KNIVES ARE OUT

Rachel Maddow Rips Rick Santorum As He Tried To Take Back His “Man-On-Dog Thing”

MSNBC-host-Rachel-Maddow-interviews-GOP-presidential-candidate-Rick-Santorum-on-July-22-2015.-YouTube-410x220Hey, guys, did you see The Rachel Maddow Show last night? If not, you missed a seriously, seriously epic showdown between the MSNBC host and GOP presidential hopeful/antigay activist Rick Santorum.

Not to worry. We are here with the recap: Lagging in the polls, Santorum agreed to sit down with Maddow. Everything started out just fine  until he suggested that Congress should pass a law overturning the Supreme Court ruling on marriage equality, saying that the Court “is not the superior branch of government,” thus giving Maddow a chance to lecture him on civics. Because, really Rick, the Supreme Court is the superior branch of the government, hence the word “Supreme.” As Maddow pointed out, it “adjudicates” the law of the land, emphasis on “judicate.”

Santorum apparently missed the lesson on Marbury v. Madison, the 1803 Supreme Court ruling, back when he was studying law at Penn State.

And that’s when things got wild. Fast.

“Do you believe people choose to be gay?” Maddow asked.

“I’ve never answered that question because I don’t really know the answer to it,” Santorum replied. “But I suspect that there’s all sorts of reasons that people end up the way they are.”

Then he said something positive about ex-gays to the lesbian host before launching into a hypothetical about why abortion must be made illegal to protect potentially gay fetuses.

Later, Maddow asked Santorum about the time he compared homosexuality to “the man-on-dog thing,” (“man on child, man on dog, whatever the case may be”), managing to elicit something that appeared to resemble an apology.

“What I said was, ‘If people have the right to consensual activity, then they have the right to and I listed all these different things,’” Santorum explained, “and I’m just saying, that the court opened a Pandora’s box.”

“You’re thinking bestiality?” Maddow asked.

Santorum said he regretted the “flippant” nature of the comment, blaming the reporter who elicited it for “not being particularly professional.”

“That’s not an excuse for me,” he added. “I take responsibility for what I said.”

“And you regret it?” Maddow asked

“Absolutely,” Santorum replied. “It was a flippant comment that should have come out of my mouth. But the substance of what I said, which is what I’ve referred to, I stand by that. I wish I had not said it in a flippant term that I did, and I know people were offended by it, and I wish I hadn’t said it.”

By this point, it was clear the former senator was getting uncomfortable. Meanwhile, Maddow appeared to be having the time of her life. And it only got better from there.

Watch the entire interview below.

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #2016 #antigay #gay stories and more

53 Comments

  • Xzamilio

    It is absolutely deplorable that we have so many elected members of Congress who don’t know jack shit about the Constitution, including the Second Amendment that they blindly follow… because for all this talk about Jesus and the Baaah-bull, they can’t even follow that nonsense to the letter. And “abortion”??? This “Christian” clearly hasn’t read the bible, because that monstrous god was about as anti-baby as it got… but then again so are they. All lives are precious, until that bastard has both feet on the ground and an SSN… then it’s a statistic and adding more to the “Welfare babies.”

    Ex-gay… Pfft.

    http://shallowvoices.blogspot.com/2014/02/okay-to-be-ex-gay.html

    I think he’s poked his head in on a few of those meetings

  • Glücklich

    I haven’t watched the segment yet but “rip[ping] into” anyone, no matter how much they might deserve it, is really not the best way to present your case or argue your point. A civil discussion doesn’t make good TV but in real life, how many times have you gotten into an argument and as soon as things get really heated, you tune out to prevent yourself from saying or doing something you’d regret or because the other person has just gone into irrational crazy-mode? And then upon reflection, or observing someone else’s fight from afar, you think “Jesus! That asshole is really making a fool of himself!”

  • Xzamilio

    @Glücklich: I have so many comments to attest to everything you just said. It can be difficult to remain civil and rational in the face of not only aggressively ignorant rhetoric, but the kind that is repeated ad nauseum, even though it has been debunked, rebutted, and dismissed to the point where saying you are beating a dead horse is an understatement… it’s like stomping glue pretty much, with THIS particular dead horse

  • Kieran

    Wow. How did Rachel ever manage to snag a desperate, badly in need of publicity republican candidate polling at 0%? What a coup.

  • GG

    Boy, does this show desperation on Santorum’s part that he will do anything to try to bolster his fledgling campaign, or what? However, while I was glad to see the exchange, I was, frankly, disappointed Rachel didn’t ask the obvious:

    – So, Rick, you think limitless time and energy should be spent by legislatures passing essentially the same law* over and over, tying up state and federal courts for a limitless amount of time and costing millions of dollars until the supreme court decides one of those cases in your favor? And that sounds like a sound plan to you?

    And I couldn’t believe she let this one pass; i.e., when Santorum said the court had created a right to same-sex marriage.

    – The court create no such right, it simply removed a barrier for certain Americans to exercise an existing right, so said Justice Kennedy.

    *That was Santorum’s description, i.e., “change just one word.”
    __________________

    So it’s supremely important to him to keep others from exercising the very same rights he enjoys (not to mention he also wants to outlaw the use of contraceptives). What an Un-American creep.

  • Spike

    Rachel is a brave lesbian to get Santorum all over her. With that said, every time she brought up marriage equality he would take a right turn to abortion. Typical politician.

    Surprise Queerty didn’t up with a better title . . . Rachel Handles Excessive Santorum Better Then Expected.

  • James

    One of lifes major problems is dealing with bores and Santorum is one of the biggest bores around. I hate him.

  • Ladbrook

    I had to bleach a hand towel a couple of weeks ago to get rid of the santorum a young trick left behind. I always hate when that happens.

  • aliengod

    Mr. Santorum, you just got your ass handed to you. Way to go Rachel.

  • AtticusBennett

    HA!

    potentially gay fetuses. that he and his kind then intend to drive to suicide in life with their bigotry.

    hey Frothy, you REALLY think none of your EIGHT children are gay? REALLY? you’re likely very very wrong about that.
    worse yet, you’ve homeschooled them, so they’ve had no proper information provided about the realities of being gay, or transgender for that matter, that could help them.

    homeschooled BS and your bogus religious cultism.

    how can people not know if you’re born gay, in 2015? simple: willful ignorance.

    what use are gay republicans if guys like Santorum still exist, eh?

    FRothy, you’re likely not going to realize which of your kids is gay until you come home from work one day and find them hanging by their neck. happens all the time. rick warren’s youngest son took his own life.

  • kthcst

    is this moron an ASS CLOWN???I DO give him credit for going on her show, he HAD to know she would rip him apart….LOl

  • GayEGO

    Now this is an excellent way to prove Ricky Sanitarium is messed up because he has been brainwashed by his religion and cannot give clear, direct answers to Rachel.

  • Cam

    @Glücklich: said…. “I haven’t watched the segment yet but “rip[ping] into” anyone, no matter how much they might deserve it, is really not the best way to present your case or argue your point.”
    __________________

    This is the article the right wing always uses to keep LGBT’s from arguing their point.

  • stanhope

    Rachel held her own…she hardly ripped on him though she should have. The headline is inaccurate.

  • Bob LaBlah

    @Glücklich: In other words “if you know you are arguing with a fool then who’s the fool”? lol

  • Glücklich

    @Cam:
    Compliment or criticism? Did you mean to say “This is the *argument*…”?

  • Maude

    The FACT is…..The job of Congress is to make law, the job of the Supreme Court is to determine whether or not the law is Constitutional,and the job of the police is to enforce, and protect the law.

    If the people don’t like the law, they can challenge it by passing new law that supersedes the old law or bring their case to the Supreme Court for re-evaluation….but the Supreme Court is loath to overturn itself.

    IMO, Gay marriage is in trouble only if after the next election, the Right controls the Executive Branch, both Houses of Congress, and a majority on the Supreme Court.

    “Never say never”, but I doubt very much that all those circumstances can be aligned.

    We won the battle of the minds. That law is now ‘made law’, and now, our goal must be to change the hearts of the opposition……or the battle will continue on, and on, and on, until we either lose all we’ve gained, or by not being hostile all of the time, we win their hearts.

    Not an easy task,but we can show the world, we are better than they by not using bitter, abusive, and hateful diatribe….Much like our American hero,
    Martin Luther King.

  • robho3

    Why would Santorum go on her show. That would be like Hitler going on a Jewish talk show. He must be desperate.

  • SteveDenver

    Santorum is a howling idiot.

  • Bad Ass Biker

    @robho3: Robho3, Santorum IS desperate and also dumb as a post and waaaaay too interested in gay sex. And having said that, I am not implying that he is one of these self hating closet cases, again he is simply too dumb for that, but like a dog with a bone, that is all that he has.

  • MCHG

    @AtticusBennett: “rick warren’s youngest son took his own life.”

    Rick Warren’s son was gay? Last I heard, he had a mental illness and struggled with it for many years before taking his own life. No ex-lovers or friends came come out and said that he was gay, which is why I find your implication of his sexuality to be strange. I don’t think we should lose sight of the fact that straight people kill themselves all the time.

    “what use are gay republicans if guys like Santorum still exist, eh?”

    This makes no sense. Its like saying “what use are progressives if Hillary is the front runner?”. For one, gay Republicans make up a tiny minority of the Republican party. Why you believe they would be able to stop someone from running for president is beyond me. No one can legally prohibit Santorum from sharing his views. No one can kick him out of the party. Any challenge would probably just convince him to dig his heels deeper into social conservatism.

    “hey Frothy, you REALLY think none of your EIGHT children are gay? REALLY? you’re likely very very wrong about that.”

    You care so much about his children that you aided Dan Savage into turning their last names into something disgusting. Also, its perfectly possible that none of his children are gay. I also have a hard time thinking that one of his kids would end up killing themselves when they have a filthy rich daddy with connections, because they’re gay.

  • billeetee

    They will PANDER to anyone, anytime, anyplace. Rand Paul set the bars on Pandering and everyone else in the clown car has followed suit. The difference here: Rick Santorum’s anus still replaces his mouth – the same of shit still comes out!

  • UncleFloppy

    Rachel Maddow for President in 2024 (or VP in 2016)!

  • Bellamy

    The problem Santorum is not getting is that it doesn’t matter whether homosexuality is morally right or wrong. The issue here is that Santorum believes that he has the power, as King George did, to grant and deny Rights and to DEPRIVE FREE CITIZENS of their birthright to decide for themselves what they believe to be morally right or wrong – because Santorum’s basis in morality is RELIGIOUS in nature – “because god said so” – and NO ONE is obliged to observe the doctrines of his religion, nor is he empowered to enforce a theocracy on a Free People!
    -Rev. Jim Cunningham, D.D.
    King James Bible Ministries International
    http://www.GayChristianSurvivors.com

  • Ladbrook

    Although I’ve never been one of Maddow’s biggest fans, I must give her major props for not ripping out this jerk’s throat. I would not have been so kind, I suspect. Hopefully she’ll be able to convince a few other bigots to come on.

    Santorum should fire his handlers for not stopping him from appearing. He sounds like a mullah.

  • onthemark

    @AtticusBennett: @MCHG:

    Minor point – Santorum has 7 children not 8. (At the moment.)

  • Berkleyguy

    She nailed him on all points and I am glad she did. He is a total idiot and when he says the hateful things he did and then apologizes and says something stupid like, “the reported took my comment out of context” – they always say that – it’s simply too little too late – the remark was made and the damage has been done.

  • AJ Legault

    That was fun to watch.

  • NoCagada

    @robho3: He’s ALWAYS desperate

  • NoCagada

    @onthemark: Don’t forget the dead one that he swears he took home from the hospital (????) and made all the other kids hold it and then he and his wife slept with it…he said it…

  • NoCagada

    @MCHG: He wasn’t known to be gay. He did have a mental illness. My question…Anybody who kills themselves burns in hell for an eternity according to Warren and his religious ilk…everybody except HIS offspring?

  • Bauhaus

    @James:

    “One of lifes major problems is dealing with bores and Santorum is one of the biggest bores around. I hate him.”

    That should be a bumper sticker.

  • Glücklich

    @NoCagada:
    eeeeEEEEEEEWWWWWAAAAAGGGHHHH! Seriously? I now have to look up where he said that!

    So sick! Goddammit everyone knows dead babies are not taken home and held. They’re taken to the nearest animal shelter as dog chew toys.

  • Giancarlo85

    @MCHG: You again? You’re so full of shit. No one is preventing anyone from sharing their views. Republicans and conservatives use that dumb excuse to self victimize all the time. You do it yourself on here. Share all the views you want… but I WILL criticize you.

  • madc090

    Didn’t seem like she “ripped him a new one” Queerty, more like she schooled him on civics. Still an awesome interview that made me respect him a bit given that he admitted sometimes his comments are not entirely the best. Shame some of his condetendors can’t do the same.

  • inbama

    very misleading.
    Rachel disagreed with him, but she was hardly hostile.

  • Finrod

    Mr. Santorum’s arguments are beyond insubstantial; one might even call them frothy.

  • youarekiddingme

    @Maude: Most of what you say is absolutely correct. One minor detail however. “…they can challenge it by passing a new law that supersedes the old law…”. That part is incorrect. That would be like the people not liking Roe v. Wade so they just pass a new law to supersede it. As we know (and you state in your next sentence) they can bring their case to the Supreme Court for re-evaluation (much like what happened with Obama Care). The final recourse is a constitutional amendment. All of these procedures were lost on that COMPLETE MORON SANTORUM!

    Wonder why that flamin idiot was on the show to begin with? Probably because he’s looking for publicity (he has no chance in HELL of being elected) and he wants to preach all that bullshit about his invisible fairy in the sky!

  • brianrio66

    Rachel, 1 / Rick, 0

  • Cam

    How sad is it that it is shocking when somebody in the media actually points out when somebody said something that was false?

  • Kamuriie

    This kind of reporting is insufferable — you haven’t even bothered to look into who’s actually correct here.

    Spoiler Alert: It’s Santorum. Yes, Santorum, the conservative douchebag who’s wrong about almost everything. He’s right.

    Santorum asserts: If SCOTUS strikes down a law, Congress can pass another one. EVEN if it’s blatantly unconstitutional. The President can sign a law — EVEN if it’s blatantly constitutional. And SCOTUS may or may not strike the second one down. What’s LIKELY to happen if this occurs? The judicial branch will issue a stay on the law to prevent it from going into effect, and the executive or legislative branch can try to appeal it.

    Nothing Santorum said (about the legalistic maneuvering) is incorrect. Santorum is a lawyer and a former US senator. He knows how laws are made and challenged–and, in this case, better than Rachel Maddow apparently does. She conceded the question of what Congress can or cannot do to him.

    Maddow was trying to put words in Santorum’s mouth, arguing against something Santorum was never asserting. This is the difference between a legal argument and a layperson’s argument.

  • Kamuriie

    @youarekiddingme: Actually, Maude is 100% correct, and you’re completely wrong. What you describe re. Roe v. Wade is precisely what has been happening since Roe v. Wade was handed down. The right has repeatedly passed laws that, at face value, violate Roe v. Wade.

    The judicial branch is reactive, not proactive. Congress (or state congresses) can pass whatever they want, EVEN if it’s blatantly constitutional. And yes, it becomes law until it’s challenged and struck down. That’s why the left has been playing whack-a-mole with Republican legislatures for decades trying to keep unconstitutional restrictions on abortion from sticking. The right has been trying to bait the Supreme Court to take another look at Roe v. Wade with one of those laws.

    Stating, as you did, that a constitutional amendment is the “final recourse” to (X) being found unconstitutional is not true in practice or theory.

  • martinbakman

    Is he polling so low because he’s one more Repub with skeletons lurking so close to the surface? I mean the allegations buzzing around the internet that 2nd mile foundation donated big money to Santorum and how Jerry Sandusky ended up with that Congressional medal through Santorum’s efforts, even after Sandusky had been kicked off of campus for being found out are just too slimey sounding to ever allow anyone with sense to take up Santorum’s cause.

  • youarekiddingme

    @Kamuriie: you’re right, as you said, “Congress can pass whatever they want, EVEN if it’s blatantly CONSTITUTIONAL…”. I couldn’t agree more!

    In the past Congress has used its legislative powers to “modify” laws that will pass the “constitutionality” test. Trying to overwrite one branch of government usually doesn’t work out so well. Again, Ammendment…

    Anyways, you stay tuned to your TV with Mr. Santorum and see how that new law banning same-sex marriage written by Congress works out for you!! Have a great day!!

  • Glücklich

    @NoCagada:
    Gross! You’re right. They took the chew toy home and passed it around! Sick sick sick!

  • 1EqualityUSA

    The dead one was given a choice between the two worlds.

  • Giancarlo85

    @Kamuriie: Obviously written by someone who has no understanding about the system of checks and balances… sorry to say that.

  • AtticusBennett

    @MCHG: the “mental illness” of rick warren’s youngest son was that he was a closeted homosexual with a father who made money by spreading anti-gay bigotry around the world.

    he was never out. doesn’t mean he wasn’t gay. family can spot family, and that boy was family.

    people who have pro-gay parents still worry and struggle with Coming Out – rick warren’s youngest son lived his entire life knowing that not only was being gay a “sin”, but that being anti-gay was the hallmark of his family’s faith.

    he blew his brains out. and he was indeed a gay man. and his heinous family buried him in the closet he lived his sad life in.

  • Clark35

    Meh, Rachel Maddow is an overrated and boring “journalist”.

  • aliengod

    @MCHG: Just so you know, there is absolutely zero evidence that Rick Warren’s son was gay. It is pure fantasy on the part of @AtticusBennett.

  • 1EqualityUSA

    Rick’s son made my gardar ping too. AtticusBennett is right on. For a fleeting moment, I thought Ol’ Saddleback was going to cave and change his rhetoric after his son killed himself. The money is too good?

Comments are closed.