Tuesday, October 24, 2006

The Empty Suit

A tip of the hat to Scott Johnson at Powerline, always the first stop in our daily review of the blogosphere. Scott has an excerpt from Bob Casey Jr.'s interview with the editorial board of the Philadelphia Inquirer--a paper that has endorsed Mr. Casey's bid to unseat incumbent Republican Rick Santorum.

In an exchange on various anti-terrorism initiatives (including the NSA terrorist surveillance program and interrogation of detainees), Casey demonstrates almost no knowledge of these critical topics, stringing together talking points and sound bites in an effort to answer the questions.

If you watched the recent TV debate between Santorum and Casey (sponsored by Pittsburgh's KDKA-TV, and carried by C-SPAN), you saw the same approach on a grand scale. Mr. Casey seems incapable of anything resembling an original thought, and (when rattled) he even has trouble reciting the Democratic Party line.

The scary part is that Mr. Casey will, in all likelihood, be the next Senator from Pennsylvania. Even scarier is the fact that the Inquirer--having recorded Casey's feeble grasp of critical issues--would endorse such an empty suit.


cynical joe said...

After listening to Bush apologists saying for six years, that Bush doesn't have to be smart because he's folksy, and in fact too much intellect (like Clinton's) is an obstacle for a good President, now, Spook, you want me to believe that Republicans support intellectual quality of candidates? Sorry, but it rings a little hollow. Mr. Santorum may have other virtues but being the sharpest tool in the Senate shed isn't one of them. In fact if we're going to grade Mr. Casey, how about a quick sketch of all the senators (R&D), and see how the stack up versus 'empty suits'

Cogitatus Incognito said...

Cynical Joe, please explain how a stupid President Bush obtained an MBA from Yale? I can understand how he might have slid by in an undergraduate program, but if you know anything about Ivy League graduate programs you know he could not be 'not smart'. You might want consider whether you're simply parroting the MSM line on President Bush. Based on your intellectual laziness, I can't give the remainder of your argument much weight.

cynical joe said...

I'm no expert in the machinations of the Ivy League, but I believe GW was admitted to Yale because of the Legacy of his family (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_preferences)

My point wasn't to throw stones at GWB, but to point out that Spook's stance about the 'emptiness' of Mr. Casey is really irrelevant. Spook is merely cheering for his team (which is his right), but no one believes that if the positions were reversed, and Casey appeared more intelligent than Santorum, that Spook would call for the election of the Democrat. Its just plain vanilla flavored politics: let's admit it.

Tom Paine said...

Cynical Joe,

Casey knows nothing of anti-terrorism initiatives, and you claim his emptiness is "really irrelevant".

Change your name from "Cynical" to "Silly".

Truth in advertising, y'know.

cynical joe said...

What I mean by irrelevant is that even if Mr. Casey was an expert in anti-terrorism initiatives, Spook wouldn't support him over Mr. Santorum. Thus Mr. Casey's credentials in such a race are not important. Spook is just simply cheerleading for his political 'side'. I don't have a problem with that, only the camouflage of the real reason for his political support.

Otter said...

cynical joe:

Bush's grade point average at Yale is ONE higher than kerry's.

I'll take the smarter, more truthful person any day.