Bozell Column: Santorum vs. The Meat Grinder
For many months, the liberal media elite has made no secret that in its mind, the field of Republican presidental candidates includes Mitt Romney and a collection of clowns. Clearly, Romney is the opponent that Barack Obama and the liberal establishment want nominated.
Journalists have mercilessly savaged every single conservative alternative to Romney who’s ascended to the top of the polls. Palin. Bachmann. Cain. Perry. Gingrich. It’s too bad for them that the results from the Iowa caucuses threw off their bold predictions that the Romney Juggernaut would achieve liftoff in Des Moines. Yet Romney won by only eight votes over surprising Rick Santorum. This means one thing only: Senator, step up to the guillotine.
“He's about to face the meat grinder of tough scrutiny for the first time,” promised Ann Curry on the “Today” show. I’m stil waiting for Obama to face the “meat grinder of tough scrutiny for the first time.” Instead, he gets to handle Barbara Walters slow-pitch puffballs in prime time, being asked what kind of superhero powers he’d like to have.
Some would protest Obama has faced some meat-grinder questions recently. Take the president’s “60 Minutes” favorite, Steve Kroft, who put some tough questions to the president on CBS in December. The complaint? Obama compromised too much with heinous right-wingers. Kroft scolded, “There are people in your own party who think that you were outmaneuvered, that you were stared down by John Boehner and Grover Norquist and capitulated....It seems to be all the compromising is being done by you.”
The compromising is supposed to be done by the conservatives. The media stayed on their message with a relentless discipline after the Iowa results. Santorum, like the other authentic conservatives, are too “far right” to win. Ann Curry started the meat grinder. “So is he going to have to change his conservative message as he's looking into north, looking into New Hampshire, which is a much less conservative state?”
ABC’s Jake Tapper laid out the “reality” of Santorum moving to the center. “His is an unapologetic, in-your-face conservatism. But Santorum argues this is all part of his fight for the traditional American family,” Tapper reported. “But in order for Santorum to succeed, he really needs to expand beyond those base Republican voters.”
CNN’s John King told Santorum he was a Democrat’s dream. “A lot of Democrats were celebrating, if you will, Senator Santorum, last night, saying, in their view, you're on the extreme right on many of these social issues and they think, for them, it's a good thing that these issues will be front and center.” This is especially appalling coming from CNN, which has created several hour-long specials boosting the extreme left, like “Gary and Tony Have a Baby.”
Several anchors – including NBC’s Savannah Guthrie before the caucuses and Fox’s Bill O’Reilly (warning of what would come) afterwards – pressed Santorum on artificial contraception, which hasn’t exactly come up in most presidential campaigns. Obama isn’t exactly being badgered about contraceptives and how he told a town hall meeting in 2008 they would help his daughters avoid being “punished with a baby.”
The media will demand Santorum move to the center on all of the issues: economic issues, defense issues, and social issues. But they think he’s especially vulnerable as “extreme” on the social ones. Conservative viewpoints are “extreme,” but the liberal counterpoints never are so.
It’s “extreme” to criticize contraceptives, but not extreme to give them to 12-year-olds in public schools. It’s “extreme” to oppose all abortions, but not extreme to favor every one of them (even partial-birth abortions) and want them funded with taxpayer money. It’s “extreme” to believe in traditional marriage, but it’s not extreme to support “poly-amorous” groupings of three or five lovers in loose “family” arrangements.
Amazingly, ABC’s “Good Morning America” slavishly promoted polyamory the morning after Santorum’s near-tie. Abbie Boudreau gushed, “Really, these days a modern family, just like ABC's hit comedy, can be anything you make it.”
Republican voters need to remember that the ultraliberals who run our national media are nowhere near the “mainstream” on the culture, or on any other vital American issue. When they insist a conservative candidate really needs to move to the middle, perhaps conservatives ought to push back and ask when was the last time these people were anywhere near the center. They couldn’t find it with a pair of binoculars.
- Brent Bozell's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
The MSM isn't mainstream
Submitted by P. Aaron on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 8:48am.
...they're just cruel, idiotic, vapid and provide little info of value. These days, they're the media, it's not news anymore.
media
Submitted by kinijane on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 8:55am.
They are determined to trash everyone out there if they are not Obama, even
distorting what what they say when they are interviewing someone, twisting the
words and when the person being interview object and try to clear the misconception,
they say "but" and go on with the lie. Newt handles this better than the rest but even
he gets shafted. The sad thing is that people buy into that crap (newts demise in
Iowa) and don't pay any attention to the underlying message, now Rick S is about
to get the treatment. When the GOP gets thru trashing each other, giving fodder
to the Obama campaign, I am somewhat worried about our chances and our
country.
They are not Mainstream
Submitted by gwalt on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 9:01am.
The so-called MSM represent approx 17-18% of the country. That is not "mainstream" that is their constituency in LA, NYC,SF and Chicago etc. the sooner we begin a concerted effective targeted media camapign against--- the media Anchors, the sooner we get truth, accuracy and our country back. They are aiding and abetting a known criminal--- Obama.
Start the campaign Mr. Bozell--- on TV, billboards and newspapers--- use their own media vehicles to bring down the Libs. By name and by face. Every day from now until Nov 6th. 43% ++ of the country will cheer!
"A lot of briefing for a 2 hr. special with Dan Rather. Saw the show & wonder why we bothered". Ronald Reagan
Move to the middle Rick
Submitted by NavyBuckeye on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 9:03am.
Yes Rick move the middle like the MSM robots want you to do. This way when you do they can call you a flip flopper.
The media is despicable.
Santorum /Media Scrutiny
Submitted by kmichaelfrancis... on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 9:08am.
It seemed that O'Reilly incorrectly attributed Santorum's success in Iowa predominantly to Social Conservative Christians, I looked at the caucus map and it seemed that Santorum received a big boost from communities with small manufacturing companies.His attractiveness to Social Conservatives is undoubtedly strong,but his appeal to blue collar workers in these small companies provided the biggest gain. His blue collar roots set him apart from Romney, along with his opposition to health care mandates, and his strong national defense positions.
Did Santorum actually win?
Submitted by motherbelt on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 9:58am.
It's close enough that I don't know that it matters, but this vote counter in Iowa says that a Typo mistakenly gave Romney 20 extra votes.
Sadly, I think Brent is wrong on this one
Submitted by Eric the Fred on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 10:27am.
It is not just the media that are woefully to the Left but a good chunk of the population as well. It's true that for Santorum to win in NH (never mind the general election) he will have to move to the Left. This is the sad truth of our population today, especially the younger generations (I'm 45).
By gradually destroying the family, the role of fathers, and the role of religion over the last 40+ years, the media, academia, and the state have managed to create the conditions ripe for indoctrinating entire generations of Americans in atheist-left wing ideology and culture.
Children raised in families where there are no fathers and/or no religious morality will get their morals from somewhere and it will invariably be from TV and gov't schools.
Brent is wrong...
Submitted by NVRAT on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 10:51am.
Eric the Fred, your 40+ should be about 10 -15 more years on to your estimate for destruction. Other than that you are absolutely correct. The whole thing started during the "Beatnik Era".
This is the "what polls well,
Submitted by redfish on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 1:48pm.
This is the "what polls well, wins" argument. But election campaigns are also about making arguments to the American public. Arguments, if persuasive and respectful, can change minds. Even if you poll well, and you make a lousy argument, you can lose. But if you poll poorly and make a good argument, you can win.
That's basically Gingrich's pitch against a Romney candidacy. You could say the same is true for a Santorum, supposing he could debate social issues well.. although I haven't seen it yet.
Seems like the media would be
Submitted by balboa on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 10:09am.
Seems like the media would be for Santorum, since there's no way he'd beat Obama.
⇒ Good point, Bal
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 10:49am.
Instead, they keep trying to push Huntsman, something I don't quite understand either.
Well which is it, Huntsman or
Submitted by balboa on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 10:55am.
Well which is it, Huntsman or Romney?
⇒ Bal
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 10:59am.
I think either Romney or Santorum could beat Obama. I don't think Huntsman's got enough bulldog in him to mount a decent attack.
romney has the most teflon -
Submitted by TruthMonger on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:10am.
romney has the most teflon - that's why the media won't want him - they will go after his religion, being rich, trying to portray an obama care flip flop, trying to find out if his maid is an illegal, thats about it
Congratulations Jimmy Carter!
⇒ Of course, TM
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:15am.
Of course, they won't ask questions about Obama's Uncle Omar the drunk driver, or aunt Zeituni, or aunt Solyndra, or whatever her name is
hee hee:)
Submitted by TruthMonger on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:30am.
hee hee:)
Congratulations Jimmy Carter!
TM,
Submitted by Agnostic on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:57am.
Until May or June then the Teflon would fall away.
Then he would be:
The business man who fired X amount of employees
The governor that drove businesses out of his state
The governor that raises taxes and on those that are affected the most
The politician with no FP experience
The businessman with limited exposure to the results of his actions
The politician who has flipped on vital issues (trying to convince Republicans he won't really do anything about ObamaCare)
Plus all the personal issues that will come to bear.
As completely underwhelming
Submitted by balboa on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:17am.
As completely underwhelming as Obama has been, I can't see Santorum beating him.
he could if it weren't for
Submitted by TruthMonger on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:28am.
he could if it weren't for the meddling giant SOB lying leftwing propoganda media machine
Congratulations Jimmy Carter!
No, I think Santorum is
Submitted by balboa on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:55am.
No, I think Santorum is capable of ruining it all by himself.
I don't believe Santorum's problem is
Submitted by lotr on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 2:07pm.
....his political ideology per se.
I see Santorum's problem being more a matter of the charisma necessary to win an election. The current occupant of the Oval Office got elected with extremist political ideologies in his resume. Of course, the the lib-media downplayed it, but Hillary wasn't much different on the political spectrum, and yet she lost the nomination. IMO, this can pretty much completely be attributed to the charisma factor.
In Santorum's case, there is the issue of the lib-media's inevitable spin and campaigning for the Democrat platform that will attempt to make his political ideology look "extreme," and perhaps for that reason his conservative ideology may be a problem, but aside from that I think he could win in the general election with his record, but for the fact that I'm not sure he has the charisma to persuade undecided voters.
⇒ Never let them see you sweat
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 2:19pm.
Pasty, sweaty, nerbous. None of it evokes confidence.
Dude needs a makeup artist.
It's Huntsman
Submitted by bkeyser on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:52am.
*
Attention candidates
Submitted by iFight on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 10:16am.
Come up with a stock answer of 3 magazines or newspapers you read. No more Katie Couric "gotchas" this time around!
You're welcome.
⇒ iFight
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 10:55am.
People with enough time to read three magazines have serious health problems. Other than Doctor's offices, where else do you see magazines? I pay enough if cable/internet access to be free from pulp. Even the local newspaper is online.
The bathroom
Submitted by iFight on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:14am.
The toilet, the loo, if you will. Sometimes the coffee table, the mailbox, grocery store line, newsstand, airplanes........they're kind of all over the place.
The Marxist-media wants Romney because ...
Submitted by Bodini on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 10:40am.
BO's campaign is based on class-warfare. Obama's union buddies started OWS and the Marxist-media fed the beast ... all with the intent of running against ... 1%er Mitt Romney!
2nd choice
Submitted by JLin on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:12am.
"Clearly, Romney is the opponent that Barack Obama and the liberal establishment want nominated."
Actually, their first choice was Jon Huntsman but Romney will do.
The youth and independent vote
Submitted by shawn. on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:22am.
I am no Romney fan because I feel he is not very honest, but I prefer him to Santorum. Independents came out in droves for Obama last time because of their dislike of George Bush and the youth voted in droves last time because they wanted A Black President
Independents overall do not like Santorum very much because of social stances and ditto for the youth. Not too long ago, people dislike for Obama would have anybody beating him. That might not be the case anymore. The unemployment rate dropped to 8.5 in December. Combine that with capturing OBL and the end of the Iraq war and you have a formidable opponent in Obama
Romney has the best chance by far.
Shawn, Shawn, Shawn...
Submitted by PA Conservative on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:45am.
You might not want to just blindly read and listen to the MSM when it comes to the unemployment rate. Please read this:
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/01/06/msm-headlines-unemployment-rate-drops...
The MSM right now has a collective woody over the 8.5% number. They will be furiously spinning that all day. The reality of the situation is a bit different. This is the type of mis-information that we will have until November of this year. Only pathetic sheeples will blindly follow ANYTHING the MSM comes out with in the next 11 months. People need to be very aware of this and need to really dig into any stories that come out that try to prop up Duh One.
Has the unemployment rate
Submitted by killa37 on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:59am.
Has the unemployment rate ever NOT dropped during the holiday season??? And you're right - look for the jobless numbers to be rigged and misrepresented in ANY way possible for the rest of the year ..............forget about underemployment, under-the-table employment, people giving up looking for jobs, people who used up all of their 'unemployment benefits', and also the shrinking job market, due to the Obama REGIME'S business and economic policies.
Killa37, Exactly.
Submitted by Liberallies on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 12:15pm.
Killa37,
Exactly. unemployment almost always drops during the holiday season and quite a few people have given up looking for jobs. this latter group is not counted.
I remember when under Bush the unemployment rate was at 4.5% and the media, the Left, Democrats were telling us that the number was not true because it didn't count the underemployed and those who had stopped looking for work. Now unemployment "drops" to 8.5% the same media and the same Democrats/Left are claiming how great it is. LOL
Bring Out The Violins
Submitted by miss911ninja on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 4:47pm.
And let's not forget how the media, the left, and Democrats focus heavily on the number of homeless whenever there's a Republican president. They bring out the violins with their coverage of afflicted families with children living in their cars, or in a van down by the river. Now there are probably more homeless than ever! How could there not be? But suddenly they're invisible!
you are right
Submitted by shawn. on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 12:29pm.
The msm is fudging reality. I am saying overall Obama is polling better than he was 3 months ago.
The Iraq war is over and if the economy picks up steam he might not be as easy to beat as some predicted.
The youth might also come out for Obama just to vote against Santorum.
Shawn
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:53am.
Voting in droves for Obama couldn't have had anything to do with Shamus McAnus being the Republican candidate, right?
part of it was
Submitted by shawn. on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 12:37pm.
.......but it was mostly the dislike for Bush that did it. The base was energized and they came out in droves. They usually stay home.
Edit
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-santorum-jeered-after-compari...
Not really
Submitted by ckc1227 on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 12:35am.
Voting in droves for Obama couldn't have had anything to do with Shamus McAnus being the Republican candidate, right?
Not really. They came out in droves because it was an "historic" election. It would have been no different no matter who we nominated. He'll win the youth vote again this time around too, though there will likely be fewer youths voting.
Shawn, Hmmm...you really
Submitted by Liberallies on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 12:34pm.
Shawn,
Hmmm...you really think so? It sounds like you are listening and believieng too much the MSM.
Right now, Santorum is not very well known outside of Pennsylvania. While he was on the debates, he never received the highlight that Newt, Cain, Romney, Perry did because his polling was always low (further proof how political polling is a scam. Need further proof, just look how Ron Paul was suppose to do magnificant in Iowa and he received much less votes than polls indicated).
As for the 8.5% unemployment. C'mon. Unemployment dropped last year in the month of December too and if I am not mistaken, I don't have the time to look it up right now, unemployment usually drops most Decembers due to the Christmas season hiring. I will hold my judgment to celebrate unemployment drop if it continues going down in January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September. Additionally, the work force today, as a poster already said, has shurnk since Obama took office. Remember, people not looking for work are not counted in the unemployment number which I have never understood why.
As for Bin Laden, it is easy to take this "victory" away from Obama. All the Republicans need to do is put up a few commercials with Obama's words condemning the tactics that he used to catch Bin Laden.
I would also point to Iran and Honduras. Obama sat on the sideline when countless of youth were rounded up and mass arrested, tried and murdered, the so called Green Revolution in Iran. Obama said, "it is their internal political problem and t he USA will not get involved", but then Obama, who had said a country's internal political problem are for them to solve, became heavily involved in supporting the Honduras dictator want to be of a president who was expelled from the Honduran presidency by their supreme court after he attempted a complete power grab like Chavez did in Venezuela. Just ask Obama why he continues to support dictators around the world.
I will give you this, it never ceases to amaze me how the Republicans are incapable of putting together a strong message that counters the Democrats propaganda machine which of course includes the MSM.
The youth vote? it will likely go for Obama, but as of right now, I do not see the same enthusiam, the same support that Obama enjoyed in 2008. In fact, many of them are far from happy with him.
Unemployment is not the real measure of ...
Submitted by Bodini on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 3:27pm.
the economic state of the nation under the Obama presidency. The real measure of economic improvement will come when the number of food-stamp recipients markedly declines.
Deal with it
Submitted by Unsane on Mon, 01/09/2012 - 11:02am.
The only time the "youth vote" mattered was in 2008. Other than that the "youth vote" is a non-factor, as young people as a rule do not vote. In fact, the biggest block of voters are old people.
If the "youth vote" is as so vital as you claim, revamping Social Security and other programs that primarily are aimed at the elderly would be a snap. But they aren't.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
I was told somewhere that it
Submitted by ray johnson on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 11:58am.
I was told somewhere that it was his steady resolve, and unwavering beliefs...i.e.not a flipper.
TIME Magazine, in an article
Submitted by redfish on Fri, 01/06/2012 - 1:22pm.
TIME Magazine, in an article about Santorum, wants us to believe laws exist that prohibit same-sex marriage:
"He suggested those who wanted to change laws prohibiting same-sex marriage faced the burden of showing why that was necessary."
http://swampland.time.com/2012/01/06/heated-exchange-exposes-santorums-h...
What laws?
I wrote a post in the forum about this. The media has to stop saying there's a "gay marriage ban", it distorts the issue, and is a kind of casual bias a lot of people in the media have, even on Fox News.