Not a member? Sign up now
Rick Santorum parody Twitter is hilarious and for some, confusing
By Alex HeiglJune 15th, 2011, 2:00 pmComments (21)
Rick Santorum is well-known for his social conservatism. He's better known for having a disgusting neologism created in his honor by Dan Savage. His over-the-top stance on various issues (particularly homosexuality) make him perfect fodder for this genius, Onion-esque Twitter feed, Rick Santorum PR, which Tweets gay-sex puns in imitation of Santorum's jargon-riddled speech.
My current favorite is probably, "We need a president with an optimistic agenda. I will provided Americans at the bottom with the upward thrust they need to reach their peak."
Hilariously, of the feeds' 3,000 followers, a fair number seem uncertain that it's a parody feed. A number of replies seem genuinely baffled, like the woman who tweeted in response to the above comment: "You're a jackhole to even send that tweet. Do you really think the 'people at the bottom' will buy that line of hooey?"
Oh, internet, your constant proof of Poe's Law never fails to entertain. Until I have a full-on breakdown upon the realization that no one can tell if anyone is being serious any more.
Tags
Rick Santorum
Commentarium (21 Comments)
This is my fave: "We know we have a lot of work ahead, but by the end of this year, Santorum will be on the lips of every young Republican."
oh, internet
Yes, let's hear it for the hipster douchebags that probably also giggle when they hear the words "penis" and "vagina" and like to look up dirty words in the dictionary. Talk about your bottom feeders. And Savage is leading the pack.
Where did you extrapolate "hipster" from the content of this post? Secondly, this has nothing to do with vulgarity, it has to do with Santorum being able to say things so outrageous that they can easily double as parody? And third of all, Savage took on Santorum because of his anti-gay agenda, not because he likes to giggle at the word "penis," which would probably be a pretty debilitating condition for a sex columnist to have.
Hey cuz, you know who's going to be in the dictionary soon? Santorum.
Is *cuz* making a funny with the "bottom feeders" comment? LOL... get it? On the Santorum thread, he said "bottom feeders". Too rich.
Ta-dah! Thanks, Tan, you are exactly who I'm talking about. I used the term "hipster" because that's who I think of whenever I think of a douchebag. And, gyptheblood, because the artlicle mentions Savage's slander of Santorum, vulgarity is absolutely relevant. My reference to people who giggle at the word "penis" wasn't regarding Savage, it was the idiots like Tan who will Google "Santorum" so that they can giggle at Savages vulgarity: annd it is a vulgarity regardless of how you feel about either of their views on anything. Finally, it doesn't take, thanks again to Tan, much effort to turn anything anybody says into a double-entendre. The people who do that are exactly the same types that look up "naughty" words in the dictionary and then giggle like 3rd graders. That about covers it, doesn't it?
You hear douchebag, you think hipster.
The world hears Santorum, the world hears 'frothy mix of fecal matter and lube'.
See, we're all the same, why can't we get along?
Mine is a generalization, Savage's isn't. Not one of the people who is amused by what Savage did would find it amusing if it were done to them just because somebody disagreed with their opinions. I may be wrong for the generalization but I'm not Savage's level of asshole. (That last one was for you, Tan. You may commence your childish giggling)
I can't speak for Dan Savage, but my take on that situation is it occurred not "just because [Savage] disagreed with [Santorum's] opinions." Were that the case, I'd imagine Savage would have a dictionary full of sexually related insulting synonyms for all Republicans and most Democrats (hey, he disagrees with Obama's opinion on gay marriage, right?). What I believe gets Santorum singled out is not his political opinions or positions but the outrageously offensive manner in which he expresses them. When you compare sex between consenting adults of the same gender to sex between humans and dogs, that's not an "opinion"; that's hate speech. Santorum wants to equate Savage's sexuality with beastiality and animal abuse? Yeah, then Santorum opens himself up to the kind of counter-attack Savage levelled.
So you think that responding to a cross burning with another cross burning is the way to go? That it helps the cause of gay rights? Most EVERYBODY knows what a fuckwit Santorum is; even many conservatives. Let him undercut himself. I just think that the tide is turning but gay rights is still the underdog, and while that is the case, Savage shouldn't do anything that makes him look as hateful and ignorant as Santorum. I'm not in favor of gay marriage but even I knew that Santorum was out of line and wished that he would shut the fuck up. Savages "It gets better" campaign is mature and reasonable and effective. What he did to Santorum, in my opinion, didn't do gay rights any favors. I appreciate your response, profrobert.
ProfRobert for the win!
@SS - Go back to the kiddies' table.
@huh -- How on earth is this equivalent hate-speech? No one has actually proposed or even joked about any legislation that would impede Santorum's health, wealth or happiness. The same cannot be said of Santorum's relationship with the gay community.
Do I think Savage's campaign is clever or thoughtful? No. But comparing it to the level of hate Santorum expresses is pretty absurd (not to mention their positions -- legislator and sex columnist -- put them on pretty uneven footing).
Also cuz -- I think you may have confused hipsters with middle schoolers. I know it can get complicated (the bikes, the over-consumption of granola, living with their parents, bangs), but they're actually different groups of people.
Although I disagree with Huh, I appreciate the manner in which s/he has articulated her/his position. (And, FWIW, I'd categorize cross-burning, at least the kind on someone else's property, as different because that's actually criminal trespass, at a minimum. As hateful as Santorum's speech or Savage's, for that matter, nothing they said was illegal.) Where Huh and I disagree, apparently, is in how to respond to that kind of speech. One of my complaints against Democratic politicians is that they do not go after people like Santorum, Palin, Bachmann, etc., who spew lies and stupidities on a consistent basis. Savage actually found a way to really stick it to Santorum -- to make him a laughingstock in a way designed to cause him as much psychic pain as possible. I think of it as "enforced empathy," and maybe the next "Santorum" will think twice about how he expresses himself. Huh disagrees with me and believes, as I understand it, that the high road is always the better road. I certainly respect anyone who takes that position.
I agree to disagree, but I like your style, profrobert.
This thread is boring.
SELF-PROCLAIMED sex columnist, no less...
Nope nope, I assure you he is a real sex columnist.
Whoa, whoa, get out the way with that good infmoriaton.