According to this AP story by Kimberly Hefling [contact her: khefling@ap.org] stating that Sen. Santorum (R- PA) just finished meeting with Supreme Court nominee Alito.
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.”
The article mentioned Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) and had to mention Bob Casey Jr. Hefling neglected to mention candidates Chuck Pennacchio, Alan Sandals and John Featherman. All three of those candidates are pro-choice. Hefling wrote that Casey is
the leading Democratic challenger in Santorum’s 2006 bid for re-election. Santorum is lagging behind Casey in the polls, and the race is already a closely watched Senate races for next year.
Which is all true, but in an artilce about Alito, she tangentially touched on Jr.’s race while neglecting to include the rest of the group. Casey’s favorability numbers are lagging according to the most recent Keystone PA poll. His favorability number fell 10% since June.
But back to Alito…
Santorum’s press secretary this week criticized Casey for not taking a stand on whether he would back Alito to the court. Casey told reporters on Monday that despite the family connection he’s waiting for more information to come out about Alito.
Who else is questioning Jr.? Chuck Pennacchio. Pennacchio wants answers to two questions. 1) the Alito nomination and 2) the Bush/Santorum Iraq War policy. Pennacchio would vote against the Alito nomination and not only would he have voted against the war, he wants the troops home and has an Iraq exit strategy [.pdf]. It’s been over two months since Pennacchio met Jr. in person in Lehigh Valley and asked him to a debate[s]. Still no answer.
Jr. is scared to say anything with conviction. Hemming and hawing his way with fingers crossed seems to be his campaign’s tactic which in my book is not a way to run a campaign against a very charismatic incumbent with a sizable following. Chuck Pennacchio stands behind his words with pride.
Wonder if he (Santorum) aslo asked about the ADA (Americans W/Disabilities Act)? Or does Santorum also consider people w/disabilities unimportant?
Street Kid – I’ve never heard Santorum discuss ADA, but that’s not to say he hasn’t nor that he has.
On a sort of related note, I do know that he is against the expansion of embryonic stem cell research, as is Jr. Chuck Pennacchio is for the expansion of embryonic stem cell research. That could help you and others who have survived traumatic brain injury.
Thanks. Am gathering some more info now. Actually doing more research than writing at this time.
If I were a Republican operative, I’d pour everything into backing Casey.
Santorum isn’t going to get re-elected, unless his opponent is even worse. And that’s hard to imagine.
So you play for the draw — turn off the ‘progressive’ base, hope to split the financial Republicans (aka pro-life Democrats), hold on to your base (wingnut Republicans), and split the Independent vote.
Best part, if you lose and Casey wins, you actually do win — big. Now the Dems, desparate to win a game you’ve rigged (not just Diebold, but laundered corporate money, dirty tricks, etc) will seek other pro-life blur-the-lines candidates for other races. Best not to allow the voters to see any obvious contrasts — easier to be the lesser of two evils when you can portray yourself as the less smeared of two equals.
Now, maybe Casey is the real deal, aside from his ‘quaint’ views on the rights women have over their own lives. But he’s one seat — a seat any decent Dem candidate with a modicum of backing can have for the asking. Its all the even-worse Casey clones in all the other states that’ll burn the party, but good.