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
A last, you finally recognized that it was an endorsement
Of course not caring “ what Specter said in his little speech a decade-and-a-half ago.” still makes it seem that you don’t realize, that “little speech” was what Santorum was endorsing and campaigning for, and reendorsing in 2004, and getting as close as he could get to endorsing it in 2008.
The man made campaign ads for Specter in 2006! That goes far beyond endorsement!