It's true that Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Rick Santorum's comments about homosexuality were more outrageous than even the most garish gay pride parade. In a now-infamous Associated Press interview, he defended sodomy laws, equating homosexuality with incest, polygamy, adultery and bigamy. And Santorum later refused to apologize.
But the creepiest bit in the article actually had nothing to do with gays or sodomy. It was this buried little factoid: 'He and his wife, Karen, have seven children—including, as Santorum puts it, 'the one in Heaven.' Their fourth baby, Gabriel Michael, died in 1996, two hours after an emergency delivery in Karen Santorum's 20th week of pregnancy. The couple took Gabriel's body home to let their three other young children see and hold the baby before burying him ... .'
That's been reported before—it is in fact often repeated in the context of Santorum's crusade against abortion—but having this weirdness brought forth within the context of the guy's condemning other people's behavior is pretty jarring. I mean, how much more perverted can you get than walking around with a dead, five-month-old fetus and having your kids caress it?
It makes me think that Santorum's new, larger-than-life visibility in the Republican leadership (he's number three among Republicans in the Senate, chair of the Senate Republican Conference) is the best thing to happen in a while. We knew from the beginning of this imbroglio that the so-called libertarian Republicans would never have the balls, not in large enough numbers, to stand up to the theocrats in the party and force Santorum out. So he can at least now be very useful for the left.
Already, Santorum's kicked up a real discussion about sexual privacy, a topic the media has long been lax about addressing, even as a case challenging sodomy laws, Lawrence v. Texas, came under Supreme Court review last month. Sodomy laws have lingered over the years and are still on the books in 13 states. But much of the mainstream press has dismissed them as 'rarely enforced'—cold comfort to those people who've been hauled off to jail in the middle of the night (like the two gay men who challenged the Texas sodomy statute in Lawrence v. Texas). More than that, sodomy statutes have been broadly used in pernicious ways. Judges have, for example, refused to give people custody of their own children in states with a sodomy statute, ruling that the individuals admitted to engaging in illegal activity by being openly gay or lesbian. So it was refreshing to actually see some attention focused on what role government should have in people's sex lives—even if it took a wingnut's comments to do it.
Santorum's statements may also energize Democrats in his state and elsewhere, giving them, as well as gay activists, a fabulous whipping post. When Trent Lott stepped down from his position as majority leader, the GOP got rid of a lightning rod and an all-around pompous fool who was bound to say many more stupid things. That allowed the party to claim it had finally purged the last remnant of bigotry from its Senate leadership. But now it has another black eye—and another public bigot in a leadership role.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and fellow Pennsylvania Republican Arlen Specter—heading into a potentially bruising primary race against a hardcore conservative—defended Santorum. But their defenses were not an agreement with the remarks as much as laughable denials that Santorum has something against gays. Mostly, Republicans have been silent—something that can't be comforting to Santorum, even if it is cowardly and unacceptable. And a few moderate Republicans did speak out. Maine's Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, Oregon's Gordon Smith and Rhode Island's Lincoln Chaffe were criticizing the remarks. John McCain also said Santorum should apologize.
Santorum's comments were likely carefully calculated. He's a shrewd operator, and his party is adept at feeding nasty stuff (especially racist code) to prejudiced voters among its base. But Santorum probably assumed the remarks would remain under the national radar. He gave the interview to a Pennsylvania AP reporter for publication in papers in that state. Speaking so strongly to the values of religious conservatives, it's likely he was trying to mute some of the criticism he'd received from them regarding Bush's faith-based initiatives program a couple of months ago. Santorum had slightly compromised on the legislation, working with gay groups like the Human Rights Campaign so that the faith-based plan would not entirely thwart existing antidiscrimination laws protecting gays in many cities and a few states.
The AP interview was an attempt by Santorum to give something back to the religious right—but it blew up in his face as gay groups called for his resignation and the story went national, possibly sending a chill through centrists and moderate Republicans across the land. With the Senate so evenly divided, all it takes is a relatively few moderate voters to get spooked, and Democrats could take back the chamber.
Santorum's outburst also further exposes the fraud of George W. Bush's compassionate conservatism. As Congressman Barney Frank said of Santorum: 'The surprise is that he's being honest about it, not that he believes this. This kind of gay-bashing is perfectly acceptable in the Republican Party.'
It's a lot easier to deal with an enemy that stands there with flashing red lights than a moving target like Bush. The president himself has supported sodomy laws in the past, courting the religious right as governor of Texas. But his stance in recent years on gay rights, as gays have become more accepted nationally and as he has moved onto the national stage, has been to try to seem tolerant—while continuing to quietly pander to his Christian-right base. The White House often goes both ways on gay issues, doing a dance that never quite commits it to anything.
That, however, is hard to do when the press is finally performing its function and putting you on the spot, as it did for a couple of news cycles regarding Santorum's comments. By first refusing to offer an opinion on the subject, the White House angered both sides. But the White House eventually caved in to the fundamentalists and called Santorum an 'inclusive man.' It was further evidence that Bush will remain silent in the face of bigotry if Karl Rove thinks it's a good idea. And the Log Cabin Republicans, who've been hawking the notion that Bush is making the party more inclusive, can't spin that any other way. Ironically, Santorum's blunt statements force even them to be more honest. That's not a bad thing.
Signorile hosts a national show each weekday from noon to 3 p.m. EST on Sirius Satellite Radio, stream 149. www.signorile.com .
----------------------------------------
