Santorum did much more than that, he threw his political weight behind him trying to make him and his agenda the law of the land, Specter was who he wanted to be president, Santorum committed himself to their cause.
Santorum was so committed to Specter and so loyal to him still in 2004 that it led to Santorum being dumped from office in a history making landslide defeat by the voters, especially by Catholics, who gave him only 39% of their vote.
Yet here you are trying to defend it all, all of Santorum's Specter saga.
I don’t defend it. I don’t make excuses for it. I admit outright that it was a bad endorsement. I don’t like it. I’d rather he hadn’t done it. Honestly, I don’t even know why he did it.
Maybe he supported every position Specter had ever taken. I doubt that ... but I suppose its plausible. Maybe he was helping a friend. Maybe he was trying to downplay his social conservatism in a middle-of-the-road State. Maybe he knew Specter didn’t have a chance-in-hell, and he was trying to gain Specter’s endorsement later on.
Maybe he was trying to curry favor with Pennsylvania voters that liked Specter more than us Red Staters did. That seems like the most likely explanation. Most likely just playing politics with endorsements. Such is the way of the world.
Ultimately, I find it entirely irrelevant. Rick Santorum is not Arlen Specter, and I don’t find the fact that he endorsed Specter a very compelling argument against his candidacy. So, I really don’t care what Specter said in his little speech a decade-and-a-half ago.
SnakeDoc