A LITTLE SAVAGE LOVE FOR CASEY AND SANTORUM-- HOW MANY REACTIONARIES CAN DANCE ON THE HEAD OF A PIN?

OK, let's start by googling the word "santorum." Top entry? Do you think you will get Rick Santorum's campaign website first? You won't. His horrendous extreme right wing voting record? Nope, not that either. One of the articles I've written about him-- like the one about him and the K Street lobbyists, or about his fake charities or his corruption? Nope, nope, nope. Go ahead and look for yourself. Here, I'll even make it easy for you. OK, no comment. Except this: that #1 most read article in the universe about the #1 most repulsive elected official in the entire United States is the handiwork of Dave Savage. The Savage Love dude. It's the only advice column I ever read.

But as much as I like how Dan handles his readers' insecurities and curiosity-- and as much a I admire his man-on-dog revenge-- I have to admit that we part ways when it comes to certain electoral strategies.

As you may know, as much disdain as I have for Santorum, I am far from a supporter of his conservative/anti-choice Democratic opponent, Bob Casey. I don't know if I would pull the lever for Casey or not in November-- probably-- but, without unlimited resources, I would never consider contributing money to Casey (instead of, for example, to progressive Democratic congressional candidates like Lois Murphy, Joe Sestak, Chris Carey, Patrick Murphy and Steven Porter).

Savage explained to his readers that he maxed-out on a personal contribution to Casey's campaign ($2,100). "That donation didn't sit well with some Savage Love readers, as Casey is anti-choice. 'Electing one or two pro-life Dems is the price we're going to have to pay to put reliably pro-choice Dems in positions of power all over the Senate,' I wrote back in June. '[Voting] for Casey, or sending a contribution to Casey, is a pragmatic, progressive, pro-choice bank shot.'"

Very nice, but Casey's finance director, Jake Perry, returned the check. "Casey is worried that Santorum's flying monkeys will spot my name on his campaign-finance reports and raise holy hell about it. And Casey didn't want to wind up debating the merits of the frothy mix."


Savage says he was "miffed." Gamingly, he says that "as I've asked my overwhelmingly pro-choice readers to be pragmatic, swallow hard, and support Bob Casey, I'm going to be pragmatic myself, swallow harder, and support Bob Casey whether he wants me to or not. So what if Bob Casey doesn't want to take my dirty money? (Or I should say, so what if Bob Casey doesn't want to be seen taking my dirty money. Perry suggested names of some independent groups in Pennsylvania working to elect Casey, groups that might be willing to take my dirty money.) I still want Casey to beat the lube-and-fecal-matter-splattered pants off Santorum this November. That's why I'm sending the $2,100 Casey spurned to Philadelphians Against Santorum. Got some dough to spare? Help defeat Rick Santorum this November by making a donation..."

I'd like to offer an alternative for spare dough-- the 5 Pennsylvania congressional candidates who are progressive and will vote to defend the right to choice and work to defeat Bush's extreme right wing judicial nominees. All 5 are at the Blue America ActBlue page. Taking back the House, a battle that in great part will be won or lost in Pennsylvania, is at least as important as replacing the worthless Santorum with the probably not quite as worthless Casey.