The contrast between the philosophies of Pat Toomey and Joe Sestak could not be more stark. And in this election, that contrast is the voters' best friend.
Mr. Toomey is the former Pennsylvania congressman who nearly dethroned Republicrat Arlen Specter in the 2004 GOP U.S. Senate primary. Mr. Specter self-destructed this election cycle when he placed political expediency above party and, as a Democrat, had his hat handed to him by Mr. Sestak, the congressman representing the 6th District.
Toomey, who went on to serve as president of the Club for Growth, is a conservative's conservative. Sestak, a retired Navy admiral, is a liberal's liberal. And while we have great personal respect for Sestak, a good and decent man, and stipulate that his military expertise would be an asset in the Senate, the nation no longer can abide his kind of failed liberal public policy prescriptions.
Pat Toomey is another good and decent man. No, there's not much "flash" but Toomey is no shrinking violet. He understands fundamental economics and government's role in facilitating economic growth. His scholarship and demeanor will serve Pennsylvanians well in the U.S. Senate.
The Arlen Specter era is over, thank goodness. And thank goodness there's someone with Pat Toomey 's bona fides to replace him.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.