# When you google "Santorum" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 15, 2012, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596 "2012-01-15T14:32:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/41 "2012-01-15T19:01:47Z")
FYI, not to be anal (heh), but it is technically not a “Google bomb”. > [@](#): > > Much attention has been focused lately on how a search for “santorum” brings up an anti-Rick Santorum web site. Some have mistaken this as being due to a Google Bomb. It’s not, because while presidential hopeful Rick Santorum might not agree, the page at issue in that search is indeed explicitly about an alternative definition for “santorum” and does use that word. [http://searchengineland.com/for-define-an-english-person-google-suggests-the-c-word-105555](http://searchengineland.com/for-define-an-english-person-google-suggests-the-c-word-105555) ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/42 "2012-01-15T19:04:47Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > If people were saying obscene things ABOUT Santorum, then that is fine. It happens all of the time. What is happening here is that people are pretending that his name means something obscene when it does not. I can call Newt Gingrich a fucking douchebag and that would be an opinion. If I say that the word “gingrich” is defined as nasty old man, I am lying. But santorum now _does_ mean that, just like _computer_ now means a machine and not a person who does math. In a few years people will probably note the irony of someone who has the same name as that substance opposing gay marriage ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/43 "2012-01-15T19:06:14Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > If I say that the word “gingrich” is defined as nasty old man, I am lying. No, not really. You can define the word any way you want for your personal use. If you want googlability, though, you have to get a few thousand people to link to your post, presumably because they found it interesting and notable, and to get others to quote your definition (and get thousands of people to link to _them_). To be honest, though, I figure your antics in this thread may end up leading to an unflattering definition of “jtgain”, though it’s unlikely to catch on because it’s not a term that flows easily. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/44 "2012-01-15T19:11:08Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > What is happening here is that people are pretending that his name means something obscene when it does not. I can call Newt Gingrich a fucking douchebag and that would be an opinion. If I say that the word “gingrich” is defined as nasty old man, I am lying. How do you think words gain new meanings? Do you think there there’s some council somewhere that allows or denies new meanings? If people start using it, then that word now has that meaning. It’s not a “lie”. ---
**Author:** ![Hyperelastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Hyperelastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hyperelastic)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/45 "2012-01-15T19:13:04Z")
When people discover the alternative, made-up meaning of “santorum”, all it’s going to do is make them think “Gay sex is even more disgusting than I’d imagined.” Way to go there, Savage. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/46 "2012-01-15T19:15:02Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > In a few years people will probably note the irony of someone who has the same name as that substance opposing gay marriage I think that’s extremely unlikely: I doubt the term is ever really going to gain a life of its own outside of mocking Rick Santorum and become something people say on a regular basis. And not to put too fine a point on it, but the guy thinks anal sex is wrong regardless of who is doing it - it’s not just a gay marriage thing. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/47 "2012-01-15T19:15:58Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > If people were saying obscene things ABOUT Santorum, then that is fine. It happens all of the time. What is happening here is that people are pretending that his name means something obscene when it does not. I can call Newt Gingrich a fucking douchebag and that would be an opinion. If I say that the word “gingrich” is defined as nasty old man, I am lying. What if I said quisling was defined as a traitor? Is that a lie? If not, when did it stop being a lie spread by the WWII British press and become a true statement? Or has quisling always meant traitor, since the beginning of time, and people just became aware of the fact in 1940? Anyhoo, I think your letting your mind get blown by people playing with definitions by thinking about it more then its worth. Word definitions are fluid, and people are just having fun with that fact at Santorum’s expense. You may not think its particularly funny, which is fine. But you seem really fixated on it being somehow invalid. Its just a prank, “legitimacy” doesn’t really enter into it. Or at least, it legitimate if people find it funny, and in this case they obviously do. If you want to try and do the same thing to Obama, go nuts. But I doubt you’ll get far since that specific prank isn’t likely to funny enough to catch on more then once. But I’m sure there are plenty of rightwing versions of Dan Savage who are more then capable of coming up with new and funny ways of making fun of politicians they don’t like. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/48 "2012-01-15T19:17:54Z")
> [@Simplicio](#): > > Anyhoo, I think your letting your mind get blown by people playing with definitions by thinking about it more then its worth. Word definitions are fluid, hee, hee ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/49 "2012-01-15T19:19:02Z")
> [@Hyperelastic](#): > > When people discover the alternative, made-up meaning of “santorum”, all it’s going to do is make them think “Gay sex is even more disgusting than I’d imagined.” Way to go there, Savage. I’m pretty sure santorum isn’t a feature unique to gay sex. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/50 "2012-01-15T19:19:44Z")
> [@Hyperelastic](#): > > When people discover the alternative, made-up meaning of “santorum”, all it’s going to do is make them think “Gay sex is even more disgusting than I’d imagined.” “And I imagined it _a lot!_” ---
**Author:** ![Hyperelastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Hyperelastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hyperelastic)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/51 "2012-01-15T19:20:15Z")
> [@Simplicio](#): > > I’m pretty sure santorum isn’t a feature unique to gay sex. No, but people aren’t going to pause and consider that particular technicality. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/52 "2012-01-15T20:30:23Z")
Seems to me bellyaching about it won’t help - if the “santorum” thing offends thee, _do_ something about it, namely start adding links to Santorum’s official website every time you post, in as many places as possible. Example: [Santorum](http://www.ricksantorum.com/) There. I’ve just offset the Google effect by 0.0001%. See how easy that was? Now all I need is a million more people to do the same. Volunteers? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2012, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/53 "2012-01-15T20:39:28Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Like when someone calls Obama a Socialist or Kenyan. That is now fine because we can make up meanings as we go. Have at it. I don’t think you will find it nearly as satisfying as we find the Santorum google bomb. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2012, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/54 "2012-01-16T03:19:36Z")
**jtgain** : Consider this scenario. A second term senator from a swing state makes bigoted remarks which he refuses to retract. A no-name sexual advice columnist responds by making his name synonymous with the frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex. Google bombing is a fairly new thing at the time, so he does that. Successfully. Funny stuff. Doing the same for a Republican Presidential candidate in 2012? Not so much. But the damage is done, as it were. I wouldn’t worry too much though: Former Senator Santorum is basically a reality show contestant anyway. He is running to burnish his resume among the rubber chicken crowd and wingnut welfare sponsors: he has done nothing to widen his appeal and was never remotely electable. Save your tears for something important. > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Seems to me bellyaching about it won’t help - if the “santorum” thing offends thee, _do_ something about it, namely start adding links to Santorum’s official website every time you post, in as many places as possible. Don’t do that. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2012, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/55 "2012-01-16T03:28:35Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Don’t do that. I agree with Measure. Because then it might make Google associate Santorum with a politician, instead of associating Santorum with the frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2012, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/56 "2012-01-16T03:52:46Z")
Well, when you’re talking about the froth, at least don’t _capitalize_ the word. It’s not a _proper_ noun. It’s not really a proper _anything_, truth be told. ---
**Author:** ![j666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/9de0a6/32.png) [@j666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/j666)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2012, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/57 "2012-01-16T04:13:50Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > It’s not a proper way to insult someone. I know what you mean, and I agree with you, in a sideways sort of way. Santorum has said enough miserably intolerant things that any insults should reflect his actual flaws and mis-deeds rather than this silly attack. ---
**Author:** ![Suedepalms](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/73ab20/32.png) [@Suedepalms](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Suedepalms)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2012, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/58 "2012-01-16T04:15:22Z")
[Santorum](http://spreadingsantorum.com/) There. Now balance is restored. ---
**Author:** ![Condescending\_Robot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a183cd/32.png) [@Condescending\_Robot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Condescending_Robot)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2012, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/59 "2012-01-16T04:34:32Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > REALLY? This is what passes for political discourse? You disagree with a politician so you pretend that their name means something obscene and then snicker about it? And on this “intellectual” board, the consensus is that is okay? And even funny? > > If your 6 year old did that, you would tell him to argue the position, not make fun of the person. Santorum compares gays to child molestors and people who rape dogs, and accuses them of conspiring to destroy America, on a daily basis. Do you believe THAT is what passes for political discourse? The entire point of bringing his name down to the level of his views is to point out the absurdity of the fact that this modern day Ku Klux Klan leader is considered a person whose views must be taken seriously for some reason. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2012, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596/60 "2012-01-16T04:40:50Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > My point is that the insult, taunt, or whatever, is illegitimate. You can’t make up the insult and then use it. Indeed: for a legitimate insult, you must find an snark-vein on a distant mountain and carve a treacherous path through the rock to where the vitriol runs pure. You must then harness the vitriol and refine it through a process entirely too complex to describe here until you’ve got an insult. 😕 What do you mean you can’t make up an insult? Where do you think insults come from? I genuinely have no idea what you’re thinking. > [@jtgain](#): > > REALLY? This is what passes for political discourse? No, it’s not. It’s what passes for a sex columnist poking some puerile, but pretty funny, fun at a bigot. Not everything must follow Robert’s Rules of Order. > [@jtgain](#): > > All right. Have your childish fun. I’ll bookmark this thread the next time a Dem politician gets hit with a label that posters here do not think is “fair”. > > Like when someone calls Obama a Socialist or Kenyan. That is now fine because we can make up meanings as we go. As opposed to what, looking meanings up in God’s Divine Dictionary? You betray a woeful misunderstanding of how human languages work. Words don’t have an objective meaning: rather, communication works to the extent that your intended audience understands your intended message with your intended connotation. When someone calls Obama Kenyan, they’re deliberately deceiving the audience by attempting to convince them of a false fact. When people assign the letters “santorum” to describe something icky, there’s no false fact at play. > [@sh1bu1](#): > > How about . . . algorithm? Yeah, right. I know he invented the Internet, but there’s no way he invented mathematical procedures. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-you-google-santorum/609596.md?page=4)