The Brett Lieberman Fund
Anyone seen signs lately that all is not going well in the Santorum re-election campaign?
I'm thinking of the incident Saturday at a meeting of Republican State Committee, held as sort of a pre-election pep rally for GOP stalwarts. Enter Sen. Rick Santorum.
According to Editor & Publisher, a newspaper trade magazine, here is what happened next:
Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA), in a bruising race for re-election, slammed a Pennsylvania newspaper -- literally -- this weekend.
The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pa., reports that Santorum, who trails Democrat Robert Casey in most polls, referred to his "rocky relations with the press" as he moved from room to room to attend regional caucuses earlier at a GOP state committee meeting in a hotel in East Pennsboro.
Later he refused to talk when a Patriot-News reporter, Brett Lieberman, approached with a question about Iran -- and again complained about what he called biased coverage.
"I have to raise tens of millions of dollars because of the junk you feed the people of Pennsylvania," he said, according to the paper. It added that he "then used an expletive to describe the coverage and slammed down a newspaper."
What was the expletive? The E&P does not say. I'm guessing it rhymes with fit.
Santorum apparently was unhappy with Lieberman's coverage of the first Santorum-Casey debate, which -- the reporter opined -- Casey won. Lieberman is the Patriot's Washington reporter.
I think it is fundamentally unfair for Santorum to blame Lieberman for the "junk" that has forced him to go out and raise $10 million to counter.
I think we are all to blame.
Who among us had not written something that has put the senator in a bad light? His guts-and-glory support of the Iraq War. His keep-them-barefoot-and-pregnant views on the gentler sex. His famous "man on dog" comment. His K Street Days. His residency problems. The whole cyber-school brouhaha.
We've been there. We've done that.
I myself have had numerous transgressions, writing about the Santorum "wacko factor" and calling him "one of the finest minds of the 13th Century."
I could go on. No wonder he is furious at us media jackals.
The thing is, I don't think Brett Lieberman should bear the brunt of the Santorum ire.
We should all chip in.
My suggestion is simple: If every reporter in Pennsylvania contributed $300 each, we could raise close to $10 million. This would go a long way to reimbursing the senator for all the grief we have given him.
So, I am calling on all reporters -- at radio & TV stations, the wires and newspapers large and small (except the Greensburg Tribune-Review) to make a $300 contribution to the Santorum campaign.
In the memo field of your check simply write:
I'm sorry, Senator. I couldn't help myself.
It would go a long way to easing his pain.
Please, write that check today.
P.S. It's been suggested that you can save up your blank taxi slips and expense the contribution as cab rides over the next couple months. Also, try "lunch with source," for some of it. Plus a few bucks here and there for "Parking & Tolls."
I'm thinking of the incident Saturday at a meeting of Republican State Committee, held as sort of a pre-election pep rally for GOP stalwarts. Enter Sen. Rick Santorum.
According to Editor & Publisher, a newspaper trade magazine, here is what happened next:
Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA), in a bruising race for re-election, slammed a Pennsylvania newspaper -- literally -- this weekend.
The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pa., reports that Santorum, who trails Democrat Robert Casey in most polls, referred to his "rocky relations with the press" as he moved from room to room to attend regional caucuses earlier at a GOP state committee meeting in a hotel in East Pennsboro.
Later he refused to talk when a Patriot-News reporter, Brett Lieberman, approached with a question about Iran -- and again complained about what he called biased coverage.
"I have to raise tens of millions of dollars because of the junk you feed the people of Pennsylvania," he said, according to the paper. It added that he "then used an expletive to describe the coverage and slammed down a newspaper."
What was the expletive? The E&P does not say. I'm guessing it rhymes with fit.
Santorum apparently was unhappy with Lieberman's coverage of the first Santorum-Casey debate, which -- the reporter opined -- Casey won. Lieberman is the Patriot's Washington reporter.
I think it is fundamentally unfair for Santorum to blame Lieberman for the "junk" that has forced him to go out and raise $10 million to counter.
I think we are all to blame.
Who among us had not written something that has put the senator in a bad light? His guts-and-glory support of the Iraq War. His keep-them-barefoot-and-pregnant views on the gentler sex. His famous "man on dog" comment. His K Street Days. His residency problems. The whole cyber-school brouhaha.
We've been there. We've done that.
I myself have had numerous transgressions, writing about the Santorum "wacko factor" and calling him "one of the finest minds of the 13th Century."
I could go on. No wonder he is furious at us media jackals.
The thing is, I don't think Brett Lieberman should bear the brunt of the Santorum ire.
We should all chip in.
My suggestion is simple: If every reporter in Pennsylvania contributed $300 each, we could raise close to $10 million. This would go a long way to reimbursing the senator for all the grief we have given him.
So, I am calling on all reporters -- at radio & TV stations, the wires and newspapers large and small (except the Greensburg Tribune-Review) to make a $300 contribution to the Santorum campaign.
In the memo field of your check simply write:
I'm sorry, Senator. I couldn't help myself.
It would go a long way to easing his pain.
Please, write that check today.
P.S. It's been suggested that you can save up your blank taxi slips and expense the contribution as cab rides over the next couple months. Also, try "lunch with source," for some of it. Plus a few bucks here and there for "Parking & Tolls."
posted by Tom Ferrick Jr. at 5:04 PM
9 Comments:
Tom -- good job with this one. Sorry I am unable to donate to help Rick at this time. (G)
Suggest readers check out Brett Lieberman's blog at http://www.pennlive.com/politics/patriotnews/pennsyltucky/
It is another daily must read for me.
If Leiberman thinks Casey won that first debate, he must be the only one in PA to say so.
I watched.
Casey won on style points. Measured, sincere and thoughtful vs. manic, angry and bombastic.
No doubt Casey won, so that makes at least two of us who saw it that way. And I think several million more will make themselves known on Nov. 7.
Better yet simply charge it to your charity.
Gee, if he's that hard on Lieberman I'd better stay way clear of the Senator!
Casey won b/c he beat expectations and did what he needed to do. Santorum lost b/c he failed to pin Casey into a corner.
But as everybody who reported on the debate said, the real winner in terms of substance and style was Tim Russert. The dude did his homework.
Tommy, Tommy, Tommy. Another anti-Republican rant. Why not just drop the pretense and call this electronic space the Tom Ferrick Democrat Soapbox? These types of bolgs really do allow people to see through all the "balance" of the Inquirer columnists. You print things here that you could never get away with in the print newspaper. But this space allows us all to see your true leanings. Incredible.
Tom Ferrick's "true" leanings are that he gets it. St. Torum is what he is. You can't deny he's crumbling under the pressure and expectation of the abrupt end to his career. The St. Torum "era" in PA is almost over... thank God!
SHOCKING that St. Slick would use such language--while pointing out how desperate his Republican colleagues are to buy his re-election. Send your donations to the PA school district he and his wife Mrs. "I think I'll stay home and not overtax myself" stuck up to cyberschool his illegal alien kids.
I'm sure some people think Casey won the debate. However, far more of them just think that Santorum lost it.
Too bad we have two crappy choices in this election.
Post a Comment
<< Home