The Case for Casey?

Over at Poetic Leanings, Scott has a long and well thought out article which argues both the pros and cons of having the Democrats approve Robert Casey jr. as the unopposed Democratic candidate to run against Rick "man on dog" Santorum for his Pa. Senate seat. It's kind of hard not to warm up to Scott when he opens up with this graf:

Senator Rick Santorum (R - Pennsylvania) is arguably one of the worst Senators currently serving in the U.S. Congress. He is a zealot, but he is also arrogant, mean-spirited, a Bush flunky, and, to be honest, not all that bright. Along with taking Bill Frist's seat in Tennessee, the Pennsylvania race should be priority number one in the 2006 election cycle.

Scott provides a very solid, thumbnail view of the background process where Casey was picked to run against Santorum and the questions which naturally arose among Democrats across the country. This was the subject of one entire episode of Morning Sedition on Air America last week, and it deserves a deeper look. The Governor of Pa was a guest (via phone) and he tried to defend the selection of Casey based on many of the same arguments which Scott mentions in his essay.

Make no mistake... this is a race which will be closely watched on a national level. The Democrats will, in 2006, have to be ready to unleash Ludifer's Hammer on every single Senate seat where they can take one back. (And they need quitte a few.) But this brings up an ethical dilemna, I think. As Scott points out, large swaths of the Keystone State are extremely conservative, anti-choice, and embracing of a number of very non-Democratic, non-progressive ideals. How much are the Democrats willing to compromise in order to get a win on the political front? Is putting up an anti-choice candidate justifiable in order to get another win in the "D Column" for the Senate? And if it happens, when it comes time to vote on some potential new anti-choice Supreme Court candidate, would Casey stand firm with the Dems, or go the "Republican Lite" route and vote with Bush?

All questions which need answering quickly. But if the PA Dems hold fast to their values and pick a pro-choice candidate who loses, has anything been gained beyond a moral one? Go read Scott's essay and let us know what you think.