Other Columns by Paul M. Weyrich
Paul M. Weyrich Bio

Printer-Friendly Version

Page 2 of 3

Meanwhile, these same polls which show Santorum winning big against the pro-abortion candidates also show Santorum winning narrowly, or even losing, against Casey. Casey gives pro-life, largely Catholic, Democrats, a candidate for whom they can vote without voting against their own party.

Of course, some of them may wonder why Senator Charles Schumer, of New York, Chairman of the Democrat's Senatorial Committee, and strongly pro-abortion, is beating drums for Casey.

I mentioned that Santorum has a couple of problems. The other problem is Arlen Specter. In 2006, then-Congressman Pat Toomey (who had limited himself to three House terms) challenged Sen. Arlen Specter in the GOP primary. Most pro-life/pro-family folks active in the political process in Pennsylvania understood that as a member of the Senate Republican Leadership Santorum would be obliged to endorse Specter, perhaps even campaign for him. But Santorum went all out for Specter. Pennsylvania friends tell me that Santorum campaigned almost harder for Specter than he did for himself in 1994 and 2000. That is saying something because Santorum is a fierce campaigner. These observers told me at the time that Santorum's ads on Christian radio stations for Specter were the factor which caused Toomey to lose by one percent. Some of these folks confronted Santorum about his vigorous campaigning for Specter and they did not care for his response. Some have said they will never support Santorum again. And now they have a pro-life Democrat they can support. Perhaps some, or even many, will.

Meanwhile, Casey is campaigning on economic issues. Pennsylvania lost a lot of well-paying skilled-labor jobs in the past few years. Casey is blaming Republicans. Casey also is raising the issue of immigration - a powerful issue, which undercuts the Republican base. If Casey were to force Santorum to debate in Casey's framework, Casey would have a major advantage. Santorum, who is one of the best campaigners Pennsylvania Republicans ever have seen, will need to hold Casey accountable for the far left ideas of Casey's party. Already the Casey campaign is suspect; otherwise why would Senator Schumer, as pro-abortion and as left as they come, get so activated! If Casey were to get to Washington the Democratic leadership willingly would tolerate a pro- life vote here and there. After all, Harry Reid votes that way. But on major issues, even the confirmation of judges, the Democratic leadership has an iron grip on its Senators. It would appear that 44 out of the 45 Democrats will filibuster Social Security reform if necessary. Casey, of course would be expected to be right there with the rest.

The president between 2001 and 2004 visited Pennsylvania more times than any other state. He narrowly had lost Pennsylvania in 2000 but was determined to carry it in 2004. His administration poured money into Pennsylvania. He almost always was bringing good news when he could. It didn't work. He came up short by about 100,000 votes. Sara Taylor said the president intends to do even more for Santorum then he did for himself. That is a tall order.

>> Continued -- Page 1 2 3