared with 39% for Mr. Romney. The survey illuminates both where Mr. Gingrich has solidified his support among Republican stalwarts, but also underscores his broader weaknesses. Mr. Gingrich owes his edge over Mr. Romney in large part to strong support in the South, where he leads the former Massachusetts governor by 24 percentage points. The former speaker notched outsize support among tea-party supporters and Republicans who see themselves as "very conservative." .................... Meanwhile, though many analysts still see Mr. Romney as the candidate most likely to nab the nomination, the poll found him still failing to convince key blocks of his own party. Among Republican primary voters, he was favored by just 29% of women, 21% of tea-party backers and 17% of strongly conservative Republicans. His largest segments of support come from those calling themselves moderates and liberals. "Gingrich is just killing Romney in the core of the party," said Mr. Hart, who noted that Mr. Romney continues to play "to a slim portion of the electorate." At the same time, just over half of all Americans—and 57% of independents—gave Mr. Gingrich poor marks on the question of which candidate has "high personal standards." Mr. Romney came out markedly stronger on that front. Some 48% of all Americans say they have negative feelings toward Mr. Gingrich, compared with 36% for Mr. Romney and 39% for Mr. Obama. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204573704577185231131679946.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
