Rick Santorum wants a one-state solution

Posted By David Kenner Tuesday, January 3, 2012 - 6:32 PM Share

The above video, where Rick Santorum provides his narrative of the Israeli-Palestinian struggle, really needs to be seen to be believed. It's from November, but has only been dredged up from the dark recesses of the Internet now because Santorum appears poised to finish strong in tonight's Iowa caucuses.

Santorum is debating with a young voter, laying out his case why Israel should not dismantle its settlements in the West Bank.  "All the people that live in the West Bank are Israelis, they're not Palestinians," he says. "There is no ‘Palestinian.'"

This echoes Newt Gingrich's contention in December that Palestinians are an "invented" people -- but, for my money, Santorum's comments are worse. Historical revisionism in the service of political gain has been a staple of international affairs since time immemorial. But what Santorum is suggesting is actually profoundly damaging to U.S. and Israeli interests: If the 3 million people of the West Bank are Israeli citizens, they have the right to vote, and will fundamentally reorder the Israeli government. That's a prospect the Israelis themselves have been trying to avoid, and the reason why they have never annexed the West Bank. Too bad nobody ever told Rick Santorum.

EXPLORE:2012 ELECTION POSTER 3, ELECTION 2012, RICK SANTORUM
 

SONGS

11:35 AM ET

January 6, 2012

good

Months ago, few Americans had heard of former Senator Rick Santorum or knew that a search of his name brings up an obscene gay sex term. But last night, Santorum became a leading contender to represent the Republican party in this year’s presidential election. Is this a problem?

Santorum’s search engine ordeal began in 2003 after he made a series of anti-gay comments in the media. In response, columnist and gay-rights activist Dan Savage led a successful campaign to push a new definition of “santorum” to the top of search listings. The results of that campaign can be seen in the following screenshot taken this morning:

As the image shows, the leading result for “Santorum” is the website “spreading santorum.” The Google (NSDQ: GOOG) search results page also displays a definition that wouldn’t be printable in a family newspaper and a click on the top link brings up an obscene graphic.

When the former Senator was a relative obscurity, Savage’s search engine campaign was (depending on your point of view) either mean or a funny and effective political tactic. But with Santorum’s newfound prominence there is a real possibility that six-graders across the land will encounter “spreading santorum” in the course of a civics class assignment. And it is not just a “Google problem,” as Politico described it in September, but a full blown search phenomenon. A search of his name brings up the same results in Bing and Yahoo!.

What can Santorum do? For now, not much. The First Amendment and America’s defamation laws for public figures mean that a lawsuit is out of the question (and would probably spur even more interest in the site).

Santorum tried approaching Google in September but was reportedly rebuffed. According to “In the Plex” author Stephen Levy, founder Sergey Brin once wrestled with the same issue over the fact the word “Jew” once brought up offensive sites, but ultimately decided that the company’s search results should not be tampered with.

In the long run, the social conservative may eventually be able to dislodge the “spreading santorum” site if he can gain more fame as a mainstream politician than as a gay-rights opponent. As SearchEngineLand’s Danny Sullivan explained in a definitive article on the Santorum phenomenon, McDonald’s was slowly able to push down unwanted search results like “McCruelty.” But given the vigor of his opponents, there is no chance Santorum will be able do this anytime soon.

The most sensible course of action for Santorum may be to agree to Savage’s proposed truce in which he will take the website down in exchange for Santorum recognizing gay people as equal citizens. In doing so, he would be accepting a position that is receiving support from courts, the federal government and most Americans. I can also attest that my own aunts are enjoying a happy life together after getting married in Canada five years ago and that, strangely, Canada hasn’t turned into a giant gay bath house.

In the meantime, parents worried about their children learning too much from their civics lessons can change their Google search filter from “moderate” to “strict.”

thanks
professional web design

 

ALIRAIZ

6:12 PM ET

January 6, 2012

Months ago, few Americans had

Months ago, few Americans had heard of former Senator Rick Santorum or knew that a search of his name brings up an obscene gay sex term. But last night, Santorum became a leading contender to represent the Republican party in this year’s presidential election. Is this a problem?

Santorum’s search engine ordeal began in 2003 after he made a series of anti-gay comments in the media. In response, columnist and gay-rights activist Dan Savage led a successful campaign to push a new definition of “santorum” to the top of search listings. The results of that campaign can be seen in the following screenshot taken this morning:

As the image shows, the leading result for “Santorum” is the website “spreading santorum.” The Google (NSDQ: GOOG) search results page also displays a definition that wouldn’t be printable in a family newspaper and a click on the top link brings up an obscene graphic.

When the former Senator was a relative obscurity, Savage’s search engine campaign was (depending on your point of view) either mean or a funny and effective political tactic. But with Santorum’s newfound prominence there is a real possibility that six-graders across the land will encounter “spreading santorum” in the course of a civics class assignment. And it is not just a “Google problem,” as Politico described it in September, but a full blown search phenomenon. A search of his name brings up the same results in Bing and Yahoo!.

What can Santorum do? For now, not much. The First Amendment and America’s defamation laws for public figures mean that a lawsuit is out of the question (and would probably spur even more interest in the site).

Santorum tried approaching Google in September but was reportedly rebuffed. According to “In the Plex” author Stephen Levy, founder Sergey Brin once wrestled with the same issue over the fact the word “Jew” once brought up offensive sites, but ultimately decided that the company’s search results should not be tampered with.

In the long run, the social conservative may eventually be able to dislodge the “spreading santorum” site if he can gain more fame as a mainstream politician than as a gay-rights opponent. As SearchEngineLand’s Danny Sullivan explained in a definitive article on the Santorum phenomenon, McDonald’s was slowly able to push down unwanted search results like “McCruelty.” But given the vigor of his opponents, there is no chance Santorum will be able do this anytime soon.

The most sensible course of action for Santorum may be to agree to Savage’s proposed truce in which he will take the website down in exchange for Santorum recognizing gay people as equal citizens. In doing so, he would be accepting a position that is receiving support from courts, the federal government and most Americans. I can also attest that my own aunts are enjoying a happy life together after getting married in Canada five years ago and that, strangely, Canada hasn’t turned into a giant gay bath house.

In the meantime, parents worried about their children learning too much from their civics lessons can change their Google search filter from “moderate” to “strict.” Months ago, few Americans had heard of former Senator Rick Santorum or knew that a search of his name brings up an obscene gay sex term. But last night, Santorum became a leading contender to represent the Republican party in this year’s presidential election. Is this a problem?

Santorum’s search engine ordeal began in 2003 after he made a series of anti-gay comments in the media. In response, columnist and gay-rights activist Dan Savage led a successful campaign to push a new definition of “santorum” to the top of search listings. The results of that campaign can be seen in the following screenshot taken this morning:

As the image shows, the leading result for “Santorum” is the website “spreading santorum.” The Google (NSDQ: GOOG) search results page also displays a definition that wouldn’t be printable in a family newspaper and a click on the top link brings up an obscene graphic.

When the former Senator was a relative obscurity, Savage’s search engine campaign was (depending on your point of view) either mean or a funny and effective political tactic. But with Santorum’s newfound prominence there is a real possibility that six-graders across the land will encounter “spreading santorum” in the course of a civics class assignment. And it is not just a “Google problem,” as Politico described it in September, but a full blown search phenomenon. A search of his name brings up the same results in Bing and Yahoo!.

What can Santorum do? For now, not much. The First Amendment and America’s defamation laws for public figures mean that a lawsuit is out of the question (and would probably spur even more interest in the site).

Santorum tried approaching Google in September but was reportedly rebuffed. According to “In the Plex” author Stephen Levy, founder Sergey Brin once wrestled with the same issue over the fact the word “Jew” once brought up offensive sites, but ultimately decided that the company’s search results should not be tampered with.

In the long run, the social conservative may eventually be able to dislodge the “spreading santorum” site if he can gain more fame as a mainstream politician than as a gay-rights opponent. As SearchEngineLand’s Danny Sullivan explained in a definitive article on the Santorum phenomenon, McDonald’s was slowly able to push down unwanted search results like “McCruelty.” But given the vigor of his opponents, there is no chance Santorum will be able do this anytime soon.

The most sensible course of action for Santorum may be to agree to Savage’s proposed truce in which he will take the website down in exchange for Santorum recognizing gay people as equal citizens. In doing so, he would be accepting a position that is receiving support from courts, the federal government and most Americans. I can also attest that my own aunts are enjoying a happy life together after getting married in Canada five years ago and that, strangely, Canada hasn’t turned into a giant gay bath house.

In the meantime, parents worried about their children learning too much from their civics lessons can change their Google search filter from “moderate” to “strict.” Months ago, few Americans had heard of former Senator Rick Santorum or knew that a search of his name brings up an obscene gay sex term. But last night, Santorum became a leading contender to represent the Republican party in this year’s presidential election. Is this a problem?

Santorum’s search engine ordeal began in 2003 after he made a series of anti-gay comments in the media. In response, columnist and gay-rights activist Dan Savage led a successful campaign to push a new definition of “santorum” to the top of search listings. The results of that campaign can be seen in the following screenshot taken this morning:

As the image shows, the leading result for “Santorum” is the website “spreading santorum.” The Google (NSDQ: GOOG) search results page also displays a definition that wouldn’t be printable in a family newspaper and a click on the top link brings up an obscene graphic.

When the former Senator was a relative obscurity, Savage’s search engine campaign was (depending on your point of view) either mean or a funny and effective political tactic. But with Santorum’s newfound prominence there is a real possibility that six-graders across the land will encounter “spreading santorum” in the course of a civics class assignment. And it is not just a “Google problem,” as Politico described it in September, but a full blown search phenomenon. A search of his name brings up the same results in Bing and Yahoo!.

What can Santorum do? For now, not much. The First Amendment and America’s defamation laws for public figures mean that a lawsuit is out of the question (and would probably spur even more interest in the site).

Santorum tried approaching Google in September but was reportedly rebuffed. According to “In the Plex” author Stephen Levy, founder Sergey Brin once wrestled with the same issue over the fact the word “Jew” once brought up offensive sites, but ultimately decided that the company’s search results should not be tampered with.

In the long run, the social conservative may eventually be able to dislodge the “spreading santorum” site if he can gain more fame as a mainstream politician than as a gay-rights opponent. As SearchEngineLand’s Danny Sullivan explained in a definitive article on the Santorum phenomenon, McDonald’s was slowly able to push down unwanted search results like “McCruelty.” But given the vigor of his opponents, there is no chance Santorum will be able do this anytime soon.

The most sensible course of action for Santorum may be to agree to Savage’s proposed truce in which he will take the website down in exchange for Santorum recognizing gay people as equal citizens. In doing so, he would be accepting a position that is receiving support from courts, the federal government and most Americans. I can also attest that my own aunts are enjoying a happy life together after getting married in Canada five years ago and that, strangely, Canada hasn’t turned into a giant gay bath house.

In the meantime, parents worried about their children learning too much from their civics lessons can change their Google search filter from “moderate” to “strict.” Months ago, few Americans had heard of former Senator Rick Santorum or knew that a search of his name brings up an obscene gay sex term. But last night, Santorum became a leading contender to represent the Republican party in this year’s presidential election. Is this a problem?

Santorum’s search engine ordeal began in 2003 after he made a series of anti-gay comments in the media. In response, columnist and gay-rights activist Dan Savage led a successful campaign to push a new definition of “santorum” to the top of search listings. The results of that campaign can be seen in the following screenshot taken this morning:

As the image shows, the leading result for “Santorum” is the website “spreading santorum.” The Google (NSDQ: GOOG) search results page also displays a definition that wouldn’t be printable in a family newspaper and a click on the top link brings up an obscene graphic.

When the former Senator was a relative obscurity, Savage’s search engine campaign was (depending on your point of view) either mean or a funny and effective political tactic. But with Santorum’s newfound prominence there is a real possibility that six-graders across the land will encounter “spreading santorum” in the course of a civics class assignment. And it is not just a “Google problem,” as Politico described it in September, but a full blown search phenomenon. A search of his name brings up the same results in Bing and Yahoo!.

What can Santorum do? For now, not much. The First Amendment and America’s defamation laws for public figures mean that a lawsuit is out of the question (and would probably spur even more interest in the site).

Santorum tried approaching Google in September but was reportedly rebuffed. According to “In the Plex” author Stephen Levy, founder Sergey Brin once wrestled with the same issue over the fact the word “Jew” once brought up offensive sites, but ultimately decided that the company’s search results should not be tampered with.

In the long run, the social conservative may eventually be able to dislodge the “spreading santorum” site if he can gain more fame as a mainstream politician than as a gay-rights opponent. As SearchEngineLand’s Danny Sullivan explained in a definitive article on the Santorum phenomenon, McDonald’s was slowly able to push down unwanted search results like “McCruelty.” But given the vigor of his opponents, there is no chance Santorum will be able do this anytime soon.

The most sensible course of action for Santorum may be to agree to Savage’s proposed truce in which he will take the website down in exchange for Santorum recognizing gay people as equal citizens. In doing so, he would be accepting a position that is receiving support from courts, the federal government and most Americans. I can also attest that my own aunts are enjoying a happy life together after getting married in Canada five years ago and that, strangely, Canada hasn’t turned into a giant gay bath house.

In the meantime, parents worried about their children learning too much from their civics lessons can change their Google search filter from “moderate” to “strict.”

Thanks

ab circle pro reviews | genf20 plus reviews

 

LIAHASAN11

11:14 AM ET

January 8, 2012

Over the past few years,

Over the past few years, there has been a growing tendency to dub Muslims as terrorists. And leading from the front in this blame game is none other than the superpower, the United States. It is extremely sad that such a tolerant and loving community is being dubbed as behind the terror outfits.

It is gross injustice that the Muslims of this world are being treated as second class. How many of you think that Muslims are behind the terror plots, no matter where they happen? No doubt most of the terror outfits are comprised of Muslims, but is it correct to say that all Muslims are terrorists? If we look at the community as a whole, the Muslims will outnumber almost the rest. Indeed most of the rich nations are Muslim nations.

There are a few misguided youth who have spoilt the spirit of Islam, disturbed the Muslim norms, created havoc in the world, revoked the laws of the land, disturbed peace, affected fraternal relations, and above all marginalised the facets and tenets of the KORAN --the Holy Book-- that has been leading several generations ever since it came into being. It is not just the Muslims that bow before the Koran, I being a non-Muslim, too, bow before the most sacred book, and I have no doubt in saying that millions of non-Muslims treat the Koran as their HOLY BOOK--much like the Geeta of Hindus, the Bible of Christains, and the Guru Granth Sahib Ji of Sikhs. All these sacred, religious books preach their followers fraternity, brotherhood, and love for all --no matter which religion they belong. Wouldn't it have been wonderful, had all of us followed our religion, keeping in mind the sanctity of all other religions?

this is my request to everyone..standby your faith, your religion, your prayer, your worship, your norms, but for God's sake don't use the pious name of God for violence, waging wars, letting bloodshed, diluting sacred human values, massacring men, women, children and old n infirm,---just for the sake of POWER n SUPREMACY over others.

ASK God when, you leave for haven, how correct are those indulging in gross human rights violations just to gain power n prestige just to create dread, fear n havoc in the world.

Muslims are a religious community, who believe in the sanctity n virtues of the Koran n the Prophet --the Great Prophet, who taught them to fight those who kill innocents, to wage a jihad against those who r antihuman-- not against all n sundry..

So, how did Muslims started being dubbed as terrorists? Being a community rich of strength n valor, the powerful Muslim lords saw themselves reaping dividends by ruling over the world. Just this was the beginning...n the rest is history, v much the present--may b d future too.

But can we let the blood of our brethren, n fellow citizens flow like this in suicide bombings, bomb blasts n all such atrocious tactics of the so-called terrorists? The disgruntled few r in a state of dissatisfaction n to satisfy themselves have started waging a war on innocents that they call as jihad. however, they fail to understand that in doing so, they have tarnished the sacred name of ISLAM, n invited criticism from world over..resulting in the world calling the entire Muslim community as associated with terrorists.

For God's sake stop calling Muslims terrorists. They are a community that loves its religion, its God, its Prophet, and upkeep human values. The dissatisfied n misled among them r the real culprits, who need to be justified. I have so many Muslim friends and trust me, they all believe in upkeeping human values, they believe in brotherhood, fraternity, their heart cries at the suicide bombings, their lives r disturbed by terrorist activities. They love humanity, first.

Do you know so many Muslims have died in the suicide bombings and bomb blasts? If the terroists who care so much for their religion, loved their religion n fellow Muslims, will they kill them? Will they place bombs at places where muslims r predominant? will they target muslim locations n habitations?

they have targetted muslim habitations..hyderabad in INDIA is a glaring example, where so many muslims were killed in the blast incide the mosque. such disgruntled elements placed the bombs inside the mosque only to create misunderstanding between different communities so that people fight each other out, which would result in the victory of the terrorists.

A Muslim scholar from Pakistan says: "Our religion teaches us that the murder of an innocent person is the murder of humanity as a whole. "

MUSLIMS r not terrorists. muslims r friends n fellow citizens. please do not mistake such a tolerant community because of a misled few!

 

LUVROZS

5:22 PM ET

January 9, 2012

luvrozs

It's no longer a misled "few". Did you see the stats from the elections in Libya and Egypt - the Muslim Brotherhood has taken over another two countries. You professed peaceful moderates are being vastly outnumbered!!! What happens to the women in those societies now?
Try telling your view to the Muslim Brotherhood - see what they do about it.
Thou protesteth too much!

 

LUVROZS

5:17 PM ET

January 9, 2012

International law - the truth regarding the land.

Check out this short 4 minute yoUTube video - and watch it again - if you really want to learn the truth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijS8mFP4I1A

Note the map and the land Israel was supposed to get. Interesting? I hope you see this video.

 

SPOOD

10:55 AM ET

January 11, 2012

So much spam

Santorum wants a lot of things we shouldn't take seriously such as:
-banning birth control
-criminalizing abortion (despite his wife having one years ago)
-privitizing every social service in sight
-Legalizing prayer and creation science in public schools
-hunting Dan Savage for sport
-hunting gays for sport
-Criminalizing Islam and Protestantism

 

KIRBANG

10:31 AM ET

January 26, 2012

Santorum

Yes he wants a one state solution for America s problems, as seen through his lens at least, a christian theocracy. He is an abomination, a self serving hypocrite pandering to the hateful and the bigoted.

 

TARQUINIS

1:08 PM ET

January 26, 2012

How many of our dear readers

How many of our dear readers noticed the recent article in Foreign Policy "How did a million Israelis go missing"?

If there is a good reason why they are leaving Israel (voting with their feet) what could it be? 
 
(The million missing Israelis: By Joseph Chamie, Barry Mirkin  
Israeli Demographers in Foreign Policy: July 5, 2011) 

http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/07/05/the_million_missing_israelis

And reports of recent polling show that HALF of all young Israelis want to leave Israel. (Mondoweis, June 28, 2011)

http://mondoweiss.net/2011/06/half-of-young-israelis-are-not-convinced-they-should-stay-in-the-long-run.html

Israel is now in a strategic trap of its own creation. With thanks and felicitation to the vast power of the Zionist lobbies, and all our good buddy Zionist posters. Don’t worry; be happy (if unending war is what you want). But if not, then get out while the getting is good.

And apparently some million have, and more want to. Because Zionism is racism and unending war.

 

GREGORYKENNETH

7:41 AM ET

February 2, 2012

Fatah for years has talked in

Fatah for years has talked in public about peaceful solutions, but acted in ways to short circuit such efforts. Fatah continues to promote violent hateful rhetoric against Israel. They have tried diplomatic end-runs around kitchenremodeling negotiating. They even had secular suicide bombers attack Israeli civilians. Most of all they engaged in useless gamesmanship such as references to phony Arab League peace plans (which aren't realistic for either side).

 

Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.

Read More