I missed this National Review editorial yesterday in support of Rick Santorum:

t will be no surprise to anyone that we favor Rick Santorum’s reelection as a senator from Pennsylvania. He has been a fine moderately conservative lawmaker, the moderation owing mainly to his state’s unionism and statism. He has led the fight for reform of welfare and Social Security, and he is superior to his opponent, Robert Casey Jr., on the broad range of issues from trade to defense to marriage.

What makes this race unusual is that both candidates profess to be pro-life. Casey is from a great pro-life family in Pennsylvania politics: His father was denied a chance to speak at the Democratic convention in 1992 because he was likely to use the opportunity to argue that his party’s tradition of defending the weak and vulnerable ought to apply to unborn children. Casey’s position on abortion may very well help him win the election. Pro-life liberals, who usually have to swallow hard before they cast a vote, will be eager to support him. Some pro-life conservatives may think that their energies are better spent on races where a fellow pro-lifer is running against a supporter of the abortion license.

Even on the life issues, however, we see a contrast between Santorum and Casey. Each brings some distinctive advantages to the fight for life, but on balance the contrasts tell strongly in favor of Santorum.

UPDATE: Also see this NY Times piece on Santorum today.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 31st, 2006 at 9:30 am and is filed under politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.