True colors shining thru for Sestak and Specter with Afghanistan

[PADEMJES12]

Seeking to shield his support of pro longing the Afghanistan war and 30,000 troop surge, which would be according to Sestak "another three to five years in Afghanistan", after campaigning as the "warrior against the war" in 2006, but then turning around to vote for multiple war funding efforts... Rep. Joe Sestak is now back into attack mode, slamming Senator Specter on the economy in a side by side comparison. Rep. Sestak, however, for all his negative attacks, is coming off as a somewhat divisive candidate, something that plays right into the Republicans hands and is a huge turn off to the Pennsylvania Democratic base, who is more focused on unity and bringing new folks into the process. A little audio theme audio below for everyone to enjoy :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zek_Ncac1Kc

Sestak, in his little side by side economic comparison in which he criticized Senator Specter, failed to omit that he abdicated economic common sense (and reality) by just favoring spending 40 billion dollars to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan in this economic climate, where we do not need to incur more debt. Senator Specter thankfully opposes the troop surge. I didnt see Sestak touting that as an economic accomplishment. Its an economic blunder in a time of difficult economic reality, where we need to be spending money on HEALTHCARE NOT WARFARE! Sestak supporting another 3-5 years and possibly more future troop increases in Afghanistan (as his track record to date has shown) to me is not very progressive as well as foolish economically and im glad Rep. Sestak's true colors are shining through before the primary.

I also didnt see him touting the fact that he voted against HR 1664 http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1664/show, the Grayson Pay for Performance Act, to prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards. This when essentially the entire Pennsylvania Democratic delegation did vote in favor of HR 1664. Middle class folks have a hard time reconciling w Sestak's logic to vote "No" against a motion that would demand corporate and wall street fat cat executives to be paid on performance, like all of us hard working Pennsylvanians are. Does NOT sound very progressive to me.

Sestak also failed to mention that he recently cried wolf just $158 billion into the Administrations $787 billion stimulus package, saying it was over sold, when in fact the Obama Administration has saved thousands of teachers, firefighters, and first repsonders jobs in our local communities in this time of short fall funding. I would hope that Rep. Sestak would stop the negativism and sit down and start working with Senator Specter on how to improve the economy and bring jobs to Pennsylvania. Not only does it hurt the party, but it detracts from the representation folks are getting from their congressman. Senator Specter has been focused more on jobs it seems. http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/2695874/

However, Sestak for his part has been showing up more often to work these days after receiving a letter from Senator Specter asking him not to waste the taxpayers money with his rampant absenteeism. Since receiving the letter from Senator Specter, Sestak has been doing better at showing up to work so thanks for saving our tax dollars Snarlin Arlen! However, the day Joe supported another 3-5 years and billions more spent in Afghanistan, im sure we'll mostly agree... is a day we wished Joe would have stayed home.

[JPZenger]

1. Afghanistan has been a home to many terrorists for 20 years

The threat from Afghanistan extends far beyond bin Laden. The country and immediately adjacent parts of Pakistan have been a base for multiple terrorism groups. If we are able to shut down Afghanistan as a base, there really aren't that many countries where they find refuge. Terrorist attacks against fellow Muslims and against Arab countries have caused a major decrease in public support among Muslims overseas for terrorists.

Rep. Sestak served in the Middle East and in the Pentagon and understands the real threats. The Iraq War was a waste. The war in Afghanistan is justifed, provided we have an exit strategy.

The Afghan National Army has broad support in the country and is greatly improving in capabilities. Unfortunately, the Afghan Police are corrupt. Obama's Plan is to direct US resources to the local leaders, ministries and organizations that prove that the aid is going directly to the people.

If we leave now, females in the country will never again be able to attend school.

The Taliban leaders and Al Quida are closely allied. We need economic policies that separate the people temporarily aiding the Taliban from the hardcore. At that point, we only have to fight the hardcore. That is what suceeded in Iraq. Using cold cash, we were able to turn hundreds of thousands of men in Iraq from fighting against us to fighting on our side.

[daviddiano]

2. Sestak's a hawk

Zenger-
Having served does not mean that Sestak knows more than others who have served and have different opinions.

Sestak claims Iraq was a waste, but he supported it while in the military and voted to fund it (without timetables) in congress. Now, Sestak is against Obama's 18-month timeline and instead talking about 3-5 years. There is not a single shred of evidence that Sestak truly opposes open-ended or unending war.

Sestak was a three-star (before he resigned as a two-star), but he remains a four-star phony.

[PADEMJES12]

3. Did Sestak resign or was he fired?

That aside, check out this link on the stoner Afghan soldiers. Looks like 18 months is unrealistic, better include funding for some McDonalds cheeseburgers if you are going to be training these guys.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQsK0oRphZw

Note a key point at the end. The taliban will wait out ten years like we would play a short game of tennis. That said, i couldnt look in the mirror and pretend its an 18 month commitment.

[JPZenger]

4. Thanks for your 6th post. Welcome to DU.

[PADEMJES12]

5. Heres an article someone from philly wrote Sunday

which essentially sums up everything Ive mentioned above.

http://www.philadelphiaweekly.com/news-and-opinion/Sestak-Wrong-on-Afghanistan-78645252.html?page=2&comments=1&showAll=#comments

[Number9Dream]

6. Specter gladly supported wasting money in Iraq

I know you like to pretend Specter's 40 years of Republicanism never existed, but reality's a bite. Let's look back at Instant Liberal, Instant Dove Arlen "saving our tax dollars":

Voted YES on $86 billion for military operations in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Oct 2003)
Voted NO on redeploying non-essential US troops out of Iraq in 9 months. (Dec 2007)
Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008. (Mar 2007)
Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Nov 2005)
Voted YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq. (Oct 2002)
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Arlen_Specter.htm

Talk about devisive... After Prersident Obama supported Specter, Specter won't support President Obama's war on terror, but he supported Bush's quagmire.

[PADEMJES12]

7. its the policy, u sure as well know that....

did joe show up for his economics classes at harvard? So much for your fake progressive!

[JPZenger]

8. Considering Sestak has a PhD from Harvard in Public Policy ...

Considering that Sestak has a PhD from Harvard in Public Policy, I think we can be certain that he did show up for economics classes.

[PADEMJES12]

9. Yes that's what makes this so astonishing....

(I was being sarcastic).

[PADEMJES12]

10. Interesting article to read....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-astore/the-price-of-pushing-our_b_393226.html