Presidential candidate, Rick Santorum, has been greatly inconvenienced by the “aspirin tablet between the knees” joke by his own private millionaire, Foster Friess. First, he assumed a victim stance. Then, after all his rhetoric against birth control in recent weeks, Santorum actually tried to present himself as a birth control supporter. One has to wonder if he took lessons from Romney.
Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum took a page from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s playbook on Friday and lashed out at CBS News for asking him about a major supporter who dismissed the need for contraception by saying women could put an aspirin “between their knees.”
“This is someone who is a supporter of mine and I’m not responsible for every comment a supporter of mine makes,” the candidate told CBS host Charlie Rose. “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.”
“Nobody said you were responsible,” Rose explained. “They said, how would you characterize it and what had you said to him, not that you were responsible? It’s to understand how you differ from what this person said.”
“This is what you guys do,” Santorum charged. “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,” he continued. “This is what you’re pulling off, and I’m going to call you on it.”
Rose noted that as late as last October, the former Pennsylvania senator had said birth control was “not OK”… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Raw Story>
Here’s the video.
That’s so many lies, it proves he Republican!
That’s so many lies, it proves he Republican!
That’s so many lies, it proves he Republican!
Ed Schultz adds far more depth in interviews with Jan Shakowsky (D-IL) and Terry O’Neill, and more on the Republican War on Women.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
I hope they keep it up, because it demonstrates just how destructive to freedom Republican big, intrusive government would be. All support personhood, where an absolute right to life begins at conception and ends at birth. Consider how much more Republicans will overreach if they get the White House.
18 Responses to “Santorum Froths Lies Over Millionaire’s Remarks”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Didn’t Rick Perry have a similar problem? Then Newty! And now Sanctomonious Santorum! Poor little boys having those supporting them coming out with some outrageous verbage!
My mother taught me that the more you lie, the harder it is to keep the lies straight — you know, who you told what and when. Eventually you get to the point that you no longer know what is lie and what is truth. When that happens, you implode.
I believe that during that 1st video with the CBS Morning Show, Santorum is in the midst of an implosion and he is ranting on and trying to cover his ass. But that is all it is — a bearly coherent rant! and fortunately the interviewer tried to call him on it. Santorum just looked like the lying SOB that he is.
And did you notice that Foster Friess, Santorum’s benefactor, wears a sweater vest. Maybe that’s who got Santorum into sweater vests.
Lynn, the list of all Republican candidates that do not have an issue with lying is between these brackets: [ ]
I think so too. The attack was a stall.
I did not. Interesting observation.
I don’t know why my utertus is such a big deal to Repub men right now; it hasn’t been for years now. If you don’t want to use birth control (get an abortion etc.), then don’t. I don’t need some man telling me what my rights are with respect of my utertus. Screw that! Margaret and Helen have a great column on this – go read it from the sidebar.
Thanks Lisa. They believe that freedom of religion rests with the church, not the individual.
I don’t understand why he said nobody went after Pres. Obama about the pastor’s racist remaks. He was crucified for them and had to distance himself from the man. I see no double standard there.
He said it, because the truth would not support his argument, so he lied.
I thought Foster Friess was a Batman villain. Instead, he’s just a villain. We definitely need Batman.
Marva, the best I can offer is a Catman! 😉
Thanks, Irene. If memory serves I referenced that one a while back.
Since Frothy Ricky seems to have a problem with spelling, I think we should all help him out and connect the dots for him …
Dang, Nameless! Now you have insulted idiots. 😉
Three things I know for certain after voting for over 45 years: 1. The media has done a really great job of slating the news so that our Presidents always seem to be responsible for the problems of the country, when in fact its the House and Senate that load up bills with things the country really needs, and things that ought to be vetoed, and then hands them to the President sort of daring him to veto the bad things so they can say he vetoed the good things. 2. As much as I want to see the size of government reduced, and the removal of quite a few departments within the government, I don’t think its going to happen. 3. I so want to see the President, Senate and House replaced in 2012 with a very aggressive and conservative government, but I don’t believe the conservatives have anyone who can beat Obama, and the majority of liberal House and Senate incumbents will get reelected. If you don’t think government is intrusive and expensive now, wait another five years and see what we have.
Welcome A1A. 🙂
I agree with your first point, up to a point, but that has been more the case when a Democrat has been office. On point 2, I agree that it is not likely for government agencies to be gutted to that extent. We differ on point three, because we had a very conservative President and Congress during the first six years of the Bush Regime, which did more to make to make government more expensive and intrusive that it had ever been before. For more sane government, the Republican party must go the way of the Whig Party.
After they get settled in office and they are not campaigning anymore, after the newly elected get used to the back room compromises, I don’t see a heck of a lot of differences between the Republicans and the Democrats. Its like the same meal from two different restaurants, its still the same meal. I don’t care if the Republican party goes the way of the Whig Party or the Democrats go the way of the Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels party, I just want to see American government reduced in size so that the people own it, not the government owning the people. I for one believe the strong will survive and the weak will die off and a country becomes stronger for it.
What matters is not the size of the government, but whom the government represents. Realistically we have two choices in November. Fairly good or infinitely bad.
I see it like this: The size of the government matters because when a government has become as overgrown as our present day government then its represents itself first, not you and I. I hardly need to give examples of our government representing itself first, I believe its commonly understood by everyone. And realistically we do have two choices in November, fraudulent and incompetent. I look at the incompetence we have elected in both the executive and legislative branches and I wonder which incompetent frauds we will elect next. We cannot do worse than we have right now.
I agree. Things like moving the government into women’s relationships’ with doctors and gay people’s relationships are two excellent examples. But government still needs to be big enough to do it’s job. Your vision of gutted government is the other extreme.