Wednesday night I watched live on C-Span my third key Senate debate this election cycle. Previously I watch debates featuring Christine O’Donnell and Chris Coons, see “2010 Delaware Senate Debate: The “Witch” versus Harry’s “Pet””as well as Sharron Angle and Harry Reid see “Nevada debate: Sharron handed Harry his hat!”
At the Toomey-Sestak debate there was a game of ‘Who’s the Extremist.” Both candidates accused the other of being extreme. Joe Sestak made a point on several occasions of trying to link Pat Toomey to the Christine O’Donnells of the political world. He piggy-backed on the work of the lame-stream media who has set O’Donnell this election as their target to tear down, marginalize and figuratively dismember. For his part Toomey adeptly countered linking the Admiral’s lockstep adherence to the futile, failed Leftist policies of the President, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Joe Sestak, because of his close admiration for and association with the current Democratic agenda, proved to be the most extreme of the two candidates.
The contrast between the two candidates was as wide as an ocean. Here are three key issues that highlight the differences between the two candidates.
CAPTIALISM VERSUS SOCIALISM
Pat Toomey stood for free enterprise. Sestak stood for big government control over Wall Street. He wants to cap Wall Street, while Toomey wants to create an environment allowing entrepreneurs to fly, to develop jobs and opportunities. That is what has built
Pat Toomey is for giving parents choice in how they education. He is against pouring good money after bad into a failed system. He cited the National Education Association (NEA) as being self serving and not serving students. Sestak was for pouring more money into the failed system. He said he was for charter schools, but did not comment on allowing the money to follow the child as did Toomey. Sestak was exposed is a pawn of the teacher unions. Toomey is a champion for parental rights and choice. Toomey condemned Sestak for squelching the
The one area I disagreed with Toomey was on the fact that he stated that he was partially Pro-Life. He said he was Pro-Life except in the case of rape, incest, and the life to the mother. Why punish the innocent baby, in the case of rape or incest, when it was the perpetrator who caused the conception? Sestak’s position is blatantly and incomparably worse. He supports abortion funding, embryonic stem cell research and the unconstitutional health care ‘reform’ act which creates essentially what will amount to death panels. Sestak denies a parents right to choose where to educate their child, but denies the child the right to live giving the woman the absolute right to determine whether a fellow human being, her boy or her girl, lives or dies.
I cannot give a full or unqualified endorsement to Pat Toomey based on his less than 100% Pro-Life position. After all, Life is the fundamental right of all human beings regardless of what stage of physical development that they or in or what some fallible earthly judge may declare to the contrary.