Sestak email blitz gone wild!

[PADEMJES12]

I just got two emails from Joe Sestak within 24 hours, asking for money... its gotta be totally annoying. The second was a real stretch, someone better take him to the eye doctors because now he's seemingly envisioning that he's the spokesman for the Pennsylvania Democratic Party base, which ive obviously been a member of for years longer than he has. Here's this guy (Sestak) that moves to the state a couple years ago, was a lifelong independent, who hardly voted... and then now acts like he's the torch carrier. Then has the nerve to divide the Party for his personal political gain, when we need to be the "Big Tent Party" and unite together to win in 2010.

Here's an little excerpt:

"There is a real disconnect between the Washington, DC establishment and Democrats in Pennsylvania. With each passing week, as we've climbed in the polls, we've heard it. We've seen it. There is a visible, increasing crescendo by Pennsylvania Democrats that an injustice has been rendered upon us."

If Joe wants to talk about disconnect between Washington DC establishment and Democrats in Pennsylvania that's fine. I keep seeing claims on various blogs that his family may no longer live in their Edgemont home in Pennsylvania. So that excludes them from being "Democrats in Pennsylvania." Keep your eyes open.


Sestak may seemingly be pulling another "Tricky Ricky" Santorum on us Pennsylvania residents (w his Penn Hills home)... says something like i guess his wife appears to be a registered voter in Virginia, and switched right after Joe got elected to Congress in 2006. Ironically, the Sestak's appear to be not only part of the Washington DC establishment, but also "established in Washington DC" as opposed to Edgemont if this premise is true. So yes, from my perspective, there seems to be a disconnect with Joe's logic from the outset that he includes himself as one of the Pennsylvania Democratic party base, when i come to the conclusion that he seems an obvious carpetbagger, which wont go over well.

Here's another little excerpt from Sestak in his update/solicitation:

"Pennsylvania Democrats did not ask for Arlen. Pennsylvania Democrats did not seek out Arlen. Pennsylvania Democrats do not want Arlen ... whom we've been voting against all these years.

As Lyndon Johnson said, "the vote is the most powerful instrument ever devised by man for breaking down injustice" ... and that powerful instrument will soon be unleashed by the Democratic base, but we need your financial support to do so."

A couple observations from this one, is that Joe Sestak includes himself in the "we" (long time) Pennsylvania Democrats. I for one, do not want Joe Sestak speaking for me as a Pennsylvania Democrat, so he should use the "I" insted of "we". He already tried that a few months ago, using a quote from Jim Burn Jr, and misrepresenting the prominent Allegheny County Democratic Party leader in an email to supporters giving them the impression that he supports them, when in fact he does not. He finished the first sentence with "whom we've been voting against all these years." Sestak is obviously new to Pennsylvania and was not a member of the Democratic party until opportunism surfaced in 2006. Thus, it is quite clear that Sestak himself from his voter record was a "no show" at the polling place while in the military, so the statement is essentially false. Joe hasnt been voting "all these years" and never showed up to vote.

I do find it interesting that Sestak uses a quote from Lyndon Johnson, the escalator of the Vietnam War who lied and disappointed the Democratic base in the late 1960s. Sestak, of course is a hawk like Johnson who has come out for a troop surge in Afghanistan, which will cost billions of dollars and stretch our troops even thinner on deployments. Joe's really confused w Afghanistan and I am proud to say... Joe Sestak... YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR THE DEMOCRATIC BASE. Sestak, like Johnson ran as the "warrior against the war" in 06, then turned around and voted for the Iraq wars and to fund Dick Cheney's office. He too... has some things in common with Lyndon Johnson. Sestak favors a policy that will take atleast another 3-5 years and hundreds of billions of dollars... but a daily Kos article said that US surged involvement will have us in Afghanistan for a much longer term commitment.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/12/8/17155/6197

With this kind of foolishness, its hard to see how we can focus on jobs and healthcare, when Joe Sestak wants us to spend billions fighting an open ended commitment of a war. So I for one, give Arlen credit... jobs should be the focus and not feeding the military industrial complex for decades to come... having our children go to war, with largely debt financed supplementals. So, to speak for the Democratic base as a much longer term Democrat than Joe... Joe you DO NOT speak for us, and we are glad that President Obama, Vice President Biden, Governor Rendell and Senator Casey have welcomed Arlen aboard, where he'll be a great ally in the Senate as he's already shown. Stop trying to speak for others and start worrying about speaking for yourself on Afghanistan.

[JPZenger]

1. It is interesting that you only care about 2 candidates

PADem: it is interesting that you only seem to have an interest in two candidates: Coakley for Mass. Senate and Specter for PA. Senate. Both on DU and on www.dailykos.com, I haven't found any posts by you on ANY other subject, such as health care, etc. In both cases, you spent all of your time on DU bashing the opponents of these two particular candidates on a daily basis.

If I looked further, would I find anything in common between these two campaigns?

[PADEMJES12]

2. did the Coakley one.....

because it was the hot topic :) not anything in common. I like to write and cover
races and candidates that peak my interest. Who do u like JP, if u don't mind me asking aside from
being a cheerleader for Joe sestak? I'll be covering the
Pennsylvania society this weekend so u can expect some stuff on that coming up and now
that Lou Barletta's coming back.... im sure we'll have a field day!

Yes particular races do peak my interest tough. The altmire-buchanan one will be a good one.
I expect the guvs race to be the hot ticket after new years.

[PADEMJES12]

3. guess theres a new Rasmussen.....

aka republican pollster out. These guys hate Snarlin Arlen, but here it is.
My own conclusion is that Sestak should drop out of the race, live to fight another day,
and we need to unite to defeat right winger Pat Toomey.

http://www.pa2010.com/2009/12/specter-leads-sestak-by-13-in-new-poll/#comments

[Born Free]

4. I like Joe Sestak better than Arlan Spector

I plan on voting for Joe in the primary, but will support Spector if he wins the primary. I am not suggesting Joe or any other politician is perfect, only that I think he will be better choice for Pa & USA than Spector. I have only been a democrat for about 30 years, maybe that is not long enough to be considered a real democrat by PADEMJES12. Of course, I probably fail a lot of litmus tests. It would have been better if a link to the said letter was posted rather than excerpts - I don't get emails from either campaign but do get a fer from Leahy and a few others on the health care issue.



.

[PADEMJES12]

5. thats your right born free, thanks for your support after Specter wins

We should be holding candidates to the same standard. I myself, as a longtime democrat wont be voting for sestak, who has only been in the state for a couple of years. Political opportunism is fine, but id never volunteer for sestak. He wouldnt even lift a finger to help out any of the judicial candidates. There is no "sestak" for team... his mentality seems to only be... team up for sestak.

Yes, born free, you are much more qualified as a long time Democrat to speak... Of course that's not the issue. The issue is Joe's arrogance in portraying to speak for the Democratic base, which is obviously similar to his wishful thinking in mis-representing Jim Burn Jr. a few months ago.

In terms of including emails, I feel including the whole thing would be inappropriate, but the parts that made me chuckle I wanted to include for everyone's enjoyment.

[Born Free]

6. we'll see...

I don't see Joe Sestak the same way you do and it has nothing to do with how long I have been a democrat. I do find it interesting how you throw the "opportunist" label, almost like it is a talking point by the opposition. To me, Sestak is the better choice. I don't let the polls and news media outlets persuade me into voting for the candidate they say will win, nor do I repeat campaign talking points over and over. I don't hate Spector, just don't think he is the best (democratic ) candidate we have, so I will choose Sestak in the primary, unless an even better candidate comes along that I believe would be better for the job. If by chance Spector is the candidate against the republican, I will probably vote for him. I was really angry with Spector during the Clarence Thomas (vs Anita Hill) hearings and voted for every democrat that ran against him, even though I knew they would probably lose. As I type this I am feeling that it will be tough for me to now vote for Spector just because he says he is a democrat. Perhaps I am the only democrat that still remembers all that....

[Bunny]

7. No, you are not the only Democrat that remembers Specter's treatment of Anita Hill.

I remember it very clearly. And come the general election, if Specter is 'our' candidate, it'll be with nose firmly held that I pull the lever for him. If I hadn't lived through twelve years of Rick Santorum, I'd be tempted to sit the whole thing out.

[PADEMJES12]

8. You're entitled to your choice,

may the best candidate win.

[Born Free]

9. Bunny

I know how you feel ... most democrats I know feel the same way. I don't personally know of any democrat that thinks Spector is the "best choice", only that he is better than anyone the right wing will choose.

[PADEMJES12]

10. Specter is a far better choice

for Pennsylvania, than is Sestak. I wouldnt be willing to trade someone with clout in DC for someone without clout... that being Sestak. Sestak knows how to change light bulbs... Specter knows how to operate the switch.

As a Democrat, im not all "gushey eyed" to throw my support to Sestak, who supported immunity for telephone companies to assist in warrantless wiretapping, essentially approving making a mockery of the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution. That is certainly why im glad to say Joe Sestak doesnt speak for me and Senator Specter does.

Also, i strongly oppose the troop surge in Afghanistan, therefore Sestak is unquestionably someone i would never support. I am glad to say Joe Sestak doesnt speak for me as a Democrat and Senator Specter does.

Sestak obviously lacks the know how to "steer the ship to safe waters" economically given his support of spending billions in a long term commitment to Afghanistan, at the same time when we need to be focusing on domestic concerns such as healthcare and the debt. I implore folks tp join me in telling Joe Sestak and others... NO MORE unfunded debt riddled financing of "nation building" in Afghanistan, where it has proved a catastrophe for the British, Soviets, and of course... even Alexander the Great.

[PADEMJES12]

11. Heres an interesting article from Washington Post

to illustrate my point regarding the debt riddled Afghan war and the detriment of what spending
another 3 to 5 years, or an open ended commitment would have on the debt, which according to the
article is an ever pressing matter. I thought Sestak would know this w a Masters in econ. If we let
him "command the ship" the ship will be sinking so to speak with his priorities. I want to see
priorities being directed towards homefront domestics, not piddled away in Afghanistan.

Anyways here's an article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/13/AR2009121302442.html?wpisrc=nl_pmopinions

[Born Free]

12. www.vote-smart.org

Those of you that would rather make your own judgment than allow others to manipulate your decisions, I suggest you visit Project Vote Smart, where fellow Americans volunteer their time and take no money from special interest groups to provide information on the various candidates. I will not quote any of the findings concerning Joe Sestak or Arlan Spector because there is enough information that it would be too easily manipulated because, as I posted previously there is no "Perfect" candidate. I could easily find information to use to support a particular argument, which I am sure some have done and will continue to do. It is far better that you look at it your self and you determine which things are most important to you. For example if you believe Joe Sestak should not be considered a true Pennsylvanian because he left Pennsylvania to serve in the Navy for 31 years it is all there to see, but some may consider it an honor to serve and understand that individuals in the armed forces can not stay at home. It all depends on how you want to view the information. The important thing is you can view it anyway you want to, not let someone else tell you what you should think.

I remember, not too long ago when the people that "knew what was best" for the USA in general and the democratic party in particular were convinced it was better to support Joe Lieberman rather than the candidate the democrats picked in primary. Many of those same people are now questioning if he is the best guy to have. The people that like to tell you what is right and best are not always the best people to listen to. Real changes come from the bottom up not the top down. One of my favorite talks I ever heard was about George Washington. The speaker described that during the time Washington and his band of misfits were freezing at Valley Forge, less than 20 miles away in Philadelphia the British were being wined and dined by the wealthy as no one believed Washington would even survive the winter. It was only after it became evident that Washington would prevail did they start to support him.

if you want to make your own decision check out http://www.vote-smart.org for an unbiased view of the candidates

[PADEMJES12]

13. I wouldn't analogize George Washington with Joe Sestak...

after all Washington perservered and maintained the Army despite poor conditions and inadequate funding from Congress, whereas Sestak is supporting sending billions of our funding (in debt on our children and grandchildren) to be piddled away in Afghanistan and straining our all volunteer army beyond its limit.

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

Washington was the General and Commander of the Continental Army, whereas Sestak, on the other hand was demoted to a 2 star admiral and i guess fired, or is it resigned because of "poor command climate". Although from my understanding, there may be a "revisionist" version of of firing/demotion/ resignation.

Nonetheless, aside from comparing Sestak to George Washington (which i did enjoy).... Im glad as a member of the Democratic base, to tell Joe Sestak to speak for himself on policies such as Afghanistan.

Im sure Born Free would agree that the candidates should be held to the same standard. I am glad President Barack Obama and Vice President Biden have endorsed Senator Specter to become our Democratic candidate!

[Born Free]

14. PADEMJES12 thanks...

You made my point very well !

Yes; these days people look at Washington in a different way then the people did back then. Back then he was not considered a hero, just a leader of a band of misfits. The British could have wiped out his bunch with absolutely NO problems, but they did not believe it was worth the trouble of marching 20 miles in the cold winter to do it. Washington was consider a "joke" to those in power that believed the "status quo" was best for America. If you look at the history of George Washington and compare him to the standards used today, he would have been consider a failure. He did not attend the better schools and he had to marry into money. As I posted, the "influential" people did not support him until after they saw he was winning.


My guess is you were also glad when the leaders in Washington said Joe Lieberman would be the better candidate to support. That top-down logic is exactly what I was referring to...

Once again ,

thanks



on edit : http://www.vote-smart.org is the placed for unbiased information

[PADEMJES12]

15. Thanks for the analogy....

if you'd look at sestak, i forgot to add... he cant maintain his staff like Washington did the "band of misfits" thru the Valley Forge winter. Same management problems he had in Navy. I see your point, but i respectfully think associating sestak to washington is comical. There's no doubt sestak views himself that way. Im not so sure how far that will get him... but im sure we'll find out.

Also, Washington didnt leave Valley Forge with all the supplies and leave his troops to defend it against the British. Im analogizing Sestak leaving the 7th district and taking the millions he raised with him and the Democrats to have to take away from other state races to defend this seat.

Another interesting observation is Washington was from Virginia, and the same could be said for Sestak in the sense he's what... now the Washington insider outsider???

[Born Free]

16. PADEMJES12

My analogy had nothing at all to do with comparing Washington to Sestak, it had to do with people in power during Washington's era being unable to recognize positive change. Almost every general argument you like to use in all your post gets into the same type of arguments the democrats in power used to keep Joe Lieberman in his position. Even though the average democratic primary voter wanted someone else - the people in charge of the party, the talking heads on TV - they all said the best thing is to keep supporting Joe Lieberman. Unfortunately , too many voters accepted that logic and now we democrats are in the situation where Joe Lieberman has the power he currently has. Your hatred for Sestak blocks your reason, you go out of you way to twist things and it is very noticeable, you would do better to cool off a little rather than spend so much time obsessing over ways to make Sestak look bad - it actually is having a negative affect on how people perceive you, and your posts may be considered more like political spam than anything else.. I agree that when you regurgitate the talking points from the opposition it doesn't sound too bad, but once you get off on your own way of thinking it really does go down hill fast. Unfortunately if all you do is regurgitate the talking points it turns too many democrats off, after a while many will not even pay attention to what you write. We all understand that you want Spector to win, and you are welcome to that way of thinking. I can't say I would be upset if Spector would win, I just don't think he is the best choice at this time.

I am sorry if anything I wrote may have offended you. My intention was not to harm you in any way or to get too personal. I am sure that in your own way you are just trying to do what you think is best and my goal is not to fight or debate you personally. I only wanted to give my current views considering Spector and Sestak. Now, I'll let you have the last words, as you seem to be the type of individual that has to have the last words ...





joe

[PADEMJES12]

17. Facts are stubborn things for Sestak too....

Joe's the type, if u dont buy into his psychology and drink the kool-aid, then there's something wrong with you. I do not hate Sestak...thats a little overboard. I disagree with some of his policies and think he's hypocritical himself and WILL BE held to the same standard as Specter, whether he or you or anyone else likes it or not... I was glad as a democrat to speak up that he does not speak for me on policies I disagree with. I am more than happy to straighten Sestak out on Afghanistan, warrantless wiretapping, and the like when i disagree with him on issues.

I certainly am not "obsessing to make Sestak look bad." Joe should have to answer and be held accountable for his votes just like anyone else. If he cant take the heat, tell him to get out of the kitchen.

You call my posts "political spam" not sure what to say, other than the fact that they have an article or policy position of Sestaks or another political topic and then i discuss my thoughts to it and post a link in some. I would call your accusation a very broad generalization not worth paying attention to, and if mine are selected out by you as spam, then 95 percent of other political blog posts are... its some analysis of Joe being a fake progressive, so i understand that sometimes the truth hurts. I must say I have really enjoyed responding to the comical analogy of Sestak being like George Washington. Man he's got some people bamboozled, tell his "band of misfits" not to drink too much of the kool aid.

Nonetheless... happy holidays! May the best candidate win and go on to defeat Toomey.