Rick Santorum Scolds David Gregory for Focusing on Social Issues
Rick Santorum had a bit of a testy exchange with NBC's David Gregory on Sunday's Meet the Press.
After Gregory asked if Santorum was going to "rail against areas of our culture that [he] disagree[s] with" if elected president, the former senator smartly replied, "It's so funny. I get the question all the time, 'Why are you talking so much about these social issues'...as people ask me about the social issues" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
DAVID GREGORY, HOST: Here's what Kimberley Strassel wrote, and it seems to reflect views that are conservative as well as moderate, about you and whether you would then act on your faith in a way. She writes this, "Reagan's success was in respecting cultural conservatives' right to live their lives as they saw fit. Mr. Santorum's mistake is in telling people how to live. His finger-wagging on contraception and child-rearing and homosexual acts disrespects the vast majority of couples who use birth control or who refuse to believe that the emancipation of women or society's increasing tolerance of gays signals the end of the republic." So, Senator, are you going to use the bully pulpit if you're president to talk about these issues, to rail against areas of our culture that you disagree with, or will, given your comments about President Kennedy, go beyond that and make it a focal point of your presidency to act on your beliefs?
RICK SANTORUM: It's so funny. I get the question all the time, "Why are you talking so much about these social issues," as they, as, as people ask me about the social issues.
MR. GREGORY: Senator, no, wait a minute.
FMR. SEN. SANTORUM: Look, the...
MR. GREGORY: You talk about this stuff every week. And by the way, it's not just in this campaign.
FMR. SEN. SANTORUM: No, I talk about, I talk...
MR. GREGORY: Sir, in this campaign you talk about it. And I've gone back years when you've been in public life and you have made this a centerpiece of your public life. So the notion that these are not deeply held views worthy of question and scrutiny, it's not just about the press.
FMR. SEN. SANTORUM: Yeah, they, they are deeply held views, but they're not what I dominantly talk about, David. You're taking things that over a course of a 20-year career and pulling out quotes from difference speeches on, on issues that are fairly tangential, not what people care about mostly in America, and saying, "Oh, he wants to impose those values." Look at my record. I've never wanted to impose any of the things that you've just talked about. These are, these are my personal held religious beliefs, and in many forums that I, that, that are, in fact, religious, because I do speak in front of church groups and I do speak in these areas, I do talk about them. But there's no evidence at all that I, that I want to impose those values on anybody else.
There are, there are important issues that this country is, is confronted with right now and that's what I've been talking about.
This dance really has been funny to watch.
Media members like Gregory are clearly offended by Santorum's positions on social issues, and are constantly complaining that this is all he talks about.
Yet if you as the interviewer don't want to discuss such matters with your guest, all you have to do is not ask him about that which you find offensive.
Seems pretty simple, doesn't it?
But the reality is the press do want Santorum talking about such things because they believe this will help reelect President Obama.
This is twofold. First, they believe his social positions disqualify him with a large percentage of Americans.
Polls don't necessarily reflect that, but it's beside the point because that's what these folks think.
Secondly, by focusing so much attention on these matters, Santorum can be painted as a one trick pony.
Although social issues weren't exclusively the topics discussed with Gregory, we have seen numerous times in recent weeks such interviews be totally dominated by them.
Clearly the media must believe this will be Santorum's Achilles heal in the end.
Associate Editor’s note: As you are likely aware, since the financial collapse of 2008, charities and non-profit organizations have seen a sharp reduction in donations. Although the environment has improved, contributions are still nowhere near where they were prior to the recession. Unfortunately, the Media Research Center has not been immune. With this in mind, your support has become more important than ever. With a critical election approaching, the liberal media needs to be monitored 24/7. As we have been predicting for months, the press are willing to do anything to get their beloved politicians elected and/or reelected. As such, we need your help to fight this fight. Any contribution, even $10, is greatly appreciated. Please consider a tax-deductible gift to the Media Research Center to help us battle the liberal media. Thank you.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
I like Santorum well enough...
Submitted by NeoKong on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:09pm.
But he seriously needs to learn how to handle an excitable attack interview.
Gregory was practically peeing himself and Santorum could have easily made him look the fool.
⇒ Exactly, Kong
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:20pm.
He should have brought up Church of Obama's theology which raises envy to a virtue.
the look of "gotcha" on that
Submitted by WarEagle66 on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 12:51am.
the look of "gotcha" on that punk's face at the end of his diatribe just shows him to be a complete jagoff.
but santorum has to expect much more of this.....
the left wing media is chicken brained
Submitted by humanzee on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:29pm.
They tried crucifying Bush for his social conservatism when they ran Kerry against him and it failed horribly. They tried to hang Bush in 2000 for saying Jesus influenced his decisions and he edged out Gore in Florida.
The GOP started losing congress over the Iraq War, economic issues. The constant barrage of anti-war propaganda and the linking of the war with the economic downturn helped the Democrats. The media pounded on Iraq every minute, every day, every week, every month, every year. The constant barrage of anti-war propaganda broke down those psychological barriers.
If the the Democrats attack Santorum like they attacked Bush in 2000 and 2004 on his social conservatism... they'll lose.
The media tends to think more people think like them than actually do.
Campaigning on crushing Iran is a losing issue for the GOP. 2012 is all about internal issues. Toughness on Iran should be something addressed softly and it should only be used to showcase Obama's weakness on defense.
Economy, affirmative action, political correctness.... these are all issues tied to each other. Whites who find it hard to find a job will see that in a bad economy this could screw them over. The Supreme Court will make affirmative action a big issue later in the year. The country is decaying and many people feel it. Long gone are the days of cheap gasoline, wall street is desperate to insulate itself from the decline around it.
People see those Dow Jones numbers and they mean nothing to them. It's like the country is becoming a secular Saudi Arabia, where the oil riches don't seem to trickle down to opportunities for everyone else.
If Santorum manages to win the bible belt over, being a Pennsylvania Catholic... he has to be the nominee.
I don't think Obama can make this election about Santorum's social conservatism. If Santorum gets the left wing sideshow freaks to foam at the mouth and compromise themselves... that's a good thing.
Whoever if the GOP nominee has to go through a short training process to get them into the mentality of hating the media. It seems many members of the GOP don't have time to notice how hostile the mainstream media is to them... with the exception of Newt Gingrich.
Gen X-Gen Y isn't totally dominant yet. I don't feel good about people born in 1970s+. Seems like the people who are tailor made to be at the driver seat of mega societal decline while the jackals, tigers, leopards abroad build up their own countries.
Baby boomer libs screwed up things a lot. Gen X - Gen Y... don't seem to understand the responsibilities of power. They seem like the generations that will be fooled into giving away the keys to American dominance.
Dear Dick Gregory,
Submitted by stratman on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:31pm.
I've gone back years when you've been in public life and you have made being a jackass a centerpiece of your public life.
Sincerely,
American
* Good answer from Santorum. Good job dialing down emotions.
Exactly!
Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:45pm.
Using Gregory's theory, if he were being interviewed the first question would be obvious.
Interviewer: "Mr. Gregory, since you spend so much time there, does President Obama's butt smell good?"
⇒ Gregory's reply
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:51pm.
Gregory - "I haven't brushed and flossed yet. Would you like to smell my breath?"
Exactly - LOL
Submitted by stratman on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 9:07pm.
You're right. Gregory's got the "zactlys".
as if they admire Reagan's
Submitted by TruthMonger on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:33pm.
as if they admire Reagan's approach to politics - hilarious
little do they seem to know that Santorums social views rep the vast majority in this country
Congratulations Jimmy Carter!
There was a headline on HotAir earlier about the
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:33pm.
Santorum "opposition of the separation between church and state" manufactured crisis, once again created by the media. And like you'd expect to see on DKos or HuffPo, the statists surfaced and began blasting Santorum for being a religious zealot, bound to impose his religious beliefs on all Americans. It's ludicrous.
First, it's ludicrous for these people in opposition to Santorum on these grounds to call themselves Conservatives- they're not. If you're reading this and oppose a Santorum presidency largely or solely because you think he'll in some way turn our "democracy" into a theocracy- you're not a Conservative. You're agreeing with secularists that religious people have no place in government. You look down on people of faith. You're a progressive.
Second, were Santorum to impose his religious beliefs on all Americans, or somehow create a theocracy of your beloved democracy, you're assuming a presidency with more power than even Obama has amassed. Why would you assume that? By what avenue would a GOP president impose the Christian version of Sharia? You're assigning a notion created by the media to Rick Santorum that you'd be blasted by the very same media for assigning to radical Islamists.
Most of us here have agreed that any of the four candidates would be better than Obama; which is saying a lot because Ron Paul is not even remotely viable as a GOP candidate under any other circumstance. And yet by agreeing with the notion that Santorum represents the transition of Washington DC from Chicago on the Potomac to the Vatican you're buying into this media-manufactured crisis designed to scare independents. That's all this is. And you're falling for it.
You have every right to not support Rick Santorum for a variety of reasons. But if you oppose him solely on this issue, you're displaying a great deal of misplaced fear. Get in line with progressives stocking up on condoms and birth control pills if you like, but that line has a commonality about it that real Conservatives should be embarrassed to condone.
Full disclosure: I'm supporting Rick Santorum because I believe he has the integrity to repel the ineveitable attempts to corrupt him, from within and without. I see this level of character in him that I fear is missing from the other candidates. His religion, as is that of the the other three GOP candidates and the idiot currently residing in the White House, is immaterial. I am not a Catholic. I currently practice no religion.
bkeyser
Submitted by amyshulk on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 5:24am.
I'm in for whomever gets the nod - down ticket is where my primary focus is.
That said, the msm, while wildly successful in foisting O on an uninformed/misled populace last go round, will find they tipped their hand and people will either tune them out and sit it out, or they will dig deeper so as not to get burned again.
I remember thinking that O was a bad idea, but perhaps the silver lining was that a D president could accomplish what an R could not - ie: entitlement reform. Little did I comprehend just how invested the D's really were/are in enabling "entitlements".
Also, the D's/msm have SOME nerve trying to scare people with Santorum "bound to impose his religious beliefs on all Americans" after what O has done in name of the liberal "religion" of gaia worship!!!
Besides, I think people are ready for some decency, common sense, and *real* standards by now!!!
Ronald Reagan
Silver lining, Amy?
Submitted by KornKing on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 12:13pm.
After 30 years of hearing how the R's are going to throw gramma out in the street?
KornKing
Submitted by amyshulk on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 8:33pm.
Right - the D's/msm have ^so^ poisoned the well against R's on this issue, which is why it HAS to come from a D!
Ronald Reagan
David Gregory would make a
Submitted by kayakguy on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:36pm.
good Doctor Seuss character, a villain like charector
If it's Sunday, it's time for another Gregory chimp-out.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:37pm.
.
Is it the big brows,
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:51pm.
the pursed lips, or the pounding on the table that gives him that General Ursus quality?
It's not really that important
Submitted by MacWell on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:37pm.
Who the nominee is, I mean, anyone but Obummer, even Paul would get my support, we must defeat this America hating SOB and get him out of OUR White House. He is a disgrace to the founding fathers and to all those Americans who gave their last breath. We the people must help our next president out by starting to rid Washington DC of all the career politicians, and take back our Congress. This bunch of lawyers and thieves have had enough fun. The good old boys club is long past due to end, along with the lobby.
We the people, under the best of conditions, have a long hard road to haul. It's going to take us all, working together, to fix America. This bunch has done a lot of harm, in a short time, but it's going to take years to return America to where God meant her to be, a shining star of hope to the world.
Not ready for prime time at all....
Submitted by jdripper on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 8:40pm.
When Santorum was elected in 1990 the Soviet Union was on its last legs. Foreign policy was out of the American mindset. The economy was going strong and what was happening in foreign policy was the first war in Iraq. He was in the vanguard of bringing social issues to the front. He campaigned heavily on social issues. Prayer in school, the flag, abortion, and yes even contraception. He was elected to the Senate in the great sweep that the GOP did in 1994 and in 2000 with Bush at the top of the ticket and running against token opposition was re-elected but every time he hammered away at social issues.
He gave speeches on them. He was one of B-1 Bobs biggest confederates in regards to evolution being taught. Gregory is correct he made this bed and he made his reputation off of it.
When he was defeated in 2006 it was a slaughter. He lost ever county. He lost in every category and subset. While George Allen was losing by a handful of votes and Al Franken was being whisked into office by a box of votes found in the back seat of a Democrat election commissioner Santorum was being defeated by over 18 points. Casey even carried the pro life vote and the pro choice vote.
Santorum when the social questions are asked in polling without identifying the candidate women turn from him by the same scale they did in PA. He loses well over 60% of the women's vote. Nationally he is a blank slate, when his position is laid out the resulting numbers are catastrophic for him.
He will win at tops 15 States and there are indications that it might be in single digits. He can't win the Presidency and there is not one shred of evidence that says he can.
Jack
Hard to say right now
Submitted by GregE on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 9:39pm.
Until it's one on one with Obama, it's hard to say who would win what vs Obama. Once the nominee is set and the one on one campaigning 24/7 begins, the game changes. Ask Jimmy Carter in 1980.
I wonder what Gregory would say
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 9:02pm.
if Santorum, or any of the other GOP candidates were calling on the support of white people in a Launch of Caucasians for Santorum campaign ad? Wouldn't that be overtly racist?
Latins for Santorum!The
Submitted by humanzee on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 9:23pm.
Latins for Santorum!
The Italian is closer to Hispanics genetically and culturally than the half black Obama.
Santorum, Lionel Messi, Cristoval Colon (Columbus)....Latin union. Hispanics for Santorum. It could work. He has a name Hispanics can pronounce correctly. Santorum means...saintly?
Whoever trashes on Santorum does it because he's Latin. They're all racists!
Someone needs to spoof it.......
Submitted by GregE on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 9:35pm.
.........using the exact wording, except changing "African American" to "white"..............then stand back and watch the calls of racism on just the white one.
Some people are so brainwashed, they'd literally see the one as racist and Obama's as not.
I received an email once from someone about a "Minority Engineer Project" looking for engineers. I asked her if one called "White Engineer Project" would be discrimination and if "Minority Engineer Project" was discrimination. I asked in two questions. The first she said yes, the second she said no. And she didn't think twice about those answers, and proceeded to argue vehemently when challenged, none of it making any sense other than she's brainwashed.
A lot of Republicans got
Submitted by humanzee on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 9:10pm.
A lot of Republicans got booted in 2006 because of the anti-war hysteria. Democrats finally got the propaganda to hurt, they tied it into high energy prices and economic woes.
The middle east in general is what is politically toxic now.
Look at the appeal of Ron Paul to some in the left.
The number of people who feel strongly about promoting social liberalism and demonizing conservatives is exaggerated. Look at the failure of imposing gay marriage by popular vote in states like California. You have to be a severely brainwashed liberal from California to really fear Santorum.
Santorum did not lose for being a "bible thumper." He lost because the Democrats successfully made him a whipping boy for GW Bush, economic woes, rising energy prices, etc.
It's kind of funny that things got even worse when Democrats gained even more power.
I would have preferred Perry but Santorum is the only one left that passes the social conservative litmus tests.
.
David knew.......
Submitted by GregE on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 9:12pm.
He knew that that question was going to have Santorum replying as he did, because look how quickly Gregory jumped, and how hard he jumped, and the smirk on his face as he was doing it. He knew the reply, and he was ready to pounce on it. He didn't care about the question itself.
Yes And More
Submitted by stratman on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 9:47pm.
Gregory asked a false question.
I don't see a difference between the two choices he gives Santorum. Both are couched as pejoratives and each sounds suspiciously like the other but using different words. It was a Sophie's Choice question designed to trap Santorum into supporting either nasty propagandistic premise. Good on Rick for not taking the bait from the quisling master baiter Gregory.
My interpretation of Gregory's question:
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 9:54pm.
Senator, are you going to verbally abuse your wife or beat her?
Santorum/ Gregory
Submitted by kilrod on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 10:26pm.
I watched "Meet the Shills" this morning. Santorum held his own and had Gregory backing off. I think Santorum did a dam good job. The round table later was nothing but a hatchett job on Santorum with Schimdt and Parker shilling right in.
kilrod "the Birther"
If an unborn child cannot trust you, why should I,??
Why didn't he ask Gregory a few questions?
Submitted by drsamherman on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 11:32pm.
Like:
1) With gas prices rising, why are you so obsessed with my personally held religious beliefs?
2) Why do you keep openly campaigning for Obama?
3) Where do you get off lecturing anyone about morals?
4) Why don't you admit your a damned poor substitute for Tim Russert?
5) Just how badly are you addicted to meth now?
6) Are you still on the "down low" with Obama?
Rick is doing great!
Submitted by Scottyb4292 on Sun, 02/26/2012 - 11:38pm.
I seriously disagree with you, NeoKong.
Santorum actually DID make Gregory look the fool that he is right here in this very clip.
Didn't you see that s*** eating grin get wiped off Gregory's face when Rick slapped him down with the facts?
Santorum is very brave, very courageous in his fight. Anyone should be able to see this. And then, a simple comparison to Mitt Romney's style can leave no doubt who our candidate should be: Rick Santorum.
The other day, Romney said this typical lame bite: "We don't have a communication problem in this country. We have a leadership problem."
Who the heck thunk that piece of milquetoast up?
The candidates need to be briefed on their interviewers
Submitted by GW on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 12:17pm.
I would LOVE for a candidate to come back with a response like,
"Do you see what you're doing? In 2008, your show had XX million viewers. Now, it's down to XX million viewers, a drop of XX%. Questions like that are driving your viewers to Fox. What do you think you should be doing differently to get those viewers back?"
Ink Blot Test
Submitted by Pilgrim1949 on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 3:52pm.
Like the old joke about the patient's response to the ink blots the psychiatrist was showing him,
"Well, you're the one showing me all the dirty pictures!"
"Ye canne change the laws of physics....." but some politicians believe that with the right legislation you can pretend they don't really apply to your own pet projects...
A favorite trick of the Left media when interviewing someone on
Submitted by Rush Fan on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 11:50pm.
the Right is to completely ignore the answer to a question they've asked, and than restate the question fallaciously.
A perfect example is the same Meet the Press interview with Rick Santorum regarding education:
MR. GREGORY: So you're going after Romney and Paul, but you're certainly keeping your sights set on President Obama, as well. And you spoke this weekend about higher education. I want to play a portion of that.
FMR. SEN. SANTORUM: Yeah.
MR. GREGORY: And ask you a question about it.
(Videotape, yesterday)
FMR. SEN. SANTORUM: President Obama once said, said he wants everybody in America to go to college. What a snob. There are good, decent men and women who go out and work hard every day and put their skills to test that aren't taught by some liberal college professor and trying to indoctrinate them. Well, I understand why he wants you to go to college, he wants to remake you in his image. (End videotape)
MR. GREGORY: What does that mean, Senator?
FMR. SEN. SANTORUM: Well, I mean, Barack Obama is a, is, is a person of the left. He's someone who believes in big government and believes in the values that, unfortunately, are the dominant values and political values and overly politicized values and politically correct values that, that are on most colleges and university campuses. And what I've said is that, you know, I, I want everyone to have the opportunity to go to college or any other higher, higher level of training skills. [...] But it doesn't mean you have to go to a four-year college degree. And, and, and the president saying that everyone should, I think everyone should have the opportunity. The question is, you know, what, what, what is best for you? That's what this country's got to be about...
MR. GREGORY: Right. But...
FMR. SEN. SANTORUM: ...is making sure we have opportunities for everybody and their dreams.
MR. GREGORY: But your, your vision for America is that, that you, you shouldn't have that opportunity, you shouldn't be encouraged to do it? Isn't the reality in this economy that the unemployment rate among college educated folks is only 4 percent. That's the reality. I mean, is that your vision for America... mm