For those who might be interested in following the primary results from the state of Pennsylvania, they will be available here beginning at 8pm EST.

Former Senator Santorum had my respect when he served in Washington and even after his defeat at the hands of Senator Casey, I tend to pay close attention when he speaks.

I did not always concur with Mr. Santorum but he was a strong supporter of President Bush and a reliable Republican vote on most major initiatives.

He has offered the following in defense of the candidacy of Senator McCain, relaying his thoughts as to why Conservatives should support his candidacy:

Anyone who knows me knows that I don’t shy away from offering my two-cents on the issues of the day, particularly in presidential races. And anyone who has heard me talk about the presidential race over the last few months knows that I’ve had, shall we say, some serious reservations about John McCain’s candidacy.
I’ve disagreed with him on immigration, global warming and federal protection of marriage. I’ve taken strong exception to his view that the federal government should fund embryonic stem-cell research. But disagreement on such issues is one of the reasons we have presidential primaries - so each party’s voters can sort out the issues and personalities and choose the candidate who best reflects their collective view. Republicans have done that. Now the question for conservatives is whether McCain fits the Reagan Axiom that someone you agree with on 80 percent of the issues is your friend, not your enemy.

Of all the issues confronting the United States today, none is more important than our nation’s security. Although these issues don’t dominate our news as they once did, we cannot forget that without a safe and secure country, all other issues don’t matter.

McCain is clearly the candidate with the capacity, judgment, experience and will to confront America’s enemies. He’s served our country honorably - heroically - in war. I served eight years with him on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and I can assure you he knows our military. Importantly, he also knows our enemies. He understands their capabilities and their aims. He will not sugarcoat the human or financial commitment and cost needed to defeat this enemy.

The most important social issue is life. Yes, I often wished McCain would have joined me on the Senate floor in debating Barbara Boxer on issues like the partial-birth-abortion ban. In the end, with the exception of embryonic stem-cell funding, he always voted for life and stood for the culture of life. In short, he’s been a reliable vote on life issues, which are critical to conservatives.

Many conservatives have given McCain poor marks for his involvement in the Gang of 14. I was in leadership pushing hard for a showdown with the Democrats on using the “Constitutional Option” to end their filibuster of judicial nominations. The Gang of 14 broke the impasse, and it probably was for the best. I was the one counting votes on that issue, and I was much less certain of success than others. In the end, the Gang deal resulted in numerous confirmations of qualified conservative jurists.

On judges, McCain has repeatedly made clear that he will, as his Web site states, “only nominate judges who understand that their role is to faithfully apply the law as written, not impose their opinions through judicial fiat.” Sounds good to me.

Yes, I disagreed with McCain’s opposition to President Bush’s tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. But I give him credit that he now thinks we must make those tax cuts permanent to boost our now-struggling economy.

And, yes, McCain has been a thorn in the side of many of us who supported important appropriations earmarks for our states. But he’s always objected with principled consistency.

This is but one example of McCain’s character - the kind of character I want in the person who answers 3 a.m. phone calls at the White House.

Whether you agree or disagree with the former Senator, the balance of the article makes further good points in regards to McCain’s candidacy. If you have a few moments, you might want to check it out.

Let me first say that I am so delighted it is Primary Day here in Pennsylvania and by this evening the state will settle back in from 6 solid weeks of steady campaigning by the two democratic candidates.

Enough already with the robo calls, knocks on the door and pollsters phoning peddling their wares.

As I felt about Iowa and New Hampshire when they dominated the news cycle for an endless period of time, I now feel about my home state. Be gone..you will not be missed.

Now with that off my chest, the following are the fundraising totals for all three presidential candidates for the month of March.

The March reports marked the end of the first quarter of 2008 and illustrated how fundraising has spiked dramatically compared to the four quarters of 2007. Obama has raised $132 million so far this year, surpassing his total for all of 2007. Clinton raised $68.5 in the first quarter of this year; her average quarterly fundraising in 2007 was $27 million. McCain has raised $38 million this year, also exceeding his 2007 total.

Obama’s fundraising in March led all candidates, but was still lower than the mark he set in February, when he raised more than $55 million. The Illinois senator has raised $235 million in his campaign.

One month, that’s all. Wow. And this was not even a record setting month for other than Senator McCain. Pretty good take don’t you agree? Americans are a generous people as are the corporations and special interest groups who contribute to these campaigns. But I ask, is it necessary money?

What prompted this post was a trip to the local supermarket Sunday morning. Now I know it seems strange to equate campaign cash to a mundane task we all face, but please bear with me.

There have been many occasions when (especially in the grocery store) I have observed those who appear to be on a fixed income carefully choose their weekly food. When I say it is carefully chosen, it is not meant from the sense of how ripe a tomato might be but rather how much that tomato costs.

Being a careful shopper myself and one who strives to maintain a budget, I can understand that type of scrutiny. But, and there is a but (and a point here), when I see what I did on Sunday morning it sets me to wondering how we justify the monies laid out above for something as trivial as a catering platter to impress local officials or for that matter cash for these robo calls which do no more than disturb a household.

To the point now. An elderly gentleman was ahead of me at the deli counter and I heard him ask the clerk for his “regular order.” This consisted of six slices of their cheapest ham and four slices of whatever cheese was on sale. In his hand basket was a small loaf of bread, and quart of milk and a half dozen eggs.

This was a very pleasant man, one who reminded me of my paternal grandfather which is why I suppose I noticed his order in such detail.

Upon his departure, it was pointed out to me that he has frequented this particular store for years and his budget now only allows for a few items to be purchased weekly. The market has offered him assistance in various areas but his pride evidently will not allow him to accept.

I thought of food stamps but many equate that with welfare and will simply not apply. Some might say that is foolish but I do not know if given the same situation that I would avail myself of the program. I only knew that watching this polite, pleasant, proud man walk away with his meager basket left me rather depressed.

It wasn’t a feeling so much of despair for him, but as I thought of all the money which, in my opinion, has been frittered away on incidentals in the primaries of both parties it caused me to become more disillusioned with the political process in this country than I already am.

Why should one child go hungry or a single mom or dad struggle to feed and clothe their family? Why should those who help build this country through their hard, sometimes tedious work be forced to sustain themselves with so little?

Both parties talk a good game when it comes to poverty in this country. They promise free health care, increases in social security for those in their “golden years” and countless programs which will be supported by the government to sustain the health and welfare of those in need. Promise is the operative word in the preceding sentence.

We are known for our generosity abroad yet we forget those who are in dire need right here at home.

Sure, community groups, churches and charities can help and should. I am not an advocate for larger government programs which so often do not provide the assistance for which they are designed but many times line the pockets of those who are tasked to administer them.

So I ask this. If so many are willing to give so much just based on partisanship and political power, why then could they not give with the same zeal to those who would benefit the most from their gift?
Is there no way we could filter this money so unwisely spent on something which will be forgotten within hours of completion to those in need?

It wasn’t always like this. America has persevered in very hard times in the past but along the way somehow we have lost our way.

Now you must be wealthy to run for those offices which should have the interests of those like the man at the deli counter at heart.

The problem is, the majority of these folks have not graced a market or most other establishments “ordinary Americans” (credit to David) frequent other than on a quick campaign stop. They do not really have a notion of the struggle of every day life for so many in this country.

Sorry for the rambling post folks, but every once in a while something happens in life which makes you recognize that priorities are turned up-side-down. Funny that it was a man at a deli counter who aroused those feelings in me. Problem is, the problem is not new. Poverty touches all age groups, all races and religions. Now (sigh) if there was just a solution.