 |
9/03/2006 |
|
Santorum is Behind This Guy? | |
|
||
|
||
|
I wonder what is going through peoples' minds when they choose Casey over Santorum. I can understand Casey's friends and family voting for him, but this guy has no ideas, no plans except raise taxes. In this morning debate on Meet the Press with Tim Russert, Casey looked amateurish at best. Santorum presented clear strategies and offered answers to the questions that were presented to him, something Casey seemed unwilling to do during the entire debate. However when Casey did try to present some semblance of ideas, they were foolhardy at best. Let's look at some of Casey's better ideas. 1) Pull the troops out of Iraq and double the number of Special Forces. Mr. Casey, in my mind, if you double the number of Special Forces, then they are no longer all that special. There is a reason why there are number limits to the men in the Seals, Rangers, Airborne, etc. They are the best and the brightest. THEY ARE SPECIAL!!!!! When Russert asked "(By Pulling out of Iraq) What if leave behind a haven for terrorists?" Casey's response ". . . (Insert sounds of crickets here)" No answer, merely deflecting to questions about body armor and WMD's. 2) On Iran, Santorum authored the Freedom of Support Act and is trying to push it past the Senate. If you are not familiar with this, think of what Reagan did in Poland. Casey's plan, do everything possible. Like what, more rhetoric? Again, no clear ideas. Merely banter trying to get Santorum to denounce Cheney for not supporting sanctions over a decade ago. Santorum said he disagreed with him, Casey wants him to denounce Cheney. Let's look at the difference per www.merriamwebster.com: Denounce - to pronounce especially publicly to be blameworthy or evil Disagree - to differ in opinion Santorum has to work with Cheney, I am glad he saw through this semantic ambush by Casey. 3) The budget and social security. I put these two together because Casey's plan is basically the same; Raise Taxes. I will admit, I like how Casey uses the English Language. He calls a tax raise, savings for the government. But let's look at what is really is, Socialist Income Distribution. When asked, he would not claim to cut a single program, or be as he said "more fiscally responsible" except to raise taxes on people making more than $200,000 and increasing the death tax. Then he claims to want to save social security by growing the economy. Well, how can the economy grow, if you pull money out of it by increasing taxes. Then Casey goes on to blame the republicans for the "Problem" social security. Per Casey, its not a crisis, it is a problem. (There's the semantics again.) Maybe it is not a crisis for you Mr. Casey, but it is for me. I'm 31 and wonder where the money I put into the fund will be. I digress, he blames the republicans because there was no social security problem in the 90's. Russert rightly put him into his place by stating the 40 million baby boomers were not set to retire in the 90's. No answer from Casey. From the Casey website, "On Meet the Press debate this morning, Bob Casey sat side-by-side with Rick Santorum and Bob Casey showed that he has the new ideas and new direction to win in November." This was obviously written before the debate occurred. Casey is out of touch and has no clue what so ever. I can see why Casey picked this weekend for the debate, he hoped most people on the east side of the state would be down the shore and people in the rest of the state would be doing other things during the holiday weekend. There is a reason why he has lost 3 election bids in the last 6 years. Wake up people of PA, Casey is bad for the state and worse for the country. |
|
|
||
|
||