Santorum under the microscope

The conventional wisdom is that all publicity is good for a politician, but it's hard to know what to make of the way that Santorum has been getting coverage lately. A flurry of bits along these lines:

1. Tom Ferrick had a Sunday column looking at what he calls the wacko factor in recent Santorum news. His conclusion?

   I have to assume this is a deliberate strategy with two goals:
   
   One. Energize his base by turning the election into a moral crusade. Two. Peel moderate voters away from Casey by tagging him as a representative of the radical-feminist-no-fault-freedom-liberal-decadent-anti-family Democrats, if you'll excuse my hyper-hyphenation.
   
   In this scenario, Casey becomes the extremist. It is a plausible strategy, unless the Wacko Factor comes into play and voters decide that Santorum fits Winston Churchill's definition of a fanatic - a man who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

   Interesting analysis, if peppered with snark.
   
   
2. A Daily News editorial piles on the perplexity, wondering whether Santorum really wants to get reelected, given his strong recent statements.
   
   
3. Two more columnists at the DN look into the Santorum crystal ball, trying to figure out what the Senator may have in mind for 2006 and beyond, and concluding that it's mighty difficult to say.
   
   
4. Meanwhile, the Republican National Committee is coming to Rick's aid with an early show of support, by having a summer meeting in Pittsburgh.

   "I don't think that was lost on us," [RNC spokesman] McLear said. "Pennsylvania's a crucial swing state, and I think it's beneficial not only to Sen. Santorum, but also to the other candidates in the Pittsburgh area, to bring a couple of hundred Republicans into town from all over the country."

   No, that probably wouldn't hurt his visibility, but who knows whether it fits with his long-term schemes...