The race for Senate in Pennsylvania is hot, and getting hotter. Unfortunately for Libertarians, the race is a lose-lose.
he not-so-secret twist of Pennsylvania's Senate race is that both candidates are trying to reshape their parties' coalitions by tacking hard to the big-government, social conservative center. Casey, an old-school liberal on taxes, wages, trade, and union issues, is also an anti-abortion, anti-stem cell research, pro-Iraq war conservative. Santorum, who started his career in 1991 as a tax-cutting, small-government conservative congressman, has evolved into a visionary Republican leader in using government to fund religious charities and pay families to stick together.
It really sucks. I hate Santorum's statist views on moral issues. I despise Casey's liberal views on economics. I guess my decision comes down to deciding what I can live with more. A big spending social conservative who will tell me not to smoke weed, or place bets on the internet, or a big spending social liberal who will take more of my income. What is more important to me? Social issues or economic issues.
I am leaning toward Casey. Though his economic policies are frightening, they are reversable. Our economy is strong and resiliant. But if people like Santorum get their way, some of our liberties may be taken away. And those are more fragile than anything. When they are gone, they are never to return.
Posted by psugrad98 at October 9, 2006 09:00 AM | TrackBack
