Scienceblogs has some discussion on whether scientists should go after Santorum's "scalp", as a trophy of the defeat of Intelligent Design and Santorum's past support for that creationist cause (he wrote a preface to a book on ID).
Readers of Dan Savage, on the other hand, may be familiar with Dan's competition to define the word "Santorum" in association with a sex act. The winning definition being "the frothy mix of lube and...." ...well, follow the link (or read the poll).
What do YOU think? Which frame puts Santorum in the worse light -- Creationist or Froth? Or just plain Republican?