The Iraq Factor, and Local Races.

This one issue that (if the war is unresolved) will echo through almost every election. As a Democrat, how do you formulate a viable position on the war, that will 'support the troops' but show a clear separation from the current Bush administration policy that keeps us bleeding with no end in sight.

Bob Casey Jr. is running against Rick Santorum for the Senate seat in Pennsylvania, and watching his behavior is very telling.

Seeking votes in his campaign to oust Rick Santorum, perhaps the Senate's most vulnerable Republican, Casey mentioned Iraq once, and then only to laud "the valor of those young men and women who are dying for us"

When in a race, it is very dangerous to take a position that can be attacked, even using a false attack. The left so far has done a good job fighting off the lies from the right about being un-American and not supporting the troops. The The Pensacola News Journal notes the troops know, it is the policy, not the troops who the left are protesting.

I have run into people who don't support the president's views on Iraq or our objectives, but I haven't run into a single person who said (he or she) doesn't support the troops," said Jason Crawford, a Purple Heart recipient

This is the key, demand accountability for disastrous decisions made by the President, and his supporters in congress, but make sure those who are the tool of policy are still respected.

In the end, Casey should take this seat. Rick Santorum is weak. A man who has become a well deserved a punch line of jokes. Only the most blindly loyal of the right will still vote for him. His cheating his school out of thousands of dollars, his drive to again make contraception against the law, his stone-age outlook on the would will doom him.