Tuesday, November 22. 2005
Chris Cillizza at The Fix has the video of the Americans for Job Security pro-Santorum ad that we told you about yesterday. Scroll to the bottom of Chris' post to watch the ad.
And don't forget to call the phone number at the end of the ad, 717-231-7540, to say thanks to Rick "for getting it done."
Monday, November 21. 2005
Will Bunch has written a piece on Rick Santorum for the December/January issue of Mother Jones. The main thrust of the article is that Rick, while outspoken on many social issues, actually spends a large amount of his time and energy helping corporate America. Rick also seems to concentrate his help on those corporations that have given him contributions, like Walmart and Outback Steakhouse.
One interesting revelation from the piece is that Rick has voted by absentee ballot (presumably from Virginia) in 14 of the last 21 elections. Here's an excerpt:
Indeed, while Santorum has become perhaps the Senate’s most outspoken member on hot-button social issues such as abortion and gay rights, much of his day-to-day work involves matters of interest to corporate America. This year has been typically busy. Santorum authored a bill that would relax overtime regulations and exempt numerous businesses from minimum-wage rules, a move particularly dear to the restaurant industry (thus the Outback Steakhouses event). He sponsored measures aiding campaign contributors, such as the private weather company AccuWeather (which would benefit from Santorum’s proposed privatization of the National Weather Service); the fire-sprinkler industry; beer brewers; and the tomato grower Procacci Brothers, which is being accused of migrant-housing violations in Florida. And he has been pushing hard for Wal-Mart’s agenda, which includes tort reform and changes in overtime rules—Wal-Mart faces a slew of lawsuits over sex discrimination and alleged overtime violations—as well as reform of charitable giving laws and a permanent repeal of the estate tax, which would benefit the billionaire heirs of Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton. Wal-Mart’s political action committee gave $10,000, the maximum allowable PAC donation, to Santorum in 2004, plus another $10,000 to Santorum’s PAC.
Today's edition of the Hotline reports that an organization named Americans for Job Security is running television ads touting Rick Santorum in every Pennsylvania media market except Philadelphia. The organization has reportedly spent about $450 thousand on its ad buy.
So what is Americans for Job Security and why do they like Rick so much? Here's how OpenSecrets.org describes the group: "A pro-Republican, pro-business organization, Virginia-based AJS was established to directly counter labor's influence." And here's a recent description from the Texas Observer:
Meanwhile Nelson had co-founded the GOP media shop Dawson McCarthy Nelson Media (DMNM) in 2001. Among the clients claimed on DMNM’s website is Americans for Job Security (AJS), a shadowy Virginia-based group that the American Insurance Association helped launch in 1997 by supplying $1 million in seed money. AJS takes out attack ads against liberal and moderate candidates nationwide without disclosing its political contributions or expenditures. This track record of spending large quantities of undisclosed funds on attack ads has fostered the perception that AJS is a for-hire corporate attack dog. Last year Austin-based Campaigns for People filed a complaint with Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, urging him to investigate if AJS violated Texas’ prohibition on corporate electioneering. At issue were 2003 attack ads that AJS unleashed to help defeat moderate Tommy Merritt in the Republican primary for a vacated senate seat in 2003 (“Meet the Attack Dogs,” March 12, 2004).
We'll try to post the video of the ad as soon as we can get a hold of it. Stay tuned.
Friday, November 18. 2005
Are you surprised? We didn't think so.
From the Associated Press:
Sen. Rick Santorum said Friday he was impressed with Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito after a closed-door meeting with him in his Senate office.
The conservative Pennsylvania senator said he did not ask about specific issues - including abortion - because "I don't think that's what's important."
"What is important is the judge's philosophy," said Santorum, the No. 3 Senate Republican. "It is absolutely consistent where I think a majority of Americans are, which is judges are to apply the law, not make the law."
Wednesday, November 16. 2005
A Strategic Vision poll released today shows Rick Santorum with his lowest job approval and highest disapproval numbers yet. 38% of respondents approve of Rick's performance, while 48% disapprove.
Since October 6th, Rick's approval rating has dropped 5 percentage points and his disapproval rating has risen by 7 points. Here are the numbers:
14. Do you approve or disapprove of United States Senator Rick Santorum's job performance?
Approve 38%
Disapprove 48%
Undecided 14%
Tuesday, November 15. 2005
On Monday the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette asked Rick Santorum about the ethical implications of his role as leader of the K Street Project, in which he has worked with such paragons of virtue as Tom Delay and Jack Abramoff. Here's how the Post-Gazette describes his response:
But Mr. Santorum said yesterday that his regular meetings with the lobbying groups are part of his leadership role as the Senate's third-ranking Republican. He described the meetings as a way to inform influential groups who can filter the Republican message out to clients to help achieve Republicans' goals.
While job candidates are discussed, Mr. Santorum said, "there is no pressure to put Republicans in those roles, period -- no pressure. ... I absolutely abhor that."
"The K Street project is purely to make sure we have qualified applicants for positions that are in town," Mr. Santorum said. "From my perspective, it's a good government thing."
In case you are unfamiliar with the K Street Project or you need your memory refreshed, here's how the Washington Monthly described the Project and Rick's involvement in it:
...But there's one confirmation hearing you won't hear much about. It's convened every Tuesday morning by Rick Santorum, the junior senator from Pennsylvania, in the privacy of a Capitol Hill conference room, for a handpicked group of two dozen or so Republican lobbyists. Occasionally, one or two other senators or a representative from the White House will attend. Democrats are not invited, and neither is the press.
"The chief purpose of these gatherings is to discuss jobs--specifically, the top one or two positions at the biggest and most important industry trade associations and corporate offices centered around Washington's K Street, a canyon of nondescript office buildings a few blocks north of the White House that is to influence-peddling what Wall Street is to finance. In the past, those people were about as likely to be Democrats as Republicans, a practice that ensured K Street firms would have clout no matter which party was in power. But beginning with the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994, and accelerating in 2001, when George W. Bush became president, the GOP has made a determined effort to undermine the bipartisan complexion of K Street. And Santorum's Tuesday meetings are a crucial part of that effort. Every week, the lobbyists present pass around a list of the jobs available and discuss whom to support. Santorum's responsibility is to make sure each one is filled by a loyal Republican--a senator's chief of staff, for instance, or a top White House aide, or another lobbyist whose reliability has been demonstrated. After Santorum settles on a candidate, the lobbyists present make sure it is known whom the Republican leadership favors. "The underlying theme was [to] place Republicans in key positions on K Street. Everybody taking part was a Republican and understood that that was the purpose of what we were doing," says Rod Chandler, a retired congressman and lobbyist who has participated in the Santorum meetings. "It's been a very successful effort." It seems to involve giving as much power as possible, in both the public and private sectors, to his Republican cronies.
Saturday, November 12. 2005
President Bush was in Pennsylvania yesterday giving a Veterans Day speech at the Tobyhanna Army Depot. Rick Santorum was invited to attend the president's speech, but did not due to what he termed a scheduling conflict.
While Bush was in Tobyhanna, Santorum was delivering a speech to American Legion members at the Union League in Philadelphia. After his speech, Rick took the opportunity to place partial blame for the unpopularity of the war in Iraq on the White House.
However, Rick wanted to make sure that no one thought that, by not attending the presidential visit to Pennsylvania and blaming administration mistakes for the low approval of the Iraq war, he was trying to distance himself from President Bush. Here's how the Allentown Morning Call put it:
Sen. Rick Santorum took a rare swing Friday at President Bush, saying the war in Iraq has been less than optimal and that some blame for that lies with the White House.
Santorum, a conservative Republican and usually a strong Bush ally, said the unpopularity of the war should be shared between the White House and the media.
"Certainly, mistakes were made," Santorum said of the war's conduct. "But that's a criticism you can make of every conflict."
The comments, made after a Veterans Day speech at the Union League in Philadelphia, came at the same time the Pennsylvania senator stressed he wasn't trying to distance himself from the president, who spoke moments earlier about 80 miles away at the Tobyhanna Army Depot.
Bush's poll numbers are the lowest of any time during his presidency, in part due to the climbing death toll in Iraq...
Now, knowing all of that, why would anyone suspect that Rick Santorum was trying to put some distance between himself and President Bush?
Friday, November 11. 2005
ABC's Primetime finds Rick Santorum to be somewhat hypocritical when it comes to lawsuits. Here's the story:
Lawsuit Abuse Critic Explains SuitSenator's Wife Sued a Chiropractor for $500,000, Was Awarded $350,000 by Jury
Nov. 10, 2005 — - In recent years many doctors and politicians have complained that frivolous malpractice lawsuits and disproportionate jury awards are a problem in need of reform.
But when "Primetime" did some investigating, it turned out that at least some of the people in favor of reform -- even some of its loudest proponents -- have themselves benefited from the current laws.
The Senator's Wife
Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., says that the No. 1 health care crisis in his state is medical lawsuit abuse and in the past he's called for a $250,000 cap on non-economic damage awards or awards for pain and suffering. "We need to do something now to fix the medical liability problem in this country," he declared at a rally in Washington D.C., this past spring.
But Santorum's wife sued a doctor for $500,000 in 1999. She claimed that a botched spinal manipulation by her chiropractor led to back surgery, pain and suffering, and sued for twice the amount of a cap Santorum has supported.
Santorum declined a request for an interview, so "Primetime" caught up with him at the signing of his new book in Pennsylvania this August to ask if he thinks his stance and history are in conflict.
"I guess I could answer that in two ways," he said. "Number one is that I've supported caps. I've been very clear that I am not wedded at all to a $250,000 cap and I've said publicly repeatedly, and I think probably that is somewhat low, and that we need to look at what I think is a cap that is a little bit higher than that."
'Of Course I'm Going to Support My Wife'
But the fact is that Santorum has sponsored or co-sponsored a $250,000 cap on non-economic damages two times -- even though he testified in his wife's case against the doctor.
"Of course I'm going to support my wife in her endeavors," he said. "That doesn't necessarily mean that I agree with everything that she does."
But Santorum agreed enough to tell the jury that he had to carry the laundry upstairs for his wife and that, because she suffered humiliation from weight gain, she no longer had the confidence to help him on the campaign trail. The jury was so moved it voted to award Karen Santorum $350,000.
"That's where again you're misled is that a lot of, there was cumulative damages," he said. "The medical bills, lost income, all those other things that were out there."
Those medical bills totaled $18,800, yet she sued for $500,000. And lost income? The judge made no mention of that when he slashed the jury's award in half, saying it was excessive.
The judge noted that the remaining damages "awarded amounted to something in the neighborhood of $330,000 or so for injuries sustained and the effect upon Mrs. Santorum's health, her past and future pain and suffering and inconvenience."
Wednesday, November 9. 2005
On MSNBC's Countdown Tuesday night Keith Olbermann and Andy Borowitz discussed Scooter Libby's novel The Apprentice, which apparently involves numerous references to bestiality -- including one episode involving a bear. During their conversation, Borowitz gave Olbermann his (obviously satirical) take on Rick Santorum's view of man-bear marriage. Here's the video:
Wednesday, November 2. 2005
WHOA. We're not sure where to even begin with this one. Rick Santorum called in unannounced to Imus today after Imus apparently referred to Rick as a "suit dummy." Rick wanted to refute Imus' characterization of him. We don't believe he was successful. Here's the audio of a large chunk of the interview. In the clip Rick does the following: - Says Libby, Cheney and Chalabi are all honest and didn't lie.
- Claims Joe Wilson is a liar.
- Says the CIA has a grudge against Chalabi and tried to destroy him.
- Snaps out on Imus for challenging his claims (a recurring theme we've discussed before).
- Compares not being able to safely drive from the Baghdad Airport into Baghdad today to conditions in Philadelphia in 1778 - to which, Imus points out there was no airport in Philadelphia then.
- Says that Imus' wife called him and said she wanted to "do a threesome."
- Calls Bill Frist, "a really decent, honorable man."
Besides pointing out the problem with Rick's comparison of Baghdad to Philadelphia in 1778, Imus has at least two great lines during the interview. Almost 5 minutes into the audio clip, in response to Rick's analysis of the situation in Iraq Imus says, "you have an IV of the neo-con Kool-Aid, don't you?" One minute later in the clip Imus accuses Rick of being "so misguided it's almost disturbing." "Suit dummy" sounds much nicer in comparison.
|
