Monday, February 13, 2012
Gay Marriage / 2012 The Rick Santorum Rally in Tacoma Probably Could Have Gone Better
Posted by Paul Constant on Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 10:41 PM
- Click to enlarge.
Dick Nixon was an appropriate figure to invoke, because like Nixon's presidency, Santorum's speech was plagued from beginning to end by angry young protesters. Members of Occupy Tacoma embedded in the crowd mic checked Santorum on several different occasions. (Occupy Tacoma headquarters were just 500 feet away from the rally site.) Marriage equality activists started a pro-gay-marriage chant that silenced the candidate for something like two minutes, and they encouraged passing traffic to honk in support of marriage equality and taxing the wealthy, adding to the general cacophony. The concrete plaza in front of the Washington State History Museum entrance, with its sweeping coliseum-style seating surrounded on two sides by abrupt, tall brick walls, was a perfect echo chamber, muddling both Santorum's speech and the shouts of protesters into one dull, angry roar. (It didn't help, either, that Santorum was lit from below, to eerie effect, during the speech, or that the podium in which he was speaking was directly above a pair of doors marked, creepily, EDUCATION CENTER.)
Not that the protesters were the only angry people there. Santorum drew a crowd of hundreds of angry Washingtonians to the event. One brave man carrying an anti-Santorum sign ("FREEDOM FROM RELIGION," on one side, "Stop the Drama, Re-elect Obama") was followed around the rally by several Santorum supporters pinching their noses and miming as though they were swatting away flies. "I can't stand the smell of this guy," one fly-swatter said, adding, "it's like he's got garbage in his pockets." An old woman told the nose-pinchers, as she squeezed past the whole scene, "Watch out for the maggots." Another woman clucked her tongue, and told her friends, "If you're an atheist, you'll just believe in anything."
- Click to enlarge.
- Click to enlarge.
- Click to enlarge.
After Santorum's remarks, Kirby Wilbur came back to the mic and told the audience to give themselves a round of applause for showing the Occupiers "what the real America looks like." The crowd pushed and pulled at a chance to shake Santorum's hand and get a photo with him during a lengthy and chaotic meet-and-greet afterward. About halfway through the handshaking, Santorum was glitterbombed. This was not just any glitterbomb, where a handful of glitter is haphazardly thrown at the candidate: Rick Santorum was glitter bukkake'd: He had glitter cascading down the front of his sweater vest, all down his back, through his hair, and his giant forehead shone in the flashes of photographs like Ke$ha had just vomited on it. But Santorum plodded onward with the weary grace of someone who had been sprinkled with glitter by strangers against his will many times before. He didn't shake everyone's hand, but he made an effort. And then he was whisked away.
(Find all of my photos from the event in this Google Plus gallery.)
4
it's hard to believe people this dumb exist in the state of washington, let alone america. what a fucking waste.
5
I fantasize about Rick Santorum saying something seemingly climactic and then, echoing across the amphitheater, booms a defiant "NOT SO FAST, HATER." And the crowd gasps and everybody looks up to see Dan Savage with his hands on his hips and dramatic backlightning, because Santorum should know better than to try and stump speech in Dan's backyard. And Santorum says, in an acidic tone, "YOU!" And Dan then flies down, and they fight like ninjas.
11
Wow. Invoking Nixon? Really? I'm actually old enough to remember the Nixon impeachment hearings. Nixon was easily the most despised president in the last century, even worse than Hoover during the Great Depression.
Note to Kirby Wilbur: you're doing it wrong.
Note to Kirby Wilbur: you're doing it wrong.
13
@11
They'll be invoking Hoover next. I wonder if it's just being clueless or if it's part of the larger move to discredit all Democratic presidencies. They're not invoking Nixon during his presidency, they invoking him against the most storied president of the 20th century. They've been criticizing FDR for all of his social programs, so now they're adding JFK to their list. Let's see whether Kennedy/Nixon start popping up in Repub. speeches.
They'll be invoking Hoover next. I wonder if it's just being clueless or if it's part of the larger move to discredit all Democratic presidencies. They're not invoking Nixon during his presidency, they invoking him against the most storied president of the 20th century. They've been criticizing FDR for all of his social programs, so now they're adding JFK to their list. Let's see whether Kennedy/Nixon start popping up in Repub. speeches.
14
"If you're an atheist, you'll just believe in anything."
This is ironic on more than just One level. On many. HAHA. This kind of "We Must save our country" hysteria is for old people. Except cool ones like Betty White and Judge Judy.
This is ironic on more than just One level. On many. HAHA. This kind of "We Must save our country" hysteria is for old people. Except cool ones like Betty White and Judge Judy.
15
"If you're an atheist, you'll just believe in anything."
This is ironic on more than just One level. On many. HAHA. This kind of "We Must save our country" hysteria is for old people. Except cool ones like Betty White and Judge Judy.
This is ironic on more than just One level. On many. HAHA. This kind of "We Must save our country" hysteria is for old people. Except cool ones like Betty White and Judge Judy.
16
HELL YES my friend was the glitter-bomber!!! We're holding a party in her honor this weekend to raise money I had to pay for bail! NO SANTORUM!!!
17
HELL YES my friend was the glitter-bukkake-er!! We're holding a party in her honor/to raise funds for her bail this weekend!! NO SANTORUM.
19
Among the most pressing civil rights issues was desegregation of public schools. Nixon inherited a nation in which nearly 70% of the black children in the South attended all-black schools. He had supported civil rights both as a senator and as vice president under Eisenhower, but now, mindful of the Southern vote, he petitioned the courts on behalf of school districts seeking to delay busing. Meanwhile, he offered a practical New Federalist alternative -- locally controlled desegregation.
Starting in Mississippi and moving across the South, the Nixon administration set up biracial state committees to plan and implement school desegregation. The appeal to local control succeeded. By the end of 1970, with little of the anticipated violence and little fanfare, the committees had made significant progress -- only about 18% of black children in the South attended all-black schools.
New Federalism's focus on local empowerment did not mean an abdication of federal responsibility. In fact, the de-emphasis of federal bureaucracy coincided with a concentration of power within the White House. The president's actions on behalf of women illustrated his willingness to use that concentrated power.
Nixon had campaigned as a supporter of the Equal Rights Amendment, but did little to push its passage following his election. When feminists pointed out his lack of support for women's issues, he used presidential power to push the federal government forward.
Despite the opposition of many men in his administration, Nixon increased the number of female appointments to administration positions. He created a Presidential Task Force on Women's Rights. He asked the Justice Department to bring sex discrimination suits under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. And he ordered the Labor Department to add sex discrimination provisions to the guidelines for its Office of Federal Contract Compliance.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperien…
20
That lady's a bit unclear on the concept.
Another woman clucked her tongue, and told her friends, "If you're an atheist, you'll just believe in anything."
That lady's a bit unclear on the concept.
21
@#16
I congratulate your friend on her activism and courage - but an act that is until after it's happened indistinguishable from a physical assault really isn't a good approach.
I congratulate your friend on her activism and courage - but an act that is until after it's happened indistinguishable from a physical assault really isn't a good approach.
23
@ Warren Terra - I don't think it's that the act is indistinguishable from physical assault, it's that it's classified as physical assault. Glitterbombing looks pretty different from physical assault to me, and it can't be prosecuted as such without clear intent to harm.
24
@#23
I realize that it might be legally classified as assault, but that wasn't what I was trying to refer to. What I meant was that when a protester hurls a fistful or a bucketful of some material at a target, noone can know until afterwards that the material is harmless, and so it can only be responded to as if it were the assault it resembles.
I realize that it might be legally classified as assault, but that wasn't what I was trying to refer to. What I meant was that when a protester hurls a fistful or a bucketful of some material at a target, noone can know until afterwards that the material is harmless, and so it can only be responded to as if it were the assault it resembles.
25
"If you're an atheist you'll just believe anything."
This comment is ironic on a few levels. This republican hysteria is for old people. They are Archaic. Except for cool ones. Like Betty White and Judge Judy. I know there's more I'm missing, but those are just a couple of examples.
This comment is ironic on a few levels. This republican hysteria is for old people. They are Archaic. Except for cool ones. Like Betty White and Judge Judy. I know there's more I'm missing, but those are just a couple of examples.
28
What stood out to me is that this event is a fascinating new permutation of protest culture: the forcible, extremely intimate mingling of the two most motivated and righteous groups on the political spectrum right now, teabaggers and Occupiers (and all their permutations, plus the political theatre of the caucuses). It's interesting that protest culture really is so widespread right now, which I'm pretty sure is unprecedented in our lifetimes. Yes, there's the 1960s - but definitely favored one side, or at least it does in our collective memory.
The 1820s/30s were the only time I can think of that had analogous widespread political participation in the streets like this - right after the post-Revolution mop-up of Shay's Rebellion and others, and right before the rise of industrialization, accelarated conquest across the Mississippi, a big boom of religiosity in the 1840s, and during increased tensions surrounding slavery (but before Southerners managed to stifle all opposing voices in the South). Clearly we're in a special moment, since people think it is both necessary and possible to change things by protesting in front of each other.
The 1820s/30s were the only time I can think of that had analogous widespread political participation in the streets like this - right after the post-Revolution mop-up of Shay's Rebellion and others, and right before the rise of industrialization, accelarated conquest across the Mississippi, a big boom of religiosity in the 1840s, and during increased tensions surrounding slavery (but before Southerners managed to stifle all opposing voices in the South). Clearly we're in a special moment, since people think it is both necessary and possible to change things by protesting in front of each other.
30
@24, I agree. While the first glitterbomb was great and ironic, I don't like the precident it sets that it's OK to throw things at political candidates. Not the kind of political debate one should be proud of.
31
I never thought that I would look kindly upon Nixon but compared to the current group of yahoos running the gop he is a liberal, in some instances more liberal than Obama. He signed into law the EPA, proposed a better national healthcare bill than the one that Obama passed and (as noted by one of the above quotes) thought birth control shouldnt be denied to those who wanted it. Moreover his war lasted less than eight years instead of the 10 and counting.
32
This is basically the same shit that went down in 2000 in California with the gay rights debate stirring the obscenely wealthy, hate-fueled mummies in Orange County who are only capable of giving a shit about politics when their pathological hatred of gays is invoked. If they'd waited until after the CA primary McCain would have most likely taken the state and the world would never have had to endure eight years of W. Luckily this is Washington and a few cranky farmers and blue-hairs from the sticks are nothing compared the massive, swirling black hole of "Everyone Except Us Should Go Fucking Die And We Have The Money To Make It Happen" that is Orange County, but still it's hard not to get some vaguely disturbing deja vu out of this.
34
@31 It is frankly meaningless to say that such-and-such political figure is more or less "liberal" than liberals now. What it meant to be liberal or conservative was different then. As a historian, I think it is interesting to trace the progression of those differences and foolish/lazy to use the spectre of "OMG you can't even get into the same box as Nixon!" as a critique. It's basically a milder form of "that's just like Hitler."
Also, intrusion into Vietnam arguably began in 1945 (when the US began financing French efforts to retake Indochina from nationalist Communists who actually resisted Japanese invasion/ran the country in the areas they controlled), or 1953/4 (when the French formally gave up and the US intervened to prevent Ho Chi Minh from being elected president of united Vietnam, and when we lent "advisors" to the south), or with the Kennedy Administration (when intervention ratcheted up). By the measures of spending a ton of money and people dying who may not have died otherwise, the US had been in Vietnam from 1945 to 1974.
Also, intrusion into Vietnam arguably began in 1945 (when the US began financing French efforts to retake Indochina from nationalist Communists who actually resisted Japanese invasion/ran the country in the areas they controlled), or 1953/4 (when the French formally gave up and the US intervened to prevent Ho Chi Minh from being elected president of united Vietnam, and when we lent "advisors" to the south), or with the Kennedy Administration (when intervention ratcheted up). By the measures of spending a ton of money and people dying who may not have died otherwise, the US had been in Vietnam from 1945 to 1974.
35
@34 1973, not 74, excuse me, was when the last US troops pulled out, and then the South Vietnamese government fell in 1975.
36
@30, well if the Repubs want to "Take Our Country Back!" to the 1800s, then they should be relieved that glitter is the only thing being thrown.
37
@36, but if the pro-life crowd starts throwing fake blood on pro-choice candidates, you can't say we didn't start the trend. When you start throwing things, you lost the debate.
38
@37 I'm surprised they haven't thought of it yet. Perhaps it reminds them too much of nuns throwing blood on military personnel.
39
Dan should have showed up and turned this into the debate of the century. And Santorum's crowd is just as creepy to read about as I expected.
41
@19, @31, @38 - It really does speak to the current state of the post-Cheney GOP when Nixon is held up as an ideal.
Being a Nixon Republican hasn't been fashionable for 40 years, and it still isn't, but exhuming his policy platform shows how far his poison personality drove American politics into the ditch. It all seems so reasonable, but nothing can get done in Congress because of the entrenched partisanship Watergate created. Journalists all want to break the scoop that ends a career. It's been a nasty downward spiral ever since.
Being a Nixon Republican hasn't been fashionable for 40 years, and it still isn't, but exhuming his policy platform shows how far his poison personality drove American politics into the ditch. It all seems so reasonable, but nothing can get done in Congress because of the entrenched partisanship Watergate created. Journalists all want to break the scoop that ends a career. It's been a nasty downward spiral ever since.
42
Adolf came to mind with that lighting....some B\S ranting from a mad man with brain washed evil memorized, attracted like bugs to the lite of a flame.
http://sciencestage.com/v/5808/adolf-hit…
As well More Christ-insaneity
My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.... When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited.
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech in Munich on 12 April 1922
More...
http://sciencestage.com/v/5808/adolf-hit…
As well More Christ-insaneity
My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.... When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited.
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech in Munich on 12 April 1922
43
I'm surprised at you all, why didn't you just kill him when you had the chance? Mix a little anthrax into your cute little glitter bombs. Way to go Twilighters, you make this state look lamer than it has become.
C'mon, put you words in action!!
Oh, that's right you are all a bunch of mealy mouth Facists. You can talk a good game, but what have any of you done to enhace your surroundings?
I guess cursing at the sky, whilst shaking your impotent fists of rage, make you feel worthwhile. Me? I'll be at the polls, voting against the Tides Foundation, because my family spilt blood to help free the world from Facist dogma, and I care what happens to people, not money.
C'mon, put you words in action!!
Oh, that's right you are all a bunch of mealy mouth Facists. You can talk a good game, but what have any of you done to enhace your surroundings?
I guess cursing at the sky, whilst shaking your impotent fists of rage, make you feel worthwhile. Me? I'll be at the polls, voting against the Tides Foundation, because my family spilt blood to help free the world from Facist dogma, and I care what happens to people, not money.
44
Fact 1: Santorum is overly preoccupied with gay sex.
Fact 2: He wears a lot of sweater vests.
Draw your own conclusion.
Fact 2: He wears a lot of sweater vests.
Draw your own conclusion.
47
This rally was one of the most terrifying events I've ever been to. Whenever we booed or disagreed, I was slightly worried someone was going to attack us. Even worse than Santorum was all of the people parroting his blatant falsehoods... it was sickening to watch. Although, I guess my FAVORITE part was when Santorum spoke of intolerance in regard to the Occupy protestors and how they where such a divisive, good-for-nothing movement. Oh, the irony.
Washington is far from perfect, but thank god he is not our senator!
Washington is far from perfect, but thank god he is not our senator!
49
Is it just me or does that kid standing next to Santorum look like a cock-sucking, ass munching faggot?
53
Rick Santorum was here to give a speech? I thought he was just here to protest the Powell boys' funeral.
54
@49 I'm sure it's just the blur giving him the appearance of such perfect skin. And the neatly coiffed hair. And the popped collar. And the flattering glow reflected (har) off Santorum's over-exposed face.
But yeah, no better way to stay closeted than to wave the homophobic flag. Maybe we should just name him "Marcus Bachmann Junior Jr."
But yeah, no better way to stay closeted than to wave the homophobic flag. Maybe we should just name him "Marcus Bachmann Junior Jr."
55
Hands-down best line of the article: Another woman clucked her tongue, and told her friends, "If you're an atheist, you'll just believe in anything."
56
A few minutes before he spoke, Santorum sent an aide out into the crowd. I watched a middle-aged hippie darting desperately among us, his long gray hair flying. He yelled, "Are there any blacks here? Any Arabs? We need some to stand behind Rick". After the second lap I'm guessing he gave up. I didn't see any either.
57
Richard Nixon, as a viable candidate for the Presidency, would have thought this clown was a dangerous person to be seen around. And he would have been right.
58
@5: which kind of makes you wonder why Dan Savage didn't *write* this article. Or show up to the rally.
60
@37... you're worried the anti-choice crowd might start throwing fake blood?
I'd be glad for it! As long as they stop murdering doctors. It would be kinder and gentler. Actually, you don't have to look far into history to find right wingers shooting union members picketing their jobs. So, would I blame lefties for tossing glitter for "starting things." I would not.
I'd be glad for it! As long as they stop murdering doctors. It would be kinder and gentler. Actually, you don't have to look far into history to find right wingers shooting union members picketing their jobs. So, would I blame lefties for tossing glitter for "starting things." I would not.
Comments (60) RSS