Michelman for Senate? (Pro-abortion activist may run as independent against Santorum and Casey)

The Corner on National Review.com ^ | March 1, 2006 | Kathryn Jean Lopez

[WOSG]

"That's exactly what I think. It will only hurt Casey. BTW other than his pro-life position, what kind of dude is Casey?"

An utter shill for Schumer and Hillary.

[joanie-f]

Some of Santorum’s antics over the past couple of years (chief, but not exclusive, among them his endorsement of Specter over Toomey) have left a bitter taste in my mouth. But, with that said, Casey’s pro-life position is dubious at best (and may only be a temporary condition, geared solely toward siphoning off some of Santorum’s Christian base). And he is an unabashed fiscal and social liberal.

Latest polls show Santorum as much as 15% behind Casey. That margin would change dramatically if the conservative Christian base recognized the fragility and political convenience of Casey’s pro-life position. It would also change dramatically if Michelman were to throw her hat into the race.

But neither eventuality is likely to occur. The media will see to it that Casey remains a counterfeit pro-life advocate, so as to shore up that part of his base. And the Pennsylvania Democratic Committee will not sit still for a Michelman candidacy. The infamous John Murtha is one of those in the Pennsylvania democrat forefront who will fight tooth and nail against the candidacy of anyone who will pull major votes away from their bogus ‘pro-life’ candidate.

The national democrat machine has Santorum in its cross-hairs. I believe they see his unseating as their most important goal in November, because picking up a Pennsylvania swing-state senate seat would represent a major coup, and because Santorum is being groomed for the presidency.

Surprisingly, in some recent polls Santorum is out-polling Casey in, of all places, Philadelphia. But, even if those polls hold true, the dead people who resurrect like clockwork every two years, people whose legal residences are garbage dumpsters and vacant lots … and stray dogs and parakeets … always tend to turn out in the big cities on election day, but are somehow never taken into consideration, pre-election, by Gallup or Zogby.

James Carville once described Pennsylvania as ‘two big cities (Pittsburgh and Philadelphia), with Alabama in between.’ As a citizen of Carville’s ‘Alabama’, I’d like to think that we ‘Alabamans’ will put Santorum over the top, but it’s becoming more and more difficult for us rural hicks to offset metropolitan voter fraud.

The ideal election day results would be Santorum’s re-election and Lynn Swann preventing Rendell’s. But, unfortunately, in Pennsylvania 2006, a republican has to assume that his victory must occur by at least an honest eight to fifteen percent margin, in order to negate the biennial ‘resurrection vote’ that occurs in Pittsburgh and Philly.

As things look now, I believe Santorum will be defeated by a combination of voter fraud, deceptive rhetoric offered up by Casey and his staff, complicit ‘reporting’ by the media, and ignorance of the truth on the part of conservative (especially Christian) voters. But, despite fraud and voter ignorance, Lynn Swann probably has an even chance of winning the governorship, so I intend to wear out some shoe leather on his behalf, beginning in early autumn.

In the past, I’ve worn out a lot of shoe leather fighting uphill battles. Those days are over. But I figure I owe at least a couple of weeks of pavement pounding to a character-laden candidate who has at least an even chance of seizing victory, despite the ever-increasing corruption roadblocks that stand in his way.

~ joanie …..

[joanie-f]

Meant to ping this to you.

[AuH2ORepublican]

Not many people were more upset with Rick Santorum's endorsement of Arlen Specter than I was. Here's the text of the e-mail I sent to Senator Santorum on March 22, 2004:

"Dear Senator Santorum:

Let me begin by saying that I am not a resident of Pennsylvania, so I am not technically your constituent. But as a member of the Republican leadership in the Senate, you represent Republicans throughout the nation, and as such I feel at the liberty to drop you this friendly note.

I am an active participant in the conservative movement, and regularly mention your name not only as an example of the type of leadership, platform and voting record Republicans need to get elected in competitive states and districts, but also as my preferred candidate for President in 2008. I defended you when you were unfairly attacked for your foresighted criticism of the pro-sodomy arguments in the Lawrence case, and I am certainly proud to have someone like you in the Senate to speak out and act on issues near and dear to me, such as opposition to abortion and judicial activism and support for tax relief and national defense. But I am at a loss for words when someone asks me why you are actively supporting the reelection of Senator Arlen Specter, who disagrees with us in every single one of those important issues.

I know that tradition dictates that incumbent Senators not oppose the reelection of their colleagues from the same party, especially when they represent the same state. And as Republican Conference Chairman, it would be unbecoming for you to actively campaign for the defeat of a Republican colleague. But is it really necessary for you to run commercials supporting Arlen Specter's candidacy when he is running against Congressman Pat Toomey, a true conservative Republican from a blue-collar Democrat district (just like a certain Congressman Santorum from a decade ago) who can lead the party to a statewide victory?

I am especially disheartened by your claim that Arlen Specter votes with conservatives "on votes that matter." When the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, which you had been fighting for years to pass, got to the floor last year, it was nearly derailed by a sham substitute amendment by Dick Durbin that would not have prohibited a single abortion so long as the doctor stated that the mother's health (including mental health) may be in danger. You know better than I that passage of the substitute amendment would have signaled the defeat of the PBA ban, and would have been a major setback in the pro-life movement. I remember that you spoke eloquently on the Senate floor as to why the sham substitute had to be defeated, and that the only way to end that heinous practice was to vote against Durbin's substitute amendment. Wouldn't you call that a "vote that matters"? I sure do. And, in case you've forgotten, Arlen Specter voted in favor of Durbin's sham substitute, and the only reason it failed was because a few Democrat Senators, most of whom were up for reelection in 2004, voted against the amendment. Arlen Specter can only fool ignorant pro-lifers into believing that he supported the PBA ban, since he voted for its final passage, the results of which were a foregone conclusion. (Why, even Tom Daschle voted for the final bill! I hope that, in his Senate race against John Thune, Daschle doesn't run ads saying that he supported President Bush's agenda "on votes that matter.") But most pro-lifers are not that ignorant, and we will not support someone like Arlen Specter for reelection.

I could go on for paragraphs about Specter's voting record, the dangers posed by someone as unreliable as him serving as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee (had Specter not opposed Robert Bork's nomination to the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade would have been overturned in Planned Parenthood v. Casey back in 1992, which would have saved millions of lives), the fact that Governor Rendell would name Specter's replacement in case he can't serve out his entire six-year term, and how Specter's proven inability to attract votes from blue-collar Democrats in the Pittsburgh area and in the "T," not to mention the fact that he cannot rally the conservative base, will make him more vulnerable to a challenge from Congressman Hoeffel (who will not allow Specter to win by his usual margins in the Philly metro area) than would Pat Toomey (who would defeat Hoeffel by winning votes from pro-life, pro-gun, pro-defense Democrats, the group that gave you two House victories and two Senate victories), but I know that you already know all of that. My plea to you is that you think about these things, and reconsider your participation in an active campaign to defeat Pat Toomey in the GOP primary. If, God forbid, Specter defeats Toomey, then it would certainly be acceptable for you to campaign actively for Specter's reelection. But now is not the time to go wobbly.

I hope that you receive this note in the spirit with which it was intended, and that, after meditation and prayer, you do the right thing.

Sincerely yours in Christ,"


However, two years have gone by, and we now face the prospect of a solidly conservative senator such as Rick Santorum being challenged by a purportedly pro-life and nominally pro-gun (but indubitably liberal on every other issue) Democrat with a very famous name. I share your disappointment in the fact that PA does not have two conservative Senators partly due to Senator Santorum's decision to support the incumbent RINO Specter (as did President Bush, BTW, a fact which ironically ended up costing him PA in the general election), but allowing Bob Casey, Jr. to be elected will give PA *zero* conservative senators. Pat Toomey has already made peace with Rick Santorum, and is actively supporting his reelection. It is time for all conservatives to do likewise.

As for the polls showing Santorum down by 10%-15%, it's too early to worry. While I'd rather have Senator Santorum up by 10%-15%, I am certain that it will be a 5-point race going into election day. If history holds, Casey will underperform your average Democrat in the Philly metro area (as even the polls in which he's winning big statewide have shown) and Senator Santorum will hold his base and win. Here's my analysis of the race and my prediction (it's a few months old, but still think it's correct): http://auh2orepublican.blogspot.com/2005/08/rick-santorum-vs-bob-casey-jr.html

[Minuteman23]

All good points Joanie.

The more I hear and read about Swann, the more I like him. I'm glad to hear that you'll be campaigning for him. I would do the same if asked.

You have Email.

[joanie-f]

I hate it when that happens. :)

[Luke21]

If she runs, the nutjob feminists in Philadelphia will vote for her and Rendell will have to find another five thousand dead voters to elect Casey.

[Minuteman23]

How the hell did that guy survive having a zillion pound whale land on his head????????

Awesome video!

[California Patriot]

This would be fantastic, but the chances are high that the Rats will muscle her out of this one. They're pretty good at such things.

[boycottmovies]

one more for our side. By the way, we've decided to take a trick from the Dems playbook, and have stopped going to movies. Why subsidize an industry devoted to pressing the hard left Democratic agenda? Anyone agree with this?

[boycottmovies]

one more for our side. By the way, we've decided to take a trick from the Dems playbook, and have stopped going to movies. Why subsidize an industry devoted to pressing the hard left Democratic agenda? Anyone agree with this?

[boycottmovies]

one more for our side. By the way, we've decided to take a trick from the Dems playbook, and have stopped going to movies. Why subsidize an industry devoted to pressing the hard left Democratic agenda? Anyone agree with this?

[AuH2ORepublican]

"we've decided to take a trick from the Dems playbook, and have stopped going to movies. Why subsidize an industry devoted to pressing the hard left Democratic agenda?"

---

There are movies, and then there are movies. I don't think you'd accomplish much by *not* going to see The Chronicles of Narnia, for example. I think it would be better if you would boycott only liberal movies, not conservative or traditionalist ones.

[Minuteman23]

By the way, we've decided to take a trick from the Dems playbook, and have stopped going to movies. Why subsidize an industry devoted to pressing the hard left Democratic agenda? Anyone agree with this?

Count me in. I started staying away almost 15 years ago.