Pat Toomey always struck me as a very bright guy.
That's why I'm having trouble understanding why he is doing something so dumb.
I liked Toomey, in particular his expertise, that being economics. I know, a lot of people rapped his connection with Wall Street groups. But when he talks numbers, there's no questioning he knows his stuff. When talking about budgets, spending and deficits, he speaks with an ease that comes from a clear understanding of the issues.
He edged Delaware County Congressman Joe Sestak to become the junior senator from Pennsylvania back in 2010.
One of his most admirable acts was reaching across the aisle to partner with Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin from West Virginia on some common-sense gun control legislation that would beef up background checks.
He took a lot of heat from conservative groups over that stand, but stuck to his guns, in a way of speaking. It's hard to believe that Toomey, of all people, would be taking fire for not being conservative enough.
Maybe that's why he's standing with fellow Republicans on their head-scratching obstructionism when it comes to President Obama's nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court.
Not hours after the death of conservative icon Justice Antonin Scalia, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was saying that the president should not make a nomination in the last year of his term, instead leaving that to the new president after the November election to "give the people a voice" in the process.
Toomey concurred.
Unfortunately, that's not the way the Constitution is framed. Obama is president for eight years, not seven years and two months.
The fear, I suppose, was Republicans' belief that Obama would use his pick to tilt the 4-4 ideological split on the court after Scalia's death to the left with a liberal choice.
That went out the window this week when Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland, from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, who has garnered praise from both sides of the aisle and is widely respected as a "centrist."
That didn't matter much to Republicans.
McConnell said not only would Garland not get a hearing, he would not even meet with him.
Minutes after the Rose Garden ceremony at which Garland was introduced, Toomey put out this fairly incredible statement:
"With the U.S. Supreme Court’s balance at stake, and with the presidential election fewer than eight months away, it is wise to give the American people a more direct voice in the selection and confirmation of the next justice. Should Merrick Garland be nominated again by the next president, I would be happy to carefully consider his nomination, as I have done with dozens of judges submitted by President Obama.”
In other words, the nominee and his qualifications don't matter. What matters is that I'm not considering a nomination from this president.
It's that kind of thinking that the country is tired of, regardless of the fact that both Vice President Joe Biden and Obama could fairly be accused of using the same tactics.
I thought Pat Toomey was a lock to win another term, regardless who emerged from the Dem camp to oppose him.
Not anymore.
Like I said, he's a bright guy. I hope he's bright enough to reconsider this decision.
It just might cost him his seat, and Republicans control of the Senate.
Here's our editorial on the topic.
Comments