This attack is just vicious and disgusting.

[beachmom]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/20/lindsey-graham-gay-conser_n_544554.html

Remember that Sen. Graham is a key ally for climate change legislation. Without him, the bill would be dead. I realize many of us have had concerns about his input in the bill; still, among the GOP caucus, although he is a solid conservative, he is far more sane than most. As to his private life, well, that is none of anyone's business. I just am sick and tired of this Tea Party crowd getting respect by the media. They have proven themselves time and time again to represent the ugliest aspects of America, and they need to be defeated. Not just with Democrats defeating Republicans, but WITHIN the Republican party. Graham isn't up for re-election until 2016, but still. This is really a NEW LOW for the right wing in this country, and I really didn't think there was anything lower than their behavior during the health care reform fight. With them, there is no bottom.

[karynnj]

1. It is sickening

It really is nobody's business. Graham really has been the victim of many nasty attacks ever since he wrote the op-ed with Kerry. He should get a lot of credit from our side for having the courage to continue to stand with Kerry and Lieberman.

I also agree with you that the tea party's treatment has been far too flattering. From the beginning where they rudely shouted at representatives, who were trying to answer them, they should have been called on their bad behavior.

The reason might be who they really are. With their 57% approval of Bush, they are contain a large portion of the Republican diehards, who never left Bush. They are angry because they are out of power. It is scary that they are reconstituting themselves as plain talking populists. It is scary that they could take over the Republican party - as they seem to have - in FL. I just hope that they are seen as too extreme by the population as a whole. (But it is scary that in LTTE here, I have seen people site the John Birch Society, which I thought was long discredited.)

[Mass]

2. This is not new. Graham has been the target of rumors on his sexuality for years.

It comes back each time he tries to cooperate with the Democrats on anything. Little to do with the Tea Party, and a lot to do with nastiness when attacking somebody who opposes your ideas. If anything, this one has the merit to be upfront.Not that it is not bad. The issue should be irrelevant.

I would not blame the right alone on this. The left and gay right groups have also pursued Graham on this issue, including recently on DADT.

[beachmom]

3. Actually, one aspect is new. The winger attacking Graham is saying that Democrats

are blackmailing Graham to support their causes. As in in this guy's mind, John Kerry MADE Graham support climate change legislation OR ELSE the secret is out. So it's an attack on Democrats as well.

I agree with you that there are many gay activists and lefties who love to out gay Republican hypocrites (something for which I feel uncomfortable with unless the particular Republican in question is a champion "hate teh gays" legislator), but this attack is more egregious, IMO.

[karynnj]

4. I missed that

That really is pretty disgusting - and another sign that the sides are far too polarized is that people would believe that.

[blm]

5. SC's wingnut leaders have known about Graham forever - THEY are the ones who blackmailed him for

years to get their fascist needs met and he took it for all these years because he wanted the power of office.

[wisteria]

8. I agree with you on this. And, to suggest that there is blackmail going on is over the top.

Someone needs to call these people out when they suggest such things.

That said,I would suspect that all three Senators involved in the climate change bill knew they were going to be under attack for introducing this bill. It is a shame though.

[wisteria]

7. I don't think it is anyone business,Democrats,Republicans or the DADT people. n/t

[wisteria]

6. I would think Rove had a hand in this, but I guess it is just some of those he mentored.

I agree with you about Graham. I don't always agree with him, but for the most part he is a decent Senator who does what he thinks is in the best interest of this country and the people he represents. Some Republicans do not like those that think for themselves.

[Mass]

9. This political climate is getting really bad, and not only among republicans

Now Specter is criticizing Sestak's command record. What's next? And difficult to understand why Specter is stooping so low given that he is leading in all polls I saw.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/wire/sns-ap-us-pennsylvania-senate-ads,0,7714087.story

[wisteria]

10. I don't understand this either. Personally, I think he was advised incorrectly to air this.

He should pull the ad and perhaps offer an apology for being mistaken about Sestak's record. I have not seen Sestak come out directly and say it isn't true, But, he does repeat his service record and it seems there is no bases for this attack. It appears the Specter ad is a lie. I have sent an e-mail to Specter- for what that is worth - and told him how I felt about this ad. After seeing how the Republicans lied about Kerry's record, I think military service should be off limits unless there is real proof of dishonorable service. I still support Specter, but I am disapointed that he would stoop to this Repub level.
And, some of the polls seem closer than others. In th climate today, I think everyone is a bit nervous. But, I still believe he will come out ahead and has the best chance of beating Toomey in the general election. Toomey is really, really bad news if he gets elected. I would like to have supported Sestak, but Toomey is just too bad to take a change with Sestak.

[wisteria]

11. I have heard back from the Specter camp-that was quick!

They wrote a few nice things and then referred me to this site for more information on their claims about Rep. Sestak's military record. I post this so that others can take from it what they will. I will just add that I do not like unnamed sources, and one reference contains an unnamed source.

What Others Are Saying About Joe Sestak Being 'Relieved of Duty'
Posted on 04/21/2010 @ 04:51 PM

As Cong. Joe Sestak tries to re-write history about being relieved of duty in the Navy, here’s what others have said about Sestak creating a “poor command climate.”

Navy Times, March 20, 2006:


Mullen relieved Sestak from his position as deputy chief of naval operations for warfare requirements and programs and switched him to the office of vice chief. The Navy does not comment on the movement of flag officers. But a Navy official who declined to be named said Sestak was relieved due to an “extremely bad” command climate, adding that although analysis from Sestak’s shop was highly regarded, “saying it was not a pleasant place to work would be an understatement.” Subordinates said they were given excessive amounts of work.

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, April 5, 2010:


But a current admiral, who asked not to be identified speaking out against a former colleague, said Mr. Sestak wasn't unpopular for his desire to reduce the fleet size -- a view held by many over the years -- but rather for his "tyrannical" leadership style.


The admiral said Mr. Sestak was notorious for holding meetings at 10 p.m. on Friday nights, then ordering his staff back at 7 the next morning.


"He would command by intimidation and fear," the admiral said. "In today's Navy there's no way a guy like Joe Sestak would be able to have been as quote-unquote successful rising through the ranks."

Navy Times, Sept. 5 2007:


Former Navy Vice Adm. Joe Sestak, now a Democratic congressman from Pennsylvania, has a reputation as a “temperamental and demanding boss,” The Hill newspaper reported Tuesday -- qualities that led to his firing from a top Navy post two years ago.

Navy Times, August 8, 2005:


Adm. Mike Mullen hit the ground running as the new chief of naval operations, firing off a memo the day after taking command that exhorts sailors to renew their vows to defend the country and do so with all deliberate speed.


But perhaps more striking than Mullen’s first orders to the fleet was his swift sacking of a key deputy who was promoted to three stars by Mullen’s predecessor, Adm. Vern Clark. Vice Adm. Joe Sestak, deputy chief of naval operations for Warfare Requirements and Programs (N6/7) was considered an intellectual heavyweight in the Navy, but Mullen reassigned Sestak to points unknown on his opening day of business as the new CNO.


The official reason for Sestak’s removal: poor “command climate.”


Chief of Information Rear Adm. T. McCreary said Rear Adm. Mark Edwards, current director of the Surface Warfare division, will fill in for Sestak until a replacement can be “identified, nominated and confirmed.” Until further notice, Sestak will work as a special assistant to Vice CNO Adm. Robert Willard, McCreary said.


Whether or not it's the intended message, Mullen's very public firing of a high-profile officer will surely send ripples through the chain of command.


Sestak’s firing followed the release of an administrative bulletin outlining Mullen’s first orders on July 23, a day that found the new CNO multi-tasking.


A Navy official familiar with the situation who requested anonymity said life under Sestak went beyond just working hard to being an “extremely bad” command climate.


Pentagon sources said Sestak was known to keep appointments waiting outside his office at length and pile excessive amounts of work on his subordinates, keeping them deskbound at all hours. One described a verbally abusive leadership style.

[karynnj]

16. A good question is whether he has been able to keep Congressional staff

The accusations here, often from unnamed sources, are on traits that would impact campaign staff and his Congressional staff. Unlike in the military, they have the ability to leave if he really has an abusive leadership style. If the problem is just that he demands longer hours than others, the Congress or Senate might actually be a good match. From many accounts for many Senators, it seems like good Senators and Congressmen have workaholic staffs. It is a burn out job to be a staffer.

What is interesting is that the quality of his work and his judgment appear to be accepted by all.

I don't think that military experiences should be completely exempt from scrutiny. Imagine that instead of the military, he had worked for a major corporation or law firm and had been fired from a high position, it would have been part of the record. Do you think it will be fair if Boxer were to use the fact that HP fired Carly Fiorina? Spector's long record as a Senator is fair game, so it does seem that it is not wrong to question what was most of Sestack's adult career. In addition, these charges do not fly in the face of the official record or accuse him of lying about things he did.

I suspect that the injustice done to JK, by people lying about his service, might actually have made Democrats unwilling to examine military service at all other than to take it 100% as a major credential. (JK's main use of his service was that it showed character, judgment and leadership ability as a young man. But, his main credentials weer the rest of his adult life.) For Sestack (Massi or Clark) the military is most of their experience. Sestack's service should give him credit as someone who is extremely knowledgeable on military issues and intelligence and for having an incredible ability to explain these matters in a way that makes sense to people without that background. If there are issues with his management skills, his relations with his Congressional office are likely more relevant to what his relationship would be with his Senatorial staff.

[wisteria]

18. Good points, but I think it would be difficult to query his staff.

There was some further information at Specter's site about how Sestak pays his campaign staff and a personal testimonial from a person who claims to know both Sestak and Specter.
But, generally, I just want to see the primary come and go. With this Dem primary, Toomey has been able to gain some traction. And, as I have said before,Toomey is extremely bad news for PA. We are going to need a tough and nasty (unfortunately)candidate to take Toomey on because he will have corporate and ugly and mean Repubs backing him. Oh, and the Tea Party-whom he backs and whom back him.

[karynnj]

19. Great points - and I agree that a heated primary only helps Toomey

It is really too bad that PA has such a late primary.

[Mass]

21. Late primaries are a problem. It has helped many Republicans

in MA in governors' election. Republicans always have their duck in a row early on, while Democrats have hard fought primaries.

We should avoid this this year, but will have a three-way general election with a conservative Democrat running as an independent.

[Inuca]

14. I was disappointed by the ad

because I kind of like Specter :blush:. The ad seems way over the top and nasty and does indeed sound like swiftboating as Sestak characterized it yesterday (Hardball I think). There is something I cannot quite put my finger on that makes me uncomfortable about Sestak....

[karynnj]

17. I found a link that has the ad

http://www.politicspa.com/politicspa-specter-goes-up-with-negative-ad-on-sestak/9767/

The only comment on the Navy was that he was relieved of his duty for creating a "poor command" climate. The statistics are what they are on missing votes. This is true for anyone campaigning as a challenger. In one article, Sestack speaks of many missed when he was at his father's deathbed last year. If they account for many, Spector may have blew it because people will see this as reasonable or commendable - especially if none of the votes were close.

The fact that Spector has NYT and other papers quoting the same reason, this is different than swiftboating which was out and out lying. If Sestack can show that he was one of many people replaced when Mullen came in, then his claim that Mullen wanted his own people will look more likely. Not to mention, he has the option to do what JK did - put his fitness reports on his web site.

[beachmom]

20. It's an ugly race.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/84761847.html

One that I will stay out of.

[karynnj]

12. This one is even more explicit in arguing that Graham is buying

silence (??) by joining Kerry and Schumer. (They also very bizarrely attack Kerry on climate change and his intelligence (I bet they prefer Brown's and Palin's).

http://www.examiner.com/x-25466-DC-Independent-Examiner~y2010m4d21-Is-Lindsay-Graham-compromised

[wisteria]

13. That site is over the top partisan. They also claim Kerry is raising the gas tax 146%.

I am embarrassed this site has the name Philadelphia in it.

[karynnj]

15. True

All the examiner sites are like that - I think they are libertarian. They are playing games on the gas tax, taking a number that appeared in one paper, that had no source. Because the federal gas tax now is very small - 13.8 cents a gallon, adding say 20 cents a gallon, does equal about that percent increase. Environmentalists were argue that that increase is too small to cause any behavior change.