Hmm, sounds like he misread the mood in the room. It happens.

David Diano, might you have an opinion in this matter?

Of course I do! (do you really need to ask?)

This is not the first time Sestak has tried to interject religion.

1) When he first announced in February 2006, he told a story about talking to a young sailor on the eve of battle. The story ended with Sestak determining that to this sailor, Sestak was a deity. Direct quote from Sestak that day: “I was his God.”
100% true story.
When everybody was shaking hands and meeting the candidate I told him flat out that it was creepy and he shouldn’t be saying stuff like that.

2) When Sestak talks about Specter’s party switch, he says “As a Catholic, I understand about conversions.” But, then, by analogy, goes to undercut that Specter has really converted by blaming him for past sins under his previous religion (Republican).

What Sestak is effectively doing is trying to tap into any Antisemitism he can find. He’s subliminally sending the message: “I am a Catholic/Christian and Jews can’t be trusted.”

It’s hard to say which possible explanation is worse:
1) That it’s deliberate
2) That Sestak really feels that way, and doesn’t realize it’s slipping out.
3) That he’s so insensitive and politically tone-deaf that he doesn’t realize how he comes across
4) That he’s trying lay ground work to appeal to religious conservatives

Sestak went to Catholic school back in the late 60’s and early 70’s. It’s not like he would have had Jewish classmates. He probably heard a lot of off-color Jewish jokes.

Well, I’ve got one for Joe:

Q: How many Jews does it take to keep Sestak out of the Senate?

A: One. Arlen Specter.

Great joke Diano, I’ll borrow that one for water cooler chat or cocktail hour.

Just dont tell any polish jokes or Lee will put you in the time out chair. Is he trying to use a higher calling to brainwash people…. whats the deal??

Those “past sins” have real consequences for real people. Specter was a real Republican, and can’t hide behind some token bipartisanship on a handful of issues to disguise the fact that he was with the GOP on all their worst ideas. Is anyone seriously suggesting that he didn’t really believe in supply-side economics and deregulation? Specter is asking a Democratic primary electorate to choose him as their candidate despite his Republican record simply because he can’t win a primary against Pat Toomey. Otherwise, Democrats would happily be running against him if Toomey were not in the race. There’s no reason he deserves to be our candidate.

Jon-
Are you willing to give Specter any points for “past courage” like the stimulus bill, stem cells, etc.
Ask Toomey’s and the current “real” Republicans if Specter is one of them. If he’s not a “real” Republican, then he can play on our team. He’s can’t get elected as a Republican because he isn’t one. (and the Toomey fans think he never was)

BTW, Joe’s not a real Democrat. But, since he got elected as one, his sins count as current, not past.

Jon, so Obama supporting him doesn’t even count as one reason? With all the people supporting Arlen, and votes he’s made to help us, and his active role in helping push health care reform… your count of reasons is still ZERO??

I’ve got something to kick up the count over to at least ONE, that supersedes all the other reasons to count: Specter isn’t Sestak.

That’s reason enough.

“Of course I do! (do you really need to ask?)”

Thanks, David, that was truly my best laugh of the day. You get points for that one.

On the topic of Laura’s article, although I continue to believe firmly that Sestak will make a far superior senator than Specter, I have my doubts about whether his campaign(ing) is ready for prime time.

[...] ‘Church’ talk raises eyebrows at Dauphin County Dems dinner… [...]

You know, David, I just don’t see the anti-Semitism there. Do you think he’s writing off the Jewish vote, assuming that they will turn out in force for Sen. Specter?

flynnbw-
Sestak’s going to have a lot of trouble with the Jewish vote, even in Delaware county, where Specter has consistently done well.

Even though there was nothing wrong with Sestak speaking at the CAIR event back in 2007, he still ticked off a lot of people in the local Jewish community.

It’s not that Sestak is antisemitic, but more like he’s unaware of them, except as a voting block. He’s not really tuned into or connected to their concerns.
Kind of like when Bush was at the White House and said: “I couldn’t imagine somebody like Osama bin Laden understanding the joy of Hanukkah.”

He’s just so wrapped up in his own faith, that he’s clueless about how others think about theirs. He’s also a little weak overall about the Constitutional separation of powers, so no surprise he’s weak on separation of church and state.

Lee-
Glad to give you a chuckle there.

Sestak is a terribly amateur campaigner. The reason he got this far is that he’s a pit bull when it comes to fundraising (and too selfish to share the wealth or give back to the local Dems that got him elected).

He’s not ready for the big leagues against someone like Toomey. Toomey already kicked Joe’s a$$ in that health care debate, and has been using Joe to weaken Specter. Sestak’s too clueless to realize how much support he’s getting from Toomey, because they know they can defeat Joe and can’t beat Arlen.
If Arlen wins, his Dem credentials improve, but he will still appeal to the moderates and independents.
If Sestak wins the Primary, he’ll have to fight to win the middle. Toomey’s a right-winger, but he’s already staking out that middle territory. Sestak’s too inexperience to evict Toomey from the middle after running hard to the left to outflank Specter.
Specter’s already in the middle. “Middle” is Specter’s middle name.

“Specter’s already in the middle. “Middle” is Specter’s middle name.”

No argument. That’s precisely the problem. I prefer someone with principles over someone who constantly is doing the political math to see where it’s safe (or middle) to be. I know where the former will stand on most issues. I can’t trust the latter.

“Is anyone seriously suggesting that he didn’t really believe in supply-side economics and deregulation?”

…or the flat tax he introduced in every session of congress since the Mid-90s? or the blue dog balanced budget amendment?

The economy will be the most important issue of this election (if we ever get to hear about the issues), and guess what- voting for a recovery package (that you had a hand in making necessary) doesn’t negate being on the wrong side of economic issues so many times.

Jack

Senator Specter has won Union working family support time and time again. He will have that support again this time and rightfully so.

You need to be questioning why “the Admiral” didnt have the courage to vote with our PA Democratic delegation for HR 1664.

Lee-
1) Don’t think that Sestak hasn’t been doing political math. He touts his conservatism with conservatives and pretends to be a liberal with the netroots crowd. Specter is more predictable about where he will stand than Sestak (ask anyone surprised about Sestak’s votes for Iraq and Cheney).

2) Specter genuinely is in the middle. It’s not always fence straddling. He’s pretty liberal on social issues. While I’m for regulation that prevents fraud and abuse, I do agree that some things are over-regulated or regulated with the wrong set of incentives.

Capt Jack-
The proper balance of tax rates, regulation, etc. has a broad spectrum of opinion, and Specter is to the left of some long-time Dem senators.

There were plenty of Dems that went along with policies that led to the problems we face. Except for Feingold, the Patriot Act was unanimous in the Senate.

If you and the rest of the Sestak team really think you can lay the crisis at Specter’s feet, good luck.

Sestak has no real economic plans or gravitas. The best he can do is support Obama (who is supporting Specter).

“Even though there was nothing wrong with Sestak speaking at the CAIR event back in 2007, he still ticked off a lot of people in the local Jewish community.”

I forgot about that! Yeah, it’s not necessarily that he showed anti-Semitism going to that; just a little bit of cluelessness about the concerns of our Jewish community in Pennsylvania. Good point.

On that CAIR issue, I backed Sestak to the hilt (about as strongly as I’m now against him becoming Senator), because I felt the protrayals of CAIR were anti-Islamic racism.

Also, I understood that Sestak got signed up for it “by accident”. He got committed to going there by a staffer who didn’t consult Sestak’s political “calculator”. He certainly wouldn’t have signed up in the first place, but was stuck and he couldn’t back out.

I heard something back in 2005 or was it 2007 that Sestak has or had a staffer or something with ties to Hamas or something… can someone elaborate on this? Or am I thinking of this CAIR issue, which you folks discussed… can someone elaborate.

It was girl who was a member of CAIR (or closely associated). She’s the one that set up Sestak speaking at event.

“if we ever get to hear about the issues”

Jack

You are absolutely right about that. We are hearing about everything but the issues. And that is precisely why I said that I had reservations about whether Sestak’s campaign (as opposed to his worth as a senator) is ready for prime time. Sestak has got to be the one to raise and address the issues and stay focused on them, regardless of the distractions raised by Specter. So far, as you implied, he hasn’t been doing it. Sestak needs to be told that.

Lee—

Sestak loves himself too much to do that from what info ive seen so far. Specter will work him over in a debate

Sestak’s the one offering distractions and gimmicks.

On the issues that Sestak is picking, he’s got very little experience or gravitas.

I caught his appearance on CNBC with Toomey. Sestak kept making navy analogies about the economy running aground, fixing leaks, etc. VERY lame. The host, Kudlow, even made a snickering comment about expecting that kind of talk from a former admiral. Joe did manage to slam Obama a bit. Way to go, Traitor Joe.

Sestak’s campaign boils down to “I used to be an admiral. Be impressed. Love me. Worship me. Elect me.”

Sestak’s trying to toss dirt on Specter. It just shows what an outsider/carpetbagger Joe is to Pennsylvania. Specter has nowhere to go but UP in the eyes of Democrats. NONE of the “bad” stuff Sestak is digging up (not a lot of digging required) amounts to a news-flash.

Specter, on the other hand, has a long list of votes where he crossed the isle to help important Democratic causes. That list is news to most Democrats.

Most Democrats don’t know Sestak’s dirty-little-secret about his votes to support Bush in Iraq and funding Cheney’s office. Seriously, most Dems are completely unaware of Sestak’s betrayals of the party.

[...] is now seeking a seat in the Senate and is challenging Arlen Specter in the Democratic Primary. Sestak invoked his best Jules Winnfield (above) at a recent [...]

People play the religion card a lot in the white parts of Delco and the Seventh.

IME, many (most?) there are Catholics. If they claim to be “ex” Catholics, they still give the Catholic guy/gal a pass in ways that us deists, freethinkers, agnostics, and atheists never would. So people coming up there expect that pass wherever they go. More in a moment on the roots of that as I experience them.

They really do not understand that Protestants, and even many Catholics, not to mention Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, etc., outside Delco really want that wall between church and state to be absolute. As Judge John Jones clearly understood in his Kitzmiller decision.

I think it’s completely accurate, the observation that their self-centered worldview bars comprehension of any other perspective. The worldview is informed by the Vatican, not by pluralism. It is absolutist, not tolerant. It is convinced of its own infallibility. It is grounded in faith and hearsay and top-down-inflicted policy, not in reason and direct experience and consensus.

And it is unmasqued in moments like this–a Catholic running for office who demonstrates that he is ignorant of what this Republic means at its most basic essence. It is unmasqued as what it is: the commitment to converting the United State of America into a theocracy.

But all that aside, what mature person tries to manipulate others in this pandering, cheap way? This I fear is what “progressivism” has become. A bunch of sound-bite button-pushing. Karl Rove Media Thunderdome. Just like the right uses. And this is why it is dangerous: it ends up being used for the exact same kind of reactionary politics.

I am proud of Pennsylvanians who remain a bulwark against the creeping religious extremism of the 20th century that infects the 21st. Believe what you want, but keep it out of my face! My ancestors fought the Revolution to create a place where people would be liberated for all time from church and kings (the First Amendment) and would have the INDIVIDUAL ability to back up their INDIVIDUAL conscience (the Second).

So call me biased and mean, but I don’t vote for Catholics, whether they are “out” or not. You can’t serve two masters (Pope? or Constitution? guess which, and ask Patrick Kennedy about all that!).

You particularly cannot serve the Constitution when your religious leaders have said all along that the Constitution’s way of doing things is wrong, because only the Pope is right or ever can be.

I was educated by Catholics and had many Catholic relatives. They were mostly decent people, hard working, etc., when they weren’t hellbent on “saving me from damnation.” (Sorry, but if I “believed in” god, I could not possibly believe it would have such a taste for pettiness, meanness, conformity, surveillance, and torture! Such god as I would have is more like a mathematician with a killer sense of humor and an amazing toolbox of physics; consider the platypus.)

At bottom these Catholics really do not understand what this Republic is about. Most came to the US late (1870s and later) and hid inside ethnically, racially, religiously insulated enclaves. In the Seventh I’d get this weird impression that they thought they’re back in the Roman Empire or something, holy or otherwise. Their political development stalled long before the Enlightenment.

To this day they huff around thinking they are better than anyone because they are shackled to irrational beliefs about their superiority, and a divide-and-conquer mentality. When someone disagrees, or simply is silent, they assert this superiority…while the rest of us are trying to reason and consensus our way to liberty for as many people as possible.

I really wanted to support Mr. Sestak but he has systematically lost my regard and confidence over the past year to 18 months. Now I’m finding him just…scary.

I used to be one of those “progressives” who wanted more extreme politics. Nowadays I see that gravitas and moderation are the best engines of humane, rational praxis, and the moral and social evolution of humanity.

So guys like Mr. Sestak can run at the local level, and rant in ways that will evolve the political discourse (just as more conservative candidates/politicians can do). But when we get to the level of the US Senate, the next to the last thing we need is the bipolar disorder of Rovian politics. The very last thing we need is more damn religionists using politics to further their holier-and-righter-than-thou narcissism.