When you make the perfect the enemy of the good, you end up with this:
Bob Casey is about as pro-life as Harry Reid...
Posted on 03/29/2005 6:40:35 AM PST by Conservative Goddess
Some very smart people believe that U.S. Senator Rick Santorum is poised to become ex- Senator Santorum, a casualty of his scheduled re-election contest next year with State Treasurer Bob Casey.
....
In fact, a close look at the record suggests that his confrontational style and conservative rhetoric conceals more than it reveals. Too much attention has been spent on Santorum the cultural ideologue and not enough on his pragmatism and political opportunism; inside this raging bull of a conservative is a pragmatist for whom getting re-elected always trumps ideology, which may not make him any different than other politicians.
....
The independent and much respected National Journal’s rating system cited here is probably the most highly regarded measure of its kind. What its analysis reveals is that Pennsylvania’s junior senator consistently shifts toward the center in those years just before his reelection. Santorum may continue to talk like a conservative, but he’s voting like a pragmatist. Last year, for example, according to the Journal, Santorum was actually narrowly left of the Republican center, with his votes placing him closer to Arlen Specter than to his more conservative colleagues.
Last year was not the only year he moved left. He did the same in the run up to his 2000 re-election. The year before the election, he supported a decidedly un-conservative sales tax hike in 11 western Pennsylvania counties to build new sport stadiums in Pittsburgh, campaigned for pro choice Christy Todd Whitman, and supported increasing the minimum wage. In 2000, he supported federal funding for several Pennsylvania projects, including money for aquatic habitat. He also fought to save the health care benefits of 560, 000 Pennsylvanians who participated in the Medicare+Choice program. Most revealing of all, he backed off his commitment for the 1997-balanced budget act.
Similarly, this election cycle, Santorum is showing renewed interest in transportation and other Pennsylvania pork barrel appropriations. Indeed, he has now become a key player in bringing the bacon back home. He has also held high profile press conferences with John Kerry promoting a measure that would accommodate workers’ religious practices and with Hillary Clinton for money to study the effects of TV viewing, Internet and other media on children. And he is now rethinking his position in favor of capital punishment.
Santorum even now supports Clinton’s Americorps program that he once ridiculed as a colossal waste of taxpayer’s money for kids to sit around campfires singing kum ba yah.
His conservative talk and moderate walk were on display recently in key congressional budget votes. Initially, the “conservative” Santorum voted against a variety of Senate initiatives to restore budget cuts by the House--from Medicaid to Homeland Security grants, to education, and even Amtrak funding. But then on cue, the “moderate” Santorum, voted with the majority, 51 to 49, on final passage to restore the cuts to education, Medicaid, and the other domestic programs he had previously not supported.
....
But this focus on Santorum’s high profile rhetoric has been myopic, causing his adversaries to miss much that is important. In particular, insufficient attention has been paid to Santorum’s unflagging work at his party’s grass roots; how he’s established comprehensive constituency services; how he’s worked tirelessly for Republicans--ask Arlen Specter about this--and how he has joined Specter in the Pennsylvania pork brigade. And far too little notice has been given to how he has blended his conservative zealotry with political pragmatism.
Maybe Democrats will learn the lesson taught here. Maybe they will learn not to underestimate Santorum. Maybe they will learn to watch what he does more closely than what he says. Maybe they will learn to take him less seriously as an ideologue and more seriously as a politician. And maybe they will finally defeat him next year. Maybe!
This is NOT a conservative state like Oklahoma, yet we have elected one of the most conservative Senators in the country. John Kerry carried Pennsylvania, and Arlen Specter got more votes than Kerry. Specter is the most popular politician in this state. Santorum probably picked up a lot of votes by supporting Specter; had he not supported him he would have been severely damaged going into this campaign. If we let Santorum lose this Senate seat, we will never get it back. Bob Casey will have it for 40 years.
Cut off your nose to spite your face.
One senator is not the equivalent of a President. I voted for President Bush, not because I agreed with his support of Arlen, but because Kerry would have beem so much worse. You cannot equate a senator with a president. The two are decidedly different. The Senator is one of my elected representatives in Congress and when he ceases to speak for me, I cease to support him.
5. What is your position on a provision in the state’s budget to fund contraceptive services?Casey (D): Support
5a. What is your position on requiring employers or health insurance plans to cover contraceptives in their prescription drug plans?
Casey (D): Support
7. What is your position on government requiring that benefits be provided to same-sex partners?
Casey (D): Employers should be permitted to extend domestic partnership benefits to same-sex couples in committed, long-term relationships.
8. What is your position on legislation prohibiting homosexual couples from adopting children?
Casey (D): Oppose
5. What is your position on school choice legislation in the form of direct grants to students to attend the school of their choice (vouchers)?
Casey (D): Oppose
I say surround him with conservatives.
Santorum may not survive, and we may have to wait 6 years. But if heresy is punished there, the others might be encouraged to stay less impure. Defiance of the base with impunity is not representative government. Just a thought, worth what you paid for it!
I'll take Santorum over Casey, anyday. The writer's an idiot. And yes, I'm in York, PA.
Is this serious? Somehow all this santorum bashing seems more against his oppostion to homosexual marriage and other culture issues than him not being conservative enough.
No, she's a true conservative. Dan Rather has some memos from her commanding officer in the Pennsylvania Air National Guard that say so.
This is an organized campaign by a few newbies.
The Force gives these newbies power over weaker minds.
Unfortunately, many FReepers have the IQ of a toaster, so it works.
For those who excoriate me for daring to suggest that our elected representatives should say what they mean and mean what they say, I'd like to boil it down for you:
All I'm asking for is truth in advertising.
When Rick speaks like a preacher on Sunday, but votes like a casper-milque-toast moderate on Monday, there has been no truth in advertising. Those who do not bother to compare words and deeds are easily duped. I was duped by his words for a long time.
I find no compelling argument for tolerating duplicity in our elected representatives. On the contrary, I believe they should be held to the highest possible standards of honesty because there has clearly been and continues to be "the odious propagation of the tentacles of the government anemone" into virually every aspect of our lives. Quote from Judge Hoyt, Decision, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 47 T.C. 58 (1966)
How are we to stop the odious propagation if our elected officials are not honest with us? Rick's votes on the budget are a prime example. For years, I voted for Rick simply because I believed his words. It's time we hold him accountable for those instances where words and deeds are incongruent. If you don't tolerate lying from your two-year old, then you shouldn't tolerate lying from your elected representative.
If after reading this, you decide to vote for Rick because he's the lesser of the evils, I applaud your conscious decision and active exercise of your franchise. I chose to hold him accountable for failure to be truthful about his motives and deeds. I will do so by withholding my vote in 2006.
Ricky will never get a chance to vote on Supreme Court nominees if Arlen holds them in committee. His would be vote for a nominee who dies in committee means nothing.
If not now, when would it be appropriate, in your view, to hold him accountable?
You spotted that too, eh PKM?
One of the new tactics used by the Donks is to come in and promote fratricide in order for us to lose seats next year. You're going to see a lot of "conservatives" talking up Third Party nonsense such as Constitution, Libertarian, etc., or throwing the Republican bum out because he isn't conservative enough. Don't be deceived by the bullsh*t artists among us.
Anyone who is arguing to decrease our Senate caucus numbers is arguing in favor of increasing the power of the liberal Democrats. Period. A LOT of people will scream RINO, but they have a different agenda.
I'm not buying this sucker's game. Thanks for being a smart trendspotter, PKM!
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Rest assured, I am no troll.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.