Pennsylvania blahs

While waiting to leave for church this morning, I caught a good portion of the "Meet the Press" debate between Pennsylvania senate candidates Rick Santorum and his challenger, Democrat Bob Casey (the son of the sainted pro-life Democratic governor Bob Casey). I've not been paying a lot of attention to this race, though it is one of the most important this fall. On social issues, Santorum is a real favorite of mine, though I've been dismayed by how closely he's hewed to the president's line on just about everything. I had hoped that Bob Casey, as a pro-life Democrat, would offer a real alternative to Pennsylvania voters.

Based on what I saw this morning, he doesn't -- not by a mile. Casey hammered Santorum for fiscal irresponsibility, which the GOP Congress is certainly guilty of. But when Russert tried to get Casey to say what programs he would cut to get the deficit down, Casey had absolutely nothing to say, aside from fiddling with the estate tax, and, get this, growing our way out of the problem. Russert pointed out that the estate tax change would produce only a tiny fraction of the funds needed, and asked him incredulously if he was really suggesting that it was possible to grow our way out of the deficit, given that the Baby Boomers are now starting to retire, and are going to become a massive drain on the public purse. Casey said, well, sure.

I couldn't believe it. I couldn't believe he had no better answer than that. Of course Santorum wasn't much better on the issue. I told Julie later that by 2015, Medicare and Social Security will be consuming almost three-quarters of the federal budget -- and neither party can bring itself to level with the American people about what's coming. And from a purely political standpoint, that's probably sensible, in that we are so used to the something-for-nothing mentality that any politician, Republican or Democrat, who told the truth would probably be whacked at the polls.

Then the Plan B issue came up. Santorum said flat-out that the pill is sometimes abortifacient, which is certainly true if you believe that life begins at conception; the pill can work by preventing the fertilized egg (that is, a human being) from implanting on the uterine wall. Santorum said he was against Plan B for that reason. Casey, who insists he's pro-life, said he was in favor of Plan B because "the science is clear" that it's contraception. That's a shameful dodge. The science is clear about how Plan B works; whether or not that counts as abortion is a moral question -- and a question that the Catholic Church answers very clearly. Casey is trying to lay claim to his father's pro-life mantle, and he's not worthy of it. Not only is he for a potentially bortifacient pill to be distributed over the counter, but he dissembles about what he perfectly well knows the pill is.

Anyway, it was depressing. I like Santorum, despite my differences with him, and hope he wins. I had hoped that Casey, though, would begin to open the door for more socially conservative religious voters in the Democratic Party. But he was pretty unimpressive this morning. Anybody else see the debate? What do you think?

UPDATE: Just read the morning newspaper account of the entire debate, which as I said, I missed. Santorum defended Rumsfeld, and called the Iraq War one of "necessity." Oh drear. And Casey apparently had little else to offer. Well, let me amend my position to this: whoever wins this race, it will be depressing news.