Sestak voted for warrantless wiretaps and Telecom immunity, too.

You are correct to observe Sestak’s run to the Left. However, if you look at his track record, he’s been more of a Blue Dog (even voting against the Dems on funding Cheney’s office).

Until Specter got into the race, Sestak was leaning more to the Right. He’d been appeasing Republicans in his districts, and expanding his appeal to PA conservatives outside his district. Specter is the one that forced Sestak to the Left.

flynnbw-
I’m sure that when the economy improves, Sestak will “clarify” his remarks to make it look like he never lost faith in Obama or the stimulus or hope.
To me, part of the genius of the stimulus was that it’s stretched out. It’s like giving a thirsty person a few barrels of water. He’s not going to drink them all at once (as the GOP thinks). Having a sustained supply until he can dig his own well brings stability.

I agree with you that without the concessions, the bill wasn’t going to pass. I think Specter deserves plenty of credit for his experience in knowing where the “sweet spot” was to peel off some GOP votes. Sestak criticizes Specter for knocking money off the package, without Sestak understanding that 90% of a loaf is better than none.

You just can’t have both — and that’s one of the things that Washington politicians really don’t understand about how things work at the local level. (And I would include both Sen. Specter and Rep. Sestak in this category).

Let’s face it: the stimulus wasn’t the best-crafted legislation in the world, but politics is the art of the possible, and without (in my opinion wrong-headed) concessions to the conservative Ds and the ladies from Maine, it wouldn’t have passed.

At this point, most economists agree that the stimulus provided badly-needed economic activity at a time when private companies were not making outlays. It also gave confidence to the overall economy.

I would like to see Rep. Sestak clarify his remarks.

I’m a Democrat who is still on the fence between the two candidates and I have to say that statements such as these are pushing me into Specter’s camp.

Aside from all of the extraneous “Christmas tree ornament programs” added to the bill (driving up the cost), there were not sufficient review standards for receipt of the money to assure the production of immediate job creation. Thus, we can’t truly measure how successful the legislation has been.

To the extent that Sestak is being honest and observing that it was not a perfect bill, he is to be applauded for his candid remarks. It is the basis for improving future legislation. Toomey will twist and misrepresent whatever either of his opponents (Specter or Sestak) say.

Sestak’s “Plan B” appears to working as Toomey’s campaign manager after Specter wins the primary.

Sestak also said:
“There’s no such thing as a shovel-ready job.”

This is just plain stupid (politically and on the facts). There were plenty of immediate road maintenance projects (even things like installing guard rails) that had came back from the dead as a result of the stimulus. These projects employed the very blue collar construction workers that have been suffering the most.

Sestak’s claim that Specter weakened the stimulus is also bogus. The simple truth is that the original untrimmed bill wasn’t going to pass at the bigger number. Specter got the bill to a point where he could bring two more Republicans on to pass it.
Specter deserves credit for getting it passed. Specter’s CONSISTENT position is that he thought without the bill, we’d be headed into another Great Depression. Specter didn’t “oversell it”.

This is just another example of Sestak having no Democratic core and maybe some payback to Obama and Dem establishment for not supporting him over Specter. This proves that the party was right to back Specter.