Pa. Senate Debate Targets Foreign Policy

Santorum And Casey Joust On Iraq, Iran And North Korean Nukes

(AP)  Foreign policy was in focus in the final debate between Sen. Rick Santorum and Democrat Bob Casey, with the GOP incumbent saying he had a strong grasp of international affairs and his challenger accusing the White House of moving too quickly to take military action.

Casey, leading in polls as he tries to unseat the Senate's third-ranking Republican, said the United States is in "worse shape" in regard to Iran and North Korea because of President Bush's policies.

"I think this administration should make sure it listens to the military experts, something the Bush administration has not done very well in regards to Iraq," said Casey.

When pressed about what line would have to be crossed before he would vote to take military action against Iran or North Korea, Casey said he would have to rely on intelligence and military experts to help make the decision.

"We cannot sit here tonight and draw a line," Casey said.

Santorum said of the potential development of nuclear weapons in Iran: "I understand this situation."

"If we are to believe that they are close to developing a nuclear weapon, I would do, I would strike, without question. ... Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. This is not North Korea, which I believe would use it more for defensive purposes," Santorum said.

Santorum, who has been a staunch defender of the decision to invade Iraq, said a second look would be a good thing. He praised the work being done by former GOP Secretary of State James A. Baker III to study it. He also said partitioning Iraq "may be a change of course that we need."

The two also differed on Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. As he has before, Casey said Rumsfeld should be fired. "We need new leadership when it comes to Iraq," Casey said.

Santorum defended Rumsfeld, saying, "He follows policy. He doesn't make policy."

Casey, the state treasurer, told Santorum on Tuesday he planned to release his IRS filings for the last five years, and asked Santorum to do the same. Santorum said he would.

The debate at the National Constitution Center was much less contentious than a debate last week in Pittsburgh, where the two bickered throughout.

Casey has accused Santorum of being part of the problem in Washington and voting with President Bush 98 percent of the time. Santorum has said Casey spends too many days away from his state treasurer's office and does not address issues.

Immigration, Social Security and the environment were also discussed Monday night.

Santorum said Casey supported environmental policies that would hurt manufacturing in Pennsylvania, while Casey said it was "dinosaur" thinking by Santorum that all policy that is good for the environment is bad for jobs. Casey also accused Santorum of not recognizing the danger of global warming.

Last month, a poll showed Casey held a 14-point lead over the incumbent among 933 likely Pennsylvania voters. The Quinnipiac University Poll had a sampling margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

[radiob-2009]

To JaneMcGreev1 did you get your check yet?After all you are doing the democratic party more good than harm? Invoking the anger factor which the Washington Post and Times said was driving people to the Democratic party.So how often are you paid,is it by word or by post?You sure do keep that anger factor alive and now I am laughing at having ever engaging you.You single handely have given the Democratic party more goodwill than Foley and Ney.

[janemcgreev1]

bluestardad obviously has the solution. Yes, he does. Now let's hear what it is.

Care to replace Don Rumsfeld? Then send in your application to the White House, chum.

[pakaal]

I agree with bluestardad that national service should be a requirement for all Americans over 18. I wouldn't say military service as he seems to, but serving in some capacity should be a requirement. And one reason is this:

I've noticed a subtle "superiority complex" in many those who have served in the military. I have nothing but respect for those who have served (including many of my own family), but this belief that those who haven't served are somehow less qualified to comment on military affairs and government is completely wrong in my opinion.

[bluestardad]

Santorum has a need MR. Foley's new product line. Republican "Soap on a Rope" Ideal for when you are having trouble "Staying the Course".

[bluestardad]

I believe that Rush Linbaugh is having a crash therapy course in dodging military service and Talking Real Loud Speaking Republican. All of you who have never registered for the draft nor served in the military are automatically invited to attend. Remember Stay the Course Vote Republican.

[bluestardad]

Stay the course, Vote Republican. Send your kids to war with ineptitude as a leadership policy.

[janemcgreeve]

Vote Santorum - he has character, integrity, and principle. Casey is just another MoveOn.Org stooge with nothing but fluff instead of substance.

A choice - a proven leader or someone who blabbers and doesn't offer solutions. Think Mayor Barletta - whom would you rather have? Someone who would open up the gates to ILLEGALS and compromise if not capitulate in the war on Terror, or someone who won't back down.

[pakaal]

Santorum's self-professed "strong grasp of international affairs" seems to be "bomb them", a masterful diplomatic solution. And he says he knows North Korea's use of nuclear weapons "would be more for defensive purposes". He certainly hasn't listened to statements by Kim Jong-Il, who is constantly threatening stability in Asia by saying he's going to attack Japan, South Korea, etc.

To me, Rick Santorum's plan of "more of the same" is the essential reason why he's trailing in the polls by 14 points. Public opinion is against this stuff, and all elected leaders answer to the public in the end. Don't listen at your own peril.

[janemcgreeve]

pakaal,

so glad you bring up "predators" roaming the halls of congress.

You're right, you know. Think Barney Frank.

Or how about the Clintons? Or the Chappaquidick Kid? Can't bring up McGreevey, "he's" gone - and thank goodness Geraldine Studds kicked the bucket.

All Dems - All Perverts - All The Time.

[janemcgreeve]

Clueless Casey Cut and Run. Typical.

You might not like Santorum, but he has guts and brains - unlike his sorry opponent.

About the only good thing that can be said about Bob Casey is that he isn't as awful and fruity as Ned Lamont. Now, that's an embarassment.

[heresmy2cent]

Rick Santorum has been an embarrisment for the state of Pennsylvania long enough.

Like George W. Bush, he is controlled by superwealthy interests and does nothing for the working class people of PA. He is the guy who tried to "privatize" social security and voted against a raise in the minimum wage 7 or more times while voting himself a raise a least 3 times.

Santorum doesn't even live in Pennsylvania, sending his children to school in Virginia while trying to pass the bill for their education onto the Pennsylvania school district where his children were "enrolled." Only recently did he agree to pay back that school district for this trickery.

Say goodbye, Rick, you've been a bad joke for too long. Bob Casey will be a huge improvement over you.

[pakaal]

Rumsfeld "doesn't make policy"?! Wow, Santorum's gone off his rocker! Or else he has no understanding of recent history.

Rumsfeld is the head of the Defense Department - that's why generals be calling for his resignation, not Bush's. Rumsfeld's a classic Neocon, he was one of the framers of the Project for a New American Century (and look how well our century's going so far, sheesh). Rumsfeld's been part of the planning of this stuff for decades, Casey's right.

Yeah, the bottom line is that Santorum's losing badly - his constituency's had enough of the problems this administration has caused, and are voting for a change. And why? Because Republican calls to "Stay the course" are the same tired, failed ideas that have brought us to our current quagmire in Iraq, lost us Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan, caused thousands of deaths in New Orleans, allowed a sexual predator roam the halls of Congress for years....

[jalexson]

The last thing the country needs is for Democrats to win control of Congress without having to offer any new ideas. When the Republicans won control in 1994 they did so by offering their "contract with American". The Democrats offer nothing except the same partisan sniping they have offered for decades. Many like their last presidential candidate still are living in 1970.

The United States needs a viable alternative to the Republican Party. The 200 year old Democratic Party isn't it. We need a new party for the 21st Century. The best way to get a new party is for voters to vote for 3rd Party candidates or write in a name this year.

[mjv2944]

Hey PA folks, don't vote for either one, they are both slick media made worthless politicians, surely you have an independent running, ote for him, what have you got to lose.