Advertisement
Call the Show 800-520-1234
LIVE: Mon-Fri, 6-9AM, ET
Hugh Hewitt Book Club
Call 800-520-1234 email Email Hugh
Hugh Hewitt Book Club

Rick Santorum and Darrell Issa

Email Email Print
Advertisement

Senator Rick Santorum and Congressman Darrell Issa are among the guests on today’s program. Transcripts of their interviews will be posted here when available.

I will discuss the outrageous assault on religious liberty launched by the president on every Catholic institution in the country with both men, and I will also be asking my callers why Mitt Romney’s statement on “the very poor” –a contrived controversy— got so much more attention than the very real outrage that is President Obama’s demand that every Catholic institution shut down or buckle under to the pro-choice absolutists in charge of his policy in this area. For background on the Obama demand, see Los Angeles Archbishop Gomez’s First Things article or Phoenix Bishop Olmsted’s letter on the subject or Philadelphia Archbishop Chaput’s comments on the new regulations.

The Santorum transcript:

HH: So pleased to begin this hour with Rick Santorum, candidate for the presidency of the United States, former United States Senator, and proud father of Bella. Rick Santorum, welcome back. I think the happiest moment last night is when you got up in front of the Nevada audience, and I was watching live on CNN, and announced that Bella was coming home from the hospital today. Has that happened?

RS: You know what? I just got out of a meeting. She was scheduled to come home later this afternoon, but there’s a, they may, because of some piece of equipment that we need to help her at night, hasn’t arrived yet from the home health care company, so she may have to stay an extra night. But she’s only staying there because of equipment, not because of her health.

HH: Well, Senator Santorum, our prayers continue to be with you and your family and with Bella. You know what’s interesting about this entire week, it’s not interesting to you, it’s drama to you and to everyone who loves you. But I think you’re illustrating that for many Americans, every single day is a day living in the American health care system, and that’s why we’ve got to preserve it.

RS: No, it’s true. I look at the American health care system, and I have always said one of the reasons I decided to run for president was because of Obamacare, and because of the government taking over health care. And I have stories from Canada and from Europe of children like my daughter, who simply are refused care because they just don’t see them as a life worth living, not a good use of government dollars, because she won’t be able to give back anything economically to the country. And that’s a tragedy. It’s a devaluing of human life. And I see that in our current health care system. [# More #]

HH: So Senator Santorum, from the health care system, let’s move backwards a bit to the campaign. Where do you see it right now in terms of your ability to move forward against Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich?

RS: You know, I actually feel pretty good. I think what happened in Florida was a signal. And as you know, Hugh, less people turned out in Florida in this election than four years ago. And that’s not a good sign. The two people who were actively campaigning in Florida were throwing mud and everything at each other obviously did not inspire a lot of folks to come out and support them. And even though Governor Romney had a good win, you know, it showed that these are not candidates that are going to rally the Republican base. And you saw from Speaker Gingrich someone who came in with a big lead.

HH: So Senator Santorum, resetting here with the cell phone issues, you did not do great in Florida last night. How do you see this campaign shaping up vis-?-vis Mitt Romney and yourself, Newt having taken it really on the chin last night?

RS: Yeah, I think that we feel very good. I mean, we’ve been doing some polling out here in Colorado, and our numbers are very strong. I don’t know if you saw the numbers out of Missouri. We’re leading Governor Romney in Missouri, we’re ahead of him in Ohio. You know, I think people are looking at the race and seeing that we don’t want a candidate that’s going to make, that’s going to have our candidate be the issue. We want Barack Obama to be the issue. We’re looking for someone who has a strong, consistent message, someone who’s got an appeal to the Reagan Democrats that we need to win this election in Ohio, and in Michigan, and in Pennsylvania. And I think as time goes on, and people look at the weakness of both candidates, both Governor Romney and Newt Gingrich, that they’re going to coalesce around me. Governor Romney’s biggest pitch to Republican primary voters are I’ve got the money and I’ve got the organization, I can win. But you know as well as I do, Hugh. He’s not going to have the money in a general election. Barack Obama’s going to have more money, and he’s going to have better organization. We’d better have better ideas and a better candidate that’s a clear contrast, or we’re not going to win. And he may have enough money to win the primary, but we’re not interested in winning the primary. We’re interested in beating Barack Obama. And that means we need a strong candidate against Obama who’s going to have him be the issue and all of his liberal failed policies.

HH: Now Rick Santorum, obviously you do need money to win against Romney. www.ricksantorum.com is running a money bomb. Have donations fallen off? Or are they continuing to be as strong as they have been since Iowa?

RS: Hugh, we had our best day yesterday. I mean, that’s almost remarkable to report.

HH: That is.

RS: But we raised a quarter of a million dollars yesterday. I mean, that’s just one of the really encouraging signs. And the neat thing was it was the smallest per dollar donation of any day we’ve had. So we had the biggest number of people contribute a huge amount of money for us. And I haven’t checked since about 9:00 this morning, but we had $60,000 dollars as of 9:00 this morning. So I think people are realizing, and they’re trying to say you know, Rick, stay in the race, hang in there. There’s a lot of other states that aren’t going to cost $20 million dollars to compete against, that are strong, principled conservatives. And we’re going to come out here and rally around you. And Newt’s had his opportunity, and now it’s time to find someone who can really defeat Romney head to head.

HH: Should Newt Gingrich bow out, Rick Santorum?

RS: I’m never going to call anybody to bow out of any race. I mean, that’s, you know, Newt feels just like I do, that this is an important election, and he’s getting in there and mixing it up as best he can. All I can say is if you look at the Florida vote, and you look at the analysis, had Newt dropped out of the race, all of his vote, almost all of it, would have gone to me. And if I dropped out of the race, almost all of it would have gone to Romney. So that just tells you that Newt, because he was the candidate that had the best chance of beating Romney, was getting a lot of votes not necessarily because of Newt, but because it was the anti-Romney vote. I think when we can solidify the position of being the anti-Romney candidate that can win, we’ll get not only the votes that may have gone to Romney, but we’ll get the votes that are clearly against him.

HH: Now I want to talk to you about two substantive issues, Senator Santorum. The first are these new regulations from the Obama administration. I read the letter from Archbishop Olmstead of Phoenix on the air. Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles has written a new article in First Things. It’s shocking, actually, what’s going on. Should this be a centerpiece of whoever the nominee’s campaign is?

RS: I talked about it in every speech I’ve given today. And here’s what I said, though, Hugh. I said that I took issue with the Catholic Bishops Conference, because Hugh, you may remember, they embraced Obamacare.

HH: Yes.

RS: They embraced it and said…here’s what I said to them. Be careful when you have government saying that they can give you rights, that you have a right to health care, and government’s going to give you something, because once you are now dependant on government, they, not only can they take that right away, they can tell you how to exercise that right, and you can either like it or not. And that’s the problem. That’s what the Catholic Bishops Conference didn’t get, that there’s no free lunch here, folks. If you’re going to give people secular power, then they’re going to use it in a secular fashion. And that’s why, you know, I hate to say it, but you know, you had it coming. And it’s time to wake up and realize that government isn’t the answer to the social ills. It’s people of faith, and it’s families, and it’s communities, and it’s charities that need to do this as it has in America so successfully for so long.

HH: Rick Santorum, what do you advise Catholic hospitals, Catholic colleges, Catholic…the centers of poverty assistance, the adoption agencies? What do you advise them to do in the face of, as Archbishop Olmstead said, we cannot comply with this unjust law?

RS: Civil disobedience. This will not stand. There’s no way they can make this stand. The Supreme Court, eventually, this thing’s going to get to the Supreme Court just like the ministerial hiring issue that was just decided by the Supreme Court the other day. And it was a 9-0 decision that said the Obama administration can’t roll over people of faith when it comes to hiring. Yet in the face of that decision, this radical, secular government of Barack Obama continues to have faith be the least important of the 1st Amendment. And I just think they fight. They fight in the courts, and they fight by civil disobedience, and go to war with the federal government over this one.

HH: Now Rick Santorum, later in the program, I’m talking with Frank Gaffney about a story that didn’t get much play. General Jerry Boykin, a great America, was dis-invited, or was actually asked by West Point to withdraw from a prayer breakfast there after opposition surfaced from CAIR. This is going on all over the country. Isn’t this…I’m actually shocked West Point did this. What’s your reaction to that?

RS: Well, on the USS Yorktown in Charleston harbor, Jerry Boykin endorsed me for president.

HH: Oh, I didn’t know that.

RS: How about that?

HH: Yeah.

RS: So I’m very proud of having his endorsement. This is a man who has spoken clearly, concisely about the threat of radical Islam. And I am not surprised given this administration who has sanitized every reference to Islam or Muslim out of every Defense Department document when it comes to the threat assessment against this country, that you would see this type of behavior from a government that is in denial as to who we’re at war with. And we’re not at war with all Muslims. But we are at war with radical Muslims, and we’d better come to grips with that, and be able to deal with it both here at home and overseas.

HH: Last question, Rick Santorum, and direct everyone to the website, www.ricksantorum.com. The F-35 is under attack. It’s the frontline aircraft of the next 30 years. What do you think we ought to do with it? How many ought we to build? And what about the Obama administration’s attempt to deplane the United States Department of Defense?

RS: It’s a budget-driven item. I mean, that’s just because the Obama administration has said that they want to continue to hack away at the Defense Department. I’ve said I’m the only candidate out there that says that I will not cut the Defense Department. We need to have the strongest military in the world. We need to have, we need to spend the money that’s necessary to defend our country, and that just doesn’t mean aircraft, but as we’ve seen in several articles recently, having, also includes our Navy, which is getting thinner and thinner and thinner with our capability of being able to patrol the waters around the world. So this is a budget-driven issue, because President Obama wants a welfare state, not a country that is forward leaning, and looking to protect their interests and grow our interests around the world.

HH: Senator Rick Santorum, thanks for joining us. We’ll check in with you again next week. www.ricksantorum.com, America, to get all the latest on Senator Santorum’s campaign, www.ricksantorum.com.

End of interview.

The Issa transcript:

HH: Joined now by Congressman Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Governmental Affairs. Chairman Issa, you’ve got Eric Holder coming up tomorrow, I see.

DI: Hugh, we sure do, and we’re looking forward to it. He’s got, as Lucille Ball said many years ago with Desi Arnaz, you’ve got some ‘splainin’ to do. And this really is an opportunity to find out if Eric Holder wants to tell us why he didn’t know what it seems like all his lieutenants knew, and why he continues to have, to be surrounded by so many people who have been shown progressively to be more and more and more involved with Fast & Furious at a level that shows they had reckless disregard for the system, and obviously for the life of Brian Terry.

HH: Mr. Chairman, I want to come back to that in just a second. I’ve got to ask you, actually, beg you to ask Eric Holder about the constitutionality of this administration’s assault on the Catholic Church, with its new regulations requiring Catholic institutions to carry coverage for birth control and day after pills, morning after pills. Are you read up on that? I was just talking with Rick Santorum about it. Every bishop in America has weighed in, and Rick just said it’s time for civil disobedience. What do you think, Darrell Issa? And will you ask Eric Holder about this?

DI: Well, we will undoubtedly be asking him a number of questions along that line, even though it’s not the main thrust, because there has been a systematic attack on faith-based people. As you know, the Catholic Charities, for a long time, was doing a wonderful job of taking care of victims of human trafficking. And that was taken away from them, because they would not explicitly provide abortion services as part of, if you will, taking care of these battered and abused women.

HH: Well, I would just like to know if he signed off on these regs, if the office of Legal Counsel signed off on these new regulations from HHS, because I think it’s a fiasco and an assault. Now back to Fast & Furious, Mr. Chairman. There was a DOJ’er who took the 5th.

DI: There was.

HH: Then he quit.

DI: And Mr. Cunningham, we’ve not finished with him, because we really, truly want to know why he’s taking the 5th with us while in fact he was apparently a more cooperating witness with the IG. And it’s one of the things we’ll be dealing with tomorrow, is we’ve received many of them around Justice’s assistance, 22 interviews, while the Inspector General has had 70. We’ve received 6,000 pages in total, including a couple of Friday dumps after the lights went out. They have about 80,000. The level of cooperation just simply, you know, it’s beyond the absurd that they would say that this is a transparent administration. You couldn’t be more opaque than they try to be.

HH: Have you mapped out yet, Mr. Chairman, whether or not you will be offering immunity to those who invoke the 5th so that they are obliged to testify a la the Watergate hearings?

DI: We reserve the right to do that. One of the important things that we’ve discovered is two of the top people, the most important people that should be held, to be tried in this drug trafficking, have been provided immunity by the administration. So one of the challenges we have is they won’t let us have those witnesses who they’ve already given immunity, who in fact were really much more kingpins. And there may be little or no benefit as to the other criminals directly involved. But as we get to people, like Mr. Cunningham, who have taken the 5th, ultimately it may be in our best interest to grant limited immunity in order to take away this theoretical self-incrimination that he’s asserting, because he’s asserting it broadly. He doesn’t want to answer any of our questions, you know, what is your name, where did you work, did you have lunch. And that’s one of those areas in which we want to try to get some truth. But you know, one of the problems is when this administration is gone, there will still be a Justice Department that let this happen, and let it continue happening. And the question is will we make permanent change? And you know, I’m not quick to grant immunity to somebody to further an investigation, but to ensure that we get real change at Justice to protect the 2nd Amendment, to protect the American people, and to protect our partners in Mexico.

HH: Sure.

DI: Remember, more people have died in Mexico by far than north of the border…

HH: Got to have change.

DI: And many of it is done, supplied by Fast & Furious.

HH: Congressman, will you ask Attorney General Holder if he will immediately discharge from the Department of Justice anyone who invokes the 5th Amendment?

DI: We will be. That will be one of the most important questions is, you know, why in fact did Mr. Cunningham remain for a period of time, and was allowed to orderly retire, and without seizing of documents and other things in his possession.

HH: It’s outrageous.

DI: We will be asking that.

HH: If someone claims the 5th, they’ve got to be out on their butt. Congressman, I’m up against a hard break. If I can keep you over the break, I would love to do so.

DI: I’d love to, but give me a rain check, because I’ve got to go back and continue voting on the House floor.

HH: Mr. Chairman, great to talk to you, good luck tomorrow. We’ll follow the hearings with Eric Holder. Read the Michael Walsh piece if you haven’t had a chance yet on the email from the deputy attorney general to Eric Holder about the victim of Fast & Furious.

End of interview.

.

Hughniverse

Listen Commerical FREE  |  On-Demand
Login Join
Advertise with us Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Book Hugh Hewitt as a speaker for your meeting

Follow Hugh Hewitt

Advertisement

The Hugh Hewitt Show - Mobile App

Download from App Store Get it on Google play
Friends and Allies of Rome