Santorum is looking and sounding desperate...His opponent in the debate didn't need to say it for viewers to come to that conclusion, it was that obvious.
But Santorum's last attack on Casey, about state investments in companies that outsource is something completely new and in my mind could start showing up in tv ads.
I don't think that is such a great idea Rick, because you something you said 13 years ago about the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) reveals how slick, manipulative, two faced and arrogant you are.
In the midst of the NAFTA debate in the fall of 1993, Rick Santorum publicly stated that he would vote against NAFTA, because his own congressional district was not competitive enough to do well under NAFTA, but that he believed the rest of the Pennsylvania would benefit under NAFTA.
While researching this issue, I also found a local newspaper article from Western Pennsylvania in 1993 where "Santorum said he was willing to vote for NAFTA had the Clinton administration agreed to negotiate a deal favorable to American steelmakers."
So Santorum made 3 different arguments at the same time:
1) NAFTA good for most of Pennsylvania
2) NAFTA bad for his area because his local western Pennsylvania district was uncompetitive.
3) He didn't actually care whether NAFTA was good or bad for his district or the state, because if he got a deal on steel tariffs, he was going to vote for it.
Just like the debate today, Santorum was under pressure and his 3 different responses were desperate.
Thousands of workers across Pennsylvania have lost their jobs to Mexico because of NAFTA. I have met some of those workers who have lost their jobs and I have met workers who were forced to train their Mexican replacements at their own work station. I have also met workers who forced to box and ship their manufacturing equipment to plants where workers are being being paid pennies on the dollar compared to Pennsylvania workers they replaced. Finally, I know about Pennsylvanians who were asked to travel to Mexico to restart these plants. (By the way, these workers were not from the 18th district)
Maybe it is time for leading politician in Pennsylvania who wasn't worried about most Pennsylvanians losing their jobs to NAFTA to lose his.
You might ask, why have I not heard this before. That is because at the same time he was saying Pennsylvania would benefit from NAFTA Santorum finally voted against it on the floor. So Santorum has generally escaped accountability from his 3 different positions on NAFTA and his general belief that NAFA is good for Pennsylvania.
It is a curious position. There are 535 members of Congress (100 Senate and 435 members of Congress).
How many of the 535 voted against NAFTA while arguing at the same time it would be a overall positive for their state? Sure there were some who voted for it and admitted the potential of some job losses.
So I think it is a good point as Santorum tries to make losing jobs overseas an issue to ask him around the state why did he think NAFTA was a good idea for them. Every part of this state has lost jobs to Mexico. When Santorum comes to your part of the state and complains about outsourcing, ask him why he argued that NAFTA was good for Pennsylvania.