It seems like only yesterday, but it was more than eight years ago that Rick Santorum unburdened himself of the view that “in every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be.”

Wikipedia reminds us that the AP reporter who recorded these remarks interrupted Santorum to comment, “I’m sorry, I didn’t think I was going to talk about ‘man on dog’ with a United States senator, it’s sort of freaking me out.” (I don’t understand that sentiment at all. Who better to discuss Man on Dog with than a member of the world’s greatest deliberative body?)

An uproar ensued. The Senate Republican leader, Bill Frist, came to the defense of the Distinguished Frothy Mixture from Pennsylvania: “Rick is a consistent voice for inclusion and compassion in the Republican Party and in the Senate, and to suggest otherwise is just politics.” The president agreed, calling Santorum an “inclusive man.”