Santorum - it's not about politics at all Options

[carbuncle]

The WP article that has created a little bit of controversy lately, Santorum (neologism), comes with a bit of a puzzler - why is Cirt putting so much work into this topic?

Jayen466 has shown that Cirt has created articles about pro- and less pro-Scientology candidates in elections, but Rick Santorum seems to be a hardcore fundementalist Christian. There doesn't seem to be any clear connection between Santorum and the CoS (at least none that was apparent from a few minutes with Google). So why is Cirt so gung-ho about this article?

You will be surprised to learn that it has something to do with Scientology. It seems that Dan Savage, who coined the term santorum, got the Scientologists kicked out of a flea market where they were posing as booksellers. Savage's piece was posted on 5 May 2008. On 7 May 2011, Cirt returned from their long WP vacation. On 9 May, Cirt began editing santorum and other Dan Savage-related topics.

[edit: I somehow missed the fact that the post was from 3 years ago!]

This post has been edited by carbuncle: Fri 27th May 2011, 4:58pm

[Zoloft]

The WP article that has created a little bit of controversy lately, Santorum (neologism), comes with a bit of a puzzler - why is Cirt putting so much work into this topic?

Jayen466 has shown that Cirt has created articles about pro- and less pro-Scientology candidates in elections, but Rick Santorum seems to be a hardcore fundementalist Christian. There doesn't seem to be any clear connection between Santorum and the CoS (at least none that was apparent from a few minutes with Google). So why is Cirt so gung-ho about this article?

You will be surprised to learn that it has something to do with Scientology. It seems that Dan Savage, who coined the term santorum, got the Scientologists kicked out of a flea market where they were posing as booksellers. Savage's piece was posted on 6 May. On 7 May, Cirt returned from their long WP vacation. On 9 May, Cirt began editing santorum and other Dan Savage-related topics.

Well, if that don't flip mah e-meter.

[It's the blimp, Frank]

It seems that Dan Savage, who coined the term santorum, got the Scientologists kicked out of a flea market where they were posing as booksellers. Savage's piece was posted on 6 May. On 7 May, Cirt returned from their long WP vacation. On 9 May, Cirt began editing santorum and other Dan Savage-related topics.

I can see why Will Beback likes this guy.

[melloden]

Another clue that Cirt is being paid by Savage or his PR people: n:Dan Savage wins Webby Award for It Gets Better Project (T-H-L-K-D).

[It's the blimp, Frank]

Another clue that Cirt is being paid by Savage or his PR people: n:Dan Savage wins Webby Award for It Gets Better Project (T-H-L-K-D).

I can see why Will Beback likes this guy.


Ever read Dan Savage's column? It's not for the kiddies.

This post has been edited by It's the blimp, Frank: Sat 4th June 2011, 3:01am

[The Joy]

Expect more kerfluffle over this article now.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/...date/?hpt=hp_t2

[SB_Johnny]

The Daily Show segment that set off the flap was very well done, I thought.

[It's the blimp, Frank]

It seems to me that we automatically assume that Cirt is single-mindedly orienting all his edits to attacks on Scientology. But does he have some other preoccupations, like, you know, the sex thing? He seems to be really big on Dan Savage.

[melloden]

It seems to me that we automatically assume that Cirt is single-mindedly orienting all his edits to attacks on Scientology. But does he have some other preoccupations, like, you know, the sex thing? He seems to be really big on Dan Savage.

Hm, and he did write that article about Corbin Fisher (T-H-L-K-D), too. Perhaps he has pretty high-up connections in the gay community.

Interesting, also, that Cirt manages to dodge SlimVirgin's questions on his talk page and then uses the "good faith" DYK removals to change the topic of the discussion. Dravecky can't possibly be an innocent party here ...

[Tarc]

It seems to me that we automatically assume that Cirt is single-mindedly orienting all his edits to attacks on Scientology. But does he have some other preoccupations, like, you know, the sex thing? He seems to be really big on Dan Savage.

I wouldn't be surprised if Benjiboy is socking around the topic somewhere, too.

I have no liking for Santorum's politics, but I think its pretty vile that a manufactured neologism is being perpetuated with a full article treatment. If Glenn Beck coined the term "Obamalama" as "the frothy mix of cocaine and semen you get from blowing your dealer in the back of limo while doing lines", let's take bets on how long that article would last.

[It's the blimp, Frank]

Good one, Cla68. Georgewilliamherbert, who really, really deserves one of those DICK awards, is in a state of high excitement over comparing a bad congressman to anal lube and fecal matter, and he will BLOCK anyone who interferes with this holy quest. Cla68 offers some words of wisdom.

[EricBarbour]

And now it's 71k bytes and 125 references. (At one point, Cirt had it up to 78,390 bytes.)

Yes, GWH was on his high horse today. He and Cirt deserve some kind of special award.
Mental Illness In Defense Of A Minority Viewpoint, perhaps.

[Cla68]

And now it's 71k bytes and 125 references. (At one point, Cirt had it up to 78,390 bytes.)

Yes, GWH was on his high horse today. He and Cirt deserve some kind of special award.
Mental Illness In Defense Of A Minority Viewpoint, perhaps.

GWH never seems to grasp the big picture.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

It would be interesting to know who this is. It's clearly a sock of someone who is probably a major player in the subsequent controversy and debate. Are there any of our resident detectives who would care to take a crack at it?

[It's the blimp, Frank]

Cirt? Georgewilliamherbert? Will Beback?

[It's the blimp, Frank]

I was wondering whether there was some intersection point between the anti-Scientology cabal and the pro-Gay cabal at Wikipedia, so I did a little reading on Scientology's policy toward gays. It's a mixed bag. Wikipedia has an article called "LGBT topics and Scientology." Why such an article is appropriate for an alleged encyclopedia is another question. But according to this L.Ron Hubbard was initially anti-Homosexuality. According to this he had a gay son who committed suicide in 1976. But then there seems to have been some accommodation between Scientologists and gays in recent years.

[Milton Roe]

I was wondering whether there was some intersection point between the anti-Scientology cabal and the pro-Gay cabal at Wikipedia, so I did a little reading on Scientology's policy toward gays. It's a mixed bag. Wikipedia has an article called "LGBT topics and Scientology." Why such an article is appropriate for an alleged encyclopedia is another question. But according to this L.Ron Hubbard was initially anti-Homosexuality. According to this he had a gay son who committed suicide in 1976. But then there seems to have been some accommodation between Scientologists and gays in recent years.

And between Scientologists and Jews. And between Scientologists and Hollywood. If you want to succeed politically in America, there are some accomodations you just eventually have to make. Otherwise you get more and more marginalized, and pretty soon you're a conservative Republican-- as useless as tits on a boar. Or in Rush Limbaugh's case, tits on a bore.

Ms. Palin, if you keep opening your mouth, I'm gunna extend this to you!

[Kelly Martin]

But then there seems to have been some accommodation between Scientologists and gays in recent years.

Of course. Gays have money, and the Scientologists want it. Scientology is fairly willing to compromise basically any of its principles in order to attract people with money.

[LessHorrid vanU]

stuff

...Gays have money...

They do? This is not true of all of those friends of mine who are gay, but perhaps I mix in a lower social class of people than you do?

I do acknowledge that there is this perception that gay people have a greater deal of disposable income in the assumption they do not need to maintain offspring or even long term commitments such as home buying since they are all living a hedonistic life style of casual sex with (very) short term relationships. Which is bollocks. From my friends it appears that wealth itself is the prime reason why people can afford to live such a hedonistic lifestyle, and that the protection that money provides (at least in these more enlightened times) allows some to be more open about their sexual adventures - and, yes, many of them are gay. However, quite a few of my friends are depressed and worried about their lifestyles - but because of their financial situation and not their sexual orientation. Of course, if you cannot afford to go out or simply choose to spend your free time at home with your long term same sex partner then you become invisible.

Some people have money, and some don't. Among both groups there are people who are gay. That is all.

[lilburne]

stuff

...Gays have money...

They do? This is not true of all of those friends of mine who are gay, but perhaps I mix in a lower social class of people than you do?

No one has ever said that homosexuality is confined to the middle classes. Though one might consider whether gay skinhead oiks living on some council estate or in bedstit land have more disposable income than those of their hetro skinhead neighbours. Of course Hubbardistas unlike the Jehovah Witnesses don't operate outside the Londis Store.

I suspect that the Hubbardistas target the lonely and angst ridden as being easy prey, and that sexuality has little to do with it.