You have commented 340 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Casey, Santorum square off
2006-09-04
Iraq, abortion and fiscal policy -- they're among the issues that divided the two leading candidates in a high-profile Pennsylvania Senate race during a debate this morning.

Republican incumbent Rick Santorum, during the debate on N-B-C's "Meet the Press," said the Iraq war is a necessary one in a broader global fight. He described Iraq as "a serious and grave danger to America."

But Democratic challenger Bob Casey accused Santorum of failing to hold the administration responsible.

Casey, though, said he wouldn't "abandon" the mission in Iraq by setting a timetable for troop withdrawal. And he said he would have voted to go to war in Iraq, given the evidence available before the 2003 invasion.

Santorum, the number-three Senate Republican, accused Casey of failing to take stands on the issues. Casey leads in the polls, but his lead has narrowed to single digits.

Both candidates oppose abortion. Casey said the "morning after pill" should be available over the counter to women over 18. Santorum disagreed, and accused Casey of violating his principles to get votes.
Posted by:Fred

#9  I don't know if Casey will be harmed by the abortion issue. I remember reading that being opposed to abortion does not divide evenly among party lines. I don't recall the actual numbers, but dems oppose it in higher numbers than you might think. While the "Christian Right" almost overwhelmingly opposes abortion - the Christian moderates and conservative moderates (ah - you know what I mean) don't feel as strongly about the issue as you might suppose - that they take into consideration factors such as back room abortions and children being born unwanted. So like gun control and gay marriage - maybe this is not such a winner for the dems as we have been led to believe.
Posted by: Shetle Thaimble6946   2006-09-04 16:18  

#8  I read the transcript of this debate last night over on Real Clear Politics. To me, it seemed like Casey was rather incoherent. He came up with no plan for the GWoT other than holding the administration accountable for the Iraq war and increasing the size of Special Forces. His response to how he would balance the budget in the midst of this was totally incomprehensible. The point regarding the schooling of Santorum's children was legit, although, almost every Senator brings there family with them. Being a US Senator is a career political, Washington DC based job. If Casey wins I bet he does the same thing.
Posted by: TomAnon   2006-09-04 16:14  

#7  Casey's case is far more damaged. He opposes abortion, as Lieberman supports war, yet he has not been thrown out of the donkey party. Why ? Because they don't have a suitable replacement. Casey is a lame duck if he wins and a forgotten fool when he loses.
Cudos to Santorum for keeping his family together, but he really should spend time in Pa. listening to the people. So should all the rest.
I'll never vote for a donkey, so Rick gets my aye.
Posted by: wxjames   2006-09-04 14:21  

#6  As I said, my problem is with a professional political class in DC. They should not be there for such long terms and the sessions should not be so long. But neither problem will go away in my life time.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-09-04 13:16  

#5  Agreed, TW. When I lived in the DC area I knew of too many on the Hill who did the apartment / dinners out thing with their families left behind.

A family with you means an anchor to reality (tenuous for some LOL) and at least some chance of parenting those kids.
Posted by: lotp   2006-09-04 09:30  

#4  I have to disagree with that one, Nimble Spemble. Senator Santorum's job requires him to live in Washington, DC for six years at a go in order to get the job done. If he doesn't want to give hs wife legitimate cause to divorce him and take the children, he'd be wise to move them with him and school the children there. That's the unfortunate reality for those with jobs beyond an easy driving distance from home.
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-09-04 08:31  

#3  "Privately" schooled with money the Penn Hills township gave him under laws that allow Pennsylvania children to attend cyber schools. The Commonwealth eventually reimbursed the township.

The crux of the issue is that he has virtually abandoned his Pennsylvania residency and moved his family to Virginia but still took advantage of PA taxpayers. This is a real problem with our professional politcal class that really lives in and relates only to DC and loses touch with its constituency base. Though I'll vote for Santorum, I think less of him because of this.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-09-04 08:20  

#2  Privately schooled with the income the State gives him? Or did he send a separate bill to Harrisburg? He draws a Federal salary; should us Virginians be upset, too?

Once one earns a salary, it no longer belongs to the employer, they can do whatever they like with it.
Posted by: Bobby   2006-09-04 07:52  

#1  I heard this one. I think it was Santorum by TKO. The only real damage to Santorum was the part about his children being privately schooled in Virginia, courtesy of Pennsy taxpayers. That would bother me if I were a member of Keystone State.
Posted by: SOP35/Rat   2006-09-04 02:28  

00:00