Santorum Fires Back at CBS's 'Gotcha'; Raises Rev. Wright Double Standard
On Friday's CBS This Morning, Rick Santorum pushed back against Charlie Rose's interrogation about supporter Foster Friess's recent "bad off-color joke" on contraception, all but name-dropping former Obama pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright as an example of the media's double standard on playing "gotcha" politics with Republicans, but not Democrats.
Rose initially countered, "This is not gotcha; what this is, is trying to understand exactly what Rick Santorum stands for, and what he might say or do as president." But the GOP presidential candidate wasn't having any of it: "You don't do this with President Obama...he sat in a church for 20 years, and [you] defended him- that, oh, he can't possibly believe what he listened to for 20 years. It's a double standard...and I'm going to call you on it" [audio available here; video below the jump].
CBS's Big Three counterparts - ABC and NBC - also spotlighted the Friess controversy. On Thursday's World News, ABC correspondent Jonathan Karl claimed that the backer's joke was "consistent with Santorum's Catholic faith, but also a reminder of just how far to the right he is on social issues, even once comparing homosexuality to bestiality." The same evening, on NBC Nightly News, Kelly O'Donnell that Friess "veered into volatile territory" with the joke that "caught fire."
The following morning, on Friday's Today show, anchor Savannah Guthrie trumpeted that Republicans "stepped into it a little bit" on the wider debate over controversy over contraception and the federal government's mandate for it, and that the remark "raised a lot of eyebrows." Guthrie then asked colleague David Gregory, "Does this illustrate how quickly this whole issue can get off course?" Gregory replied, in part, that "a lot of strategists...think that this is a real straitjacket for the party come general election time, whoever the nominee is, even if the elements of the base right now are energized by the issue."
Rose led his interview of the former Pennsylvania senator with the controversy over Friess's remark. He asked, "What have you said to him about the comments, other than what you have said to the press?" Santorum retorted by immediately accusing the journalist of playing "gotcha":
SANTORUM: I'm not responsible for every comment that a supporter of mine makes...it was a bad joke. It was a stupid joke. It's not reflective of me or my record on this issue....this is the same gotcha politics that you get from the media, and I'm just not going to play that game.
The anchor continued by pursuing the issue with his guest, which led to a back and forth between the two, and ultimately concluded with the Republican firing back with the Rev. Wright example:
ROSE: There's no question that those issues are very important, and they're very important to the voters of Michigan. But also, you have been identified as a social conservative, and those issues have been part of what you have said to the country. So this is not gotcha. What this is, is trying to understand exactly what Rick Santorum stands for, and what he might say or do as president-
SANTORUM: Well, Charlie, when you quote- hold on, Charlie. When you quote a supporter of mine who tells a bad off-color joke, and somehow, I'm responsible for that shall, that's gotcha. I mean, the bottom line is, we're- we've been- we've been-
ROSE: But nobody said you were responsible, Senator. Nobody said you were responsible. They said, how would you characterize it and what have you said to him, not that you were responsible. It's to understand how you differ from what this person said. So let me quote you-
SANTORUM: Okay. So I'm now going to have respond to every supporter who says something. Now, I'm going to have to respond to it. Look, this is what you guys do. I mean, I don't- you don't do this with President Obama. In fact, with President Obama, what you did was you went out and defended him against someone who- he sat in a church for- for 20 years, and defended him- that, oh, he can't possibly believe what he listened to for 20 years. It's a double standard, this is what you're pulling off, and I'm going to call you on it.
Even after this exchange, Rose wasn't finished with the subject, and read a past quote from the former senator on the issue of birth control. In reply, Santorum defended his record:
SANTORUM: Well, my beliefs are that, as I said, my public policy beliefs are that this contraception should be available. Again, I've supported Title X [Ten] funding. I've also supported abstinence-based education, because I believe that is a healthier alternative. I've been a very strong promoter of that. I think that pre-marital sex, and particularly, sex for- with young girls is a very dangerous and at-risk behavior. I'm not alone on that. The President even supports policies to try to make sure that folks do not have sex outside of marriage and at-risk teens [who] get involved- in that at-risk behavior, that leads to sexually-transmitted diseases; unwanted pregnancies; you know, abortions, and a whole laundry list of other things. So, no, I do stand behind the idea that abstinence is the best alternative, and I've supported that with a program called Title XX [Twenty] within the government.
- Matthew Balan's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Go get 'em Rick!
Submitted by inquiringmind on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 2:59pm.
Go get 'em Rick!
Bravo, Rick Santorum! Bravissimo!
Submitted by Galvanic on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 3:41pm.
The GOP candidates are firing back in interviews and debates, and the MSM talking heads aren't sure how to handle it. They aren't letting the MSMers get away with it.
Nice.
This is nothing. Obama and his running dogs...
Submitted by KyWriter on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 3:10pm.
...are really desperate for an issue to deflect scrutiny of his indefensible, miserable excuse for a Presidency, so this is just par for the course.
Contraception NOT a real issue, but MSM will try to make it one
Submitted by Rover on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 3:30pm.
"... even if the elements of the base right now are energized by the issue."
I see elements of the base Right energized by the freedom of religion issue, not by the issue of contraception in general. The Media would LOVE to get the Right energized by contraception, BECAUSE they do know, as Gregory mentioned, that it can be used as a straight jacket to bind the GOP in the next election.
Rose, Gregory, etc. are trying to get Santorum (and anyone else in the GOP who might snap at the bait) to become identified with this as an issue; that much less time to discuss the economy, the debt and Obama's record of failure; and plenty of opportunities to take quotes out of context or outright lie about what was said to paint the GOP as extreme, especially trying to scare women into voting for Obama.
This is not a campaign issue. "ROSE: There's no question that those issues are very important, and they're very important to the voters of Michigan." Well, I question it. Rose would like to MAKE the voters of Michigan interested in it, and unfortunately the more the Media talks about it, the more it WILL displace actual issues. Santorum et. al. should stop letting them drive the discussion and steer them back to real issues, calling them on it if they refuse to discuss real issues.
If we let the MSM dictate what the real issues are, guess what will happen. I predict that it will be about ANYTHING but Obama and his record, and will focus particularly on things that the GOP can't get traction on.
Abstinence?
Submitted by Fredy on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 3:39pm.
When did ABSTINANCE become OFF COLOR?
Even accepting this as the premise of the perverted sex craved media is a fools errand!
To the media it became OFF
Submitted by BD on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 4:29pm.
To the media it became OFF COLOR because they do not belive humans CAN or SHOULD abstain.
The Media is full of people who feel life should have no consequense....
Last summer, wasn't there
Submitted by kareling on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 3:41pm.
Last summer, wasn't there some Obama rally where the speaker introducing him was a union boss who whipped up the crowd by saying something along the lines of "Let's take these sons of bitches out" to refer to the Tea Party/GOP or anyone who opposed Obama's policies? And Obama was never asked by anyone to disavow this or otherwise say anything about it. The closest was some blather from Jay Carney about how it wasn't the job of anyone in the WH to police others' speech.
It's not the job of the WH to police others' speech
Submitted by dzejk113 on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 3:53pm.
Except when that speech goes against our "dear leader", or any other precious tenant of liberalism. Freedom of speech melts away faster than the polar ice caps when you disagree with liberals.
CBS's morning shows have always sucked,
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 3:49pm.
but who's the brain who thought that people would like to wake up to a funeral director?
Many CAPS, because I am pissed..............
Submitted by Tomorama on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 3:54pm.
Couple of things here, I am no supporter of Santorum, BUT, he isn't a bad guy.
I LOVE the fact that he shoved Wright up Rose's wrinkly arse and he is 100 PERCENT CORRECT.
THEY ignored it for months and when FORCED to report it, THEY DEFENDED OBYSMAL PERIOD.
I saw this clip on PMSNBC this morning and the all leftist male crew with LOW brain matter NEVER mentioned the facts that Santorum brought up, BUT ALL NOTED that Santorum IS RESPONSIBLE for what this guy said.
I query the crowd here:
Would that mean that Obysmals mouthpiece was responsible for "the post of the day about all Republicans have to offers Latino's are Chimychangas"?
My bad, SOME of these whores would have had to report him repeating it as somehow funny.
NO STORY AT ALL.
Democrats
Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 4:03pm.
They don't think that contraception and abortion are the only choices for a pregnant woman. Sometimes it's better to just leave them in a submerged car or give them an OD of drugs and place a suicide note next to them so their families won't think they were murdered.
Abortion is a "choice" for the STUPID
Submitted by RealVet on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 5:36pm.
Good post Phil.
Abortion is the only choice for STUPID women - and the majority of women who regard abortion as a viable method of birth control are liberal and patently stupid.
Smart women take the pill, use other methods, make sure their partners use condoms, or refrain from unprotected sex altogether. Those are the real "choices".
Murder is not an option for smart women.
He should have said "while I
Submitted by okie-pastor on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 4:07pm.
He should have said "while I don't agree necessarily with the sophomoric language Mr. Friess used, I do agree with the principle behind it. That abstinence is the best form of birth control and is 100% effective when tried."
I wish he wouldn't have thrown Friess under the buss. But I'm glad he called out media hypocrisy of guilt by association while the media broke their necks looking the other direction when it came to Jeremiah Wright!
Indeed
Submitted by Matthew Balan on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 4:12pm.
He should have said "while I don't agree necessarily with the sophomoric language Mr. Friess used, I do agree with the principle behind it. That abstinence is the best form of birth control and is 100% effective when tried."
He eventually gets around to defending abstinence, but yeah...
Game Show News
Submitted by CJohnson on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 4:22pm.
The TV viewing public are media-trained to be skilled at rating, not evaluating, content. The more abusive the interrogative interviewer gets, the better ratings they receive (viewers, voters and verdicts). Rose believes the purpose of an interview is to create winners and losers for the audience to rate based on Rose's treatment of the suspect.
He must have listened to Rush
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 4:22pm.
Rush was making the same point today.
Nice job Rick.
I don't understand.
Submitted by bkeyser on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 4:43pm.
What's wrong with the guy saying that in his day, if a woman was really concerned about getting pregnant, she'd not commit the one and only act at the time that would allow for such a result? It's somehow offensive to hint "keep your legs closed"? I mean, to anyone other than Andrea Mitchell, that is?
Santorum doesn't have to answer for a donor. No one has ever held any democrat to that standard. But that's really not the issue for me. I don't see how anyone could find what the guy said offensive, or even sophomoric (as some here have described it.) Putting an aspirin between your knees? I'll bet fully 80% of people under 30 had no idea what he was talking about. You can't really be offended by something you can't comprehend.
Useful Idiots
Submitted by Santino Corleone on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 4:29pm.
The media are, let's talk about contraception, gay marriage, amnesty----the REAL important issues for the American people. The democratic party's lapdogs---gleefully they assist the WH in keeping these "real" important issues at the fore. While millions are jobless, our AG (and the POTUS) are smack dab in the thick of the Fast & Furious scandal (what scandal?), clean energy crony capitalism, Keystone debacle, Iran, Syria---no, America wants to know where Santorum and Romney stand on contraception. What an f'in joke! This site should just start citing when the media actually commits objective journalism. Actually, a site like that could never survive without content.
If I wasn't happily married
Submitted by poseA on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 4:52pm.
If I wasn't happily married to my wife, I would become a supporter of gay marriage and make a play for Mr. Santorum.
[sarcasm]
Mr. Santorum just inoculated himself. Now the only way the media can smear him is by misquoting him and not allowing him back on the air, which is something they've already demonstrated they are willing to do.
I was more impressed with
Submitted by NCfairandbalanced on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 5:17pm.
I was more impressed with Romney and Gingrich than Santorum, but only because I didn't think he was as "electable". He is really coming into is own....he needs to keep calling the media on the double standard thing.
The media has not been that unkind to him...YET. But it's only because they didn't view him as a major player. The media will exploit anyone who is threatening to their prize, BHO. He has nothing to lose by bashing the media.
They will say to Rick: you go after us, we'll go after you. But here's the truth. They will go after Rick whether he goes after them or not. He has nothing to lose, and everything to gain.
Sad, Charlie Rose damging his brand every night
Submitted by Jonah Johansen on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 5:55pm.
Charlie Rose kind of like Terri Gross built a decent reputation over the years as thoughtful fair interviewer, only to destroy it with totally unnecessary partisan crap.
After years of fairly even handed interviews on Bloomberg and Public TV he shows up on CBS and acts like he wants to become the new Dan Rather. It is as if he desperately wants to please his new bosses at CBS, who he correctly perceives as ultra leftist (ala MSNBC;) so he is going out of his way to be biased and channels the left blog-a-sphere night after night saving his worst distortions for Republicans who confuse the new Charlie Rose with the old.
Ever since this new gig with CBS he has been a Newsbusters regular. Kind of sad. Whatever reputation for fairness or objectivity he built over the years pissed away in a month or two. He turns many like me, from sort of a fan to someone who despises the ground he walks on
BTW, My guess is that we are seeing the real Charlie Rose, a Bill Moyers style knee jerk leftist ideologue and the old Charlie Rose was a fake.
About time! Go Rick Santorum!
Submitted by DaMav on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 5:59pm.
... thass all folks ...
Santorum comes off as a whiny
Submitted by goldwater89 on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 6:12pm.
Santorum comes off as a whiny little baby. Yes, the MSM is biased, Rick. Get over it already.
And why isn't the media mentioning the fact that he lost his Senate seat by 19%
He made a good point.
Submitted by Quasi-socialist on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 6:20pm.
You're just citing a mantra.
So we are not allowed to call
Submitted by BD on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 6:24pm.
So we are not allowed to call them media on it when they make an inconsequential point and waste vast amounts of time?
Because his Senate re-election isn't relevant.
Submitted by Radical1979 on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 8:44pm.
That was then and this is now.
He lost his Senate seat in a
Submitted by lotr on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 9:55pm.
He lost his Senate seat in a blue state. What's remarkable is that he got elected in that blue state to begin with.
And why isn't the media
Submitted by ckc1227 on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 1:36am.
And why isn't the media mentioning the fact that he lost his Senate seat by 19%
Because he didn't? Shouldn't facts actually be factual?
Speaking of double standards:
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 6:18pm.
Please support 'Whites For Romney'.
It's a tacit adminission that they weren't
Submitted by Quasi-socialist on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 6:19pm.
"trying to understand exactly what" Obama stood for. The feigned perplexity of Santorum's beliefs is just another tactic of the left. They weren't the least worried how much Obama absorbed from his pastor, they didn't care.
The Left wants control of every part of our lives, from what we
Submitted by Rush Fan on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 6:31pm.
eat, to what we weigh, to the benefits of sex and abortion, to what type of car and light bulb we buy.
One of these days the Left will tell us how important it is for us to clean the wax from our ears with special Al Gore global-warming-free Q-Tips. I can visualize a Conservative who is interviewed by Andrea Mitchell, NBC News, and Andrea asks the Conservative his view on ear cleaning and Gore's global-warming-free Q-Tips.
Can you imagine Andrea Mitchell, NBC News' shock and confusion if the Conservative said to her, "I wouldn't put anything in my ears that was smaller than my fist " (my doctor tells me that). Why the Leftist media would have a field day with that!
Leftist Wikipedia has already added to Foster Friess bio his comment to Andrea Mitchell, NBC News. Notice the bias words and phrases I have highlighted:
---------------------
Kudos Rick. I hope Mitt Romney takes the same approach with the shameful Leftist bias media. However if our Republican candidate loses the election to Obama, I'm still covered. At least Obama will give me and many others contraceptives and other freebies from his stash.
Santorum angles for another "media bashing" applause line
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 7:19pm.
like those which provided shots of adrenaline to a languishing Gingrich campaign a few weeks ago, but Rick should get his facts straight before popping off with history-mangling Hannitized talking points. The notion that the media didn't cover the Obama/Reverend Wright controversy, or didn't question Obama's relationship with Wright and his reaction to the latter's anti-American sermons--that it instead defended him against the outcry sparked by the revelations--is absolute nonsense.
If the media had circled the wagons around the Democratic candidate in the manner and to the extent suggested by Santorum, then it is odd that Obama would find it necessary to denounce the Reverend and terminate his membership in the church . The facts expose the gaping holes in Santorum's recollection: The story dominated the news, the coverage was generally critical, and Obama was questioned aggressively on the subject.
Jer
But of course, Jer,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 7:54pm.
"the story dominated the news", "the coverage was generally critical", "and Obama was questioned aggressively."
Give us some more of your liberal oriented BS; that will be most convincing, I'm sure.
MD
You go first, Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 8:40pm.
Now that your pointless blather has landed with its usual thud, how about trying fact-based refutation for a change. I'm persuadable.
Jer
Go first, and do what, Jer ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 8:57pm.
attempt to convince a bone-headed lefty of the error of his ways?
In all the time I've been here at NBs, you have been primarily either an apologist for Obama, or his defender.
The apologies I attribute to your liberal mind set; your defense of Obama, however, is obviously necessary because there is nothing whatsoever laudable about either the pos OR his actions.
A liberal lefty on this site, stating that I have engaged in 'pointless blather' that landed with its usual thud.
You are a genuine caution, Jeringo - your argument "for" Obama is all the refutation I need.
QED
MD
Right...
Submitted by InSixDays on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 7:55pm.
...that's why that SNL skit about the favorable coverage Obama was getting (compared to Hillary) was soooo unfunny.
"When the government is afraid of the citizens, you have democracy,
When the citizens are afraid of the government, you have tyranny."
--Thomas Jefferson
"Luge strategy? Lie flat and try not to die." C. Boyle (Olympic Luge Gold Medal winner 1996)
You call that critical???
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 9:12pm.
It was pretty much straightforward, as journalism should be, and not the least bit critical of the 0.
Ah, but there's the bias. Straightforward when the news is could the 0 in a bad light, tons of editorializing when it's a republican in the sights.
Well, RESTLESS, it sure wasn't "defending"
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 12:52am.
Obama.
Jer
You claimed "critical"
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 5:44pm.
It wasn't that either.
Jer
Submitted by lotr on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 10:09pm.
You raise good points, but I still think that the media was generally forgiving of Obama after the fact, accepting at face value Obama's claim that he had not heard any similar hate rhetoric in all those 20 years.
lotr...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 12:48am.
I think after Obama finally dispatched the Reverend under the bus, ran over him, backed up and drove over the body a couple more times, the MSM was ready to close the file; and, to the extent it thereinafter tended to ignore the continuing complaints from the "right", your implied point that the media was too compliant is a fair one.
Jer
⇒ Let me help, Jer.
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 02/19/2012 - 12:02am.
Just a couple of words and you're exactly correct.
I think after Obama finally dispatched the Reverend under the bus, ran over him, backed up and drove over the body a couple more times, the MSM was ready to
closenot open the file.Charlie Gibson asked an inoculative question, and Stephanopolis asked a kissy-kissy question like "Does Jeremiah Wright love America as much as your lordship does?"
Beyond these , the MSM didn't want to touch the Wright story.
Yeah, right
Submitted by ckc1227 on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 2:13am.
"the story dominated the news", "the coverage was generally critical", "and Obama was questioned aggressively."
Sure they did. That's why they ignored it for a full year after the tapes were originally discovered, and never mentioned the issue after the primary was over, lol.
And your convincing proof is linking a conservative blogger's
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 2:38am.
lament concerning some lefty pundits slamming ABC and quintessential MSM members Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos for their aggressive questioning of Obama about Reverend Wright?
I said I'm persuadable, not gullible.
Jer
And your examples, Jer, tend to favor ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 2:47am.
which side of the political spectrum, again?
If you tend to provide from the left, and your opponent from the right; the outcome at best is probably going to be a wash.
MD
Good for you, Mr. Santorum
Submitted by lesterwink23 on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 8:03pm.
Perhaps some of Newt's disdain for the media is rubbing off on the former senator. I for one would very much like to see more of this from the remaining candidates. No more rolling over for the MSM and its blatant contempt for people with an (R) after their name. Call them out on their ridiculous 'gotcha' questions and the hypocrisy they don't even bother to conceal anymore
The Press Will Do Anything...
Submitted by pbthinker on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 1:38am.
To, not only protect Obama, but to try and make Republicans look extreme. What they making a fuss about was also in a reply, either Ann Landers or Dear Abby, made to a query many years ago. When asked about the effectiveness of birth control pills versus condoms, they replied that the pill could be 100% effective in it was placed between the knees and held there.
I hope more people go after the MSM for their terrible conduct during the 2008 election. The more they do it, the more the MSM is going to have to think about how they're going to conduct this election.
It makes little difference, in the long run, no one trusts the MSM any more.
I am one of the vast number of Indepents.
Submitted by Bob K on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 12:15pm.
And while I like Santorum and would support him if he was the nominee, his comments were INCREDIBLY stupid. Talk about the third rail of politics. While I admire his honesty, it works against him. Now you are will see all sorts of liberal articles screeching how "he wants to take away access to birth control!" Even as POTUS he would have next to no ability to end abortion or limit birth control. But that will not stop liberals from using it against him. A politician offering their personal opinion on birth control, etc., is really a stupid move.
⇒ Right you are
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 12:29pm.
It almost rises to the level of "The cops acted stupidly". End of discussion should be "The president has no authority to ban birth control any more than he has authority to force Americans to insure for it"
Amen.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 12:43pm.
.
precisely
Submitted by lotr on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 11:34pm.
precisely
Agree. By emphasizing social issues, Santorum has made
Submitted by Rush Fan on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 11:39pm.
himself unelectable.