I've got to agree with Atrios on
this regarding both Casey's and Rendell's declarations that they would vote for Alito:
There are lots of obvious reasons - reproductive rights - to not be thrilled about Bob Casey as our man to beat the yellowest elephant Santorum here in Pennsylvania. Supporters point to the fact that he's very pro-labor and progressive on economic issues.
Similarly, there are lots of obvious reasons to not be thrilled about Samuel Alito - reproductive rights - as a Supreme Court nominee. But there are also lots of less obvious ones, such as his awful record on workers' rights. Casey hasn't just demonstrated he's an asshole, he's also demonstrated that he has the political instincts of a fig. I'm not sure why 11 months out a Senate candidate like Casey is obligated to take a stand on an issue like this, but if he was going to he could've found lots of very serious reasons to oppose Alito's nomination, ones which would've cemented his reputation as a principled fighter on important issues not related to reproductive rights.
I don't understand why given his poor relations with the Pennsylvania Democratic base -- you know, the people supposed to bust their humps for him in October and November -- he thought it necessary to give them a big middle finger. Rather than try to find common ground with party stalwarths, despite the obvious big disagreement over choice, he instead proved that even his committment to economic liberalism isn't, well, apparently that important to him.
What does he think he gains politically out of this?
Bizarre.
(And no, his two primary challengers aren't viable alternatives. PA Dems will have to do better than them if they want a serious challenger to Casey who can also win in November. Like it or not, Casey has the clearest path to victory of any Dem Senate challenger this cycle. And we need this seat to have Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and subpoena power.)