Interview with Bob Casey, Jr. | Valerie Schmalz | July 29, 2005
Born and raised in Pennsylvania, Bob Casey, Jr., a Democrat, is running for the U.S. Senate in 2006 against incumbent Republican Senator Rick Santorum. Casey is a graduate of The College of the Holy Cross (1982) and received his law degree from Catholic University in 1988 before entering the practice of law in Scranton, Pennsylvania. Casey was elected Auditor General of Pennsylvania in 1996 and re-elected in 2000. In 2002, he ran unsuccessfully for the Democratic nomination for governor. In 2004, he was elected State Treasurer, winning more votes than any other candidate for any state or federal office in the history of the Commonwealth. Casey is the eldest son of the late Governor Robert P. Casey and his wife, Ellen. For more about Casey and his campaign, visit his website, www.bobcaseyforpa.com.
Valerie Schmalz of IgnatiusInsight.com recently interviewed Casey and asked him about his campaign, his views on life issues, and how he differs philosophically and politically from Sen. Santorum.
Continue reading...
Assuring in spots, dissembling in spots. The responses of a man walking a tightrope.
If only he'd run against Snarlin' Arlen.
Posted by: Dale Price | Friday, July 29, 2005 at 08:49 AM
I agree with what Dale has said. Mr. Casey would have to demonstrate an ability to vote against his party to gain substantial respect and support. Also, kudos to Ignatius Insight for getting and publishing this interview. I think it reflects a healthy concern for the most important issues facing our country.
Posted by: Pete Halpin | Friday, July 29, 2005 at 08:54 AM
Is he merely opposed to the nuclear option or does he also support the individual filibusters his fellow Democrats have launched on Bush's nominees? Given that the main motivating factor behind the filibusters is the preservation of Roe vs. Wade, there's no way I'd consider voting for for him if the answer was the latter, or if he didn't answer (if I lived in Pennsylvania, that is, which I don't).
Posted by: Publius | Friday, July 29, 2005 at 09:00 AM
Ditto Dale and Pete. Thx Val.
Posted by: Ed Peters | Friday, July 29, 2005 at 03:48 PM
Thanks to Ignatius for doing the Santorum and Casey interviews. Why can't the MSM to something like this?
Posted by: BillyHW | Friday, July 29, 2005 at 07:08 PM
From the interview:
IgnatiusInsight.com: Sen. Santorum has criticized you for your support of the judicial filibuster that he says is used solely to enforce compliance with Roe v. Wade. Could you comment on that?
Casey: The filibuster is one of the only mechanisms available in the Senate that forces more bipartisanship. We need more common ground and cooperation in Washington. My opponent has filibustered Democratic nominees. He’s trying to have it both ways.
-----------------------------------------
Casey's answer here is utterly pathetic. The main issue behind the Democrats' filibuster of Republican judges is Roe v. Wade. Casey's answer admits that overturning Roe is not at all important to him. Additionally, Casey must be the only person in the world who thinks a filibuster forces more bipartisanship. In my opinion, is there anything more partisan than a filibuster?
Also, I'm quite sure Santorum has never filibustered any judicial nominees. Furthermore, he has certainly never used a filibuster, or any other mechanism, to uphold Roe v. Wade. It is Casey that is having it both ways.
It is clear that if Casey has his way, Roe v. Wade will never be overruled. And what's the point of being a self-described pro-life legislator when Roe and its progeny prohibit legislation restricting abortion.
Posted by: William Bloomfield | Friday, July 29, 2005 at 08:40 PM
And what's the point of being a self-described pro-life legislator when Roe and its progeny prohibit legislation restricting abortion.
William has asked the correct question. And the answer is, of course, to provide self-deluding cover for all of the Cradle Catholics who are also Cradle Democrats (and in fact don't really see much difference between the two) and the excuse to vote for a Democrat who they know in their heart of hearts will never support a Supreme Court justice that would overturn Roe.
But hey, he probably supports a higher minimum wage, or whatever is passing for an Important Social Justice Issue these days...
Posted by: Jerry Dunleavy | Sunday, July 31, 2005 at 06:21 PM