Sestak backs Murtha, but Hoyer gets Dem Majority Leader nod
An anonymous comment to a previous post said:
"Joe is the new face of the Democratic Party",isn't it kind of hypocritical that he said he was going to support Murtha after making an issue of Weldons ethics,is he going to be a puppet with Pelosi pulling the strings?Can't wait to see if PA7-Watch will call him on this.
The issue being referred to here is jockeying for position in the new Dem-controlled House leadership. With Nancy Pelosi voted in as the incoming Speaker of the House, there was a contest for the #2 spot as Democratic Majority Leader. Pelosi backed PA's Jack Murtha, but the Dems chose Rep. Steny Hoyer from Maryland.
My first comment is that if the anonymous commenter was a Weldon supporter, isn't it now a case of saying "my guy was corrupt, but your guy is backing a guy who we think is corrupt, so you guy is bad too." If the commenter was worried about corrupt Congressmen, were they trying to expose their own Congressman's corruption?
My second comment is that it was not Sestak "making an issue of Weldons ethics," it was the FBI. Sestak let the facts speak for themselves for the most part in the campaign and didn't go to great lengths to bash Weldon over it.
So, a RAZZIE to the anonymous flip-flopping poster. But a HURRAH for calling attention to the issue.
Now back to the issue, Sestak backing Murtha. I'm glad Hoyer was elected by his fellow Dems. I won't support Murtha's past, though I'm not too familiar with his alleged misdeeds. But I will support Murtha's bold stand as one of the first and initially few voices speaking out against the Iraq War. There was a shift when former military man Murtha spoke out. That made it okay for a lot of others to do the same thing. And that matched up well with what the voters wanted too. As stated in the Inquirer: "That Murtha is a decorated Vietnam War veteran with close ties to the Pentagon bolstered his credibility to make the antiwar case."
Why did Sestak back Murtha? Bill Bender in the Delco Times quotes Sestak:
And more from the Inquirer:
Also, Murtha spoke out and supported Sestak when the Weldon swift-boaters tried to take a shot at Sestak in the campaign.
Phil Heron gives Sestak a DART on this vote. Seems harsh from the guy who gave Weldon a LAUREL after the FBI raids, with a "Hang in there Curt" comment with it. I haven't forgotten that one! (wink)
So I will give Sestak a pass on this one. Though I don't agree with his choice, I understand why he voted that way. And I'm glad it turned out Hoyer got the nod by a pretty wide margin.
But in the larger picture, I backed Sestak, and I DO expect him to do what he said he would do, and I DO hold him to a high standard of ethics. I DO expect he won't fall into the same corrupt activities that his predecessor. If he does, the RAZZIES will fly!
"Joe is the new face of the Democratic Party",isn't it kind of hypocritical that he said he was going to support Murtha after making an issue of Weldons ethics,is he going to be a puppet with Pelosi pulling the strings?Can't wait to see if PA7-Watch will call him on this.
The issue being referred to here is jockeying for position in the new Dem-controlled House leadership. With Nancy Pelosi voted in as the incoming Speaker of the House, there was a contest for the #2 spot as Democratic Majority Leader. Pelosi backed PA's Jack Murtha, but the Dems chose Rep. Steny Hoyer from Maryland.
My first comment is that if the anonymous commenter was a Weldon supporter, isn't it now a case of saying "my guy was corrupt, but your guy is backing a guy who we think is corrupt, so you guy is bad too." If the commenter was worried about corrupt Congressmen, were they trying to expose their own Congressman's corruption?
My second comment is that it was not Sestak "making an issue of Weldons ethics," it was the FBI. Sestak let the facts speak for themselves for the most part in the campaign and didn't go to great lengths to bash Weldon over it.
So, a RAZZIE to the anonymous flip-flopping poster. But a HURRAH for calling attention to the issue.
Now back to the issue, Sestak backing Murtha. I'm glad Hoyer was elected by his fellow Dems. I won't support Murtha's past, though I'm not too familiar with his alleged misdeeds. But I will support Murtha's bold stand as one of the first and initially few voices speaking out against the Iraq War. There was a shift when former military man Murtha spoke out. That made it okay for a lot of others to do the same thing. And that matched up well with what the voters wanted too. As stated in the Inquirer: "That Murtha is a decorated Vietnam War veteran with close ties to the Pentagon bolstered his credibility to make the antiwar case."
Why did Sestak back Murtha? Bill Bender in the Delco Times quotes Sestak:
"(Murtha’s) position on Iraq, which is an extremely important issue for our nation, was one I much respected," said Sestak, a former Navy vice admiral
And more from the Inquirer:
"He's the dean of the Pennsylvania delegation, and I very much respect his position, which is one of moral courage, on Iraq," Sestak said.
Also, Murtha spoke out and supported Sestak when the Weldon swift-boaters tried to take a shot at Sestak in the campaign.
Phil Heron gives Sestak a DART on this vote. Seems harsh from the guy who gave Weldon a LAUREL after the FBI raids, with a "Hang in there Curt" comment with it. I haven't forgotten that one! (wink)
So I will give Sestak a pass on this one. Though I don't agree with his choice, I understand why he voted that way. And I'm glad it turned out Hoyer got the nod by a pretty wide margin.
But in the larger picture, I backed Sestak, and I DO expect him to do what he said he would do, and I DO hold him to a high standard of ethics. I DO expect he won't fall into the same corrupt activities that his predecessor. If he does, the RAZZIES will fly!
posted by Seventh Watch at 6:05 PM
23 Comments:
Voting with Murtha is hardly a suprise. Murtha is a highly regarded Vet that led the charge for the Iraq position that Joe ran on. Besides military guys tending to stick together, Murtha is also from Pennsylvania. It is doubtful that Sestak met or knew much about Hoyer, especially compared to Murtha.
And for all those people crying about "how was Joe going to help Boeing?", DUH!!
I am curious though.. the vote was supposed to be by secret ballot. When did Joe make his vote for Murtha public?
In addition to the connections previously listed: Vets against the war, Pennsylvania delegation, etc. the other important thing to note is that Murtha is powerful (soon Chair) on the House Appropriations sub-committee for defense spending.
Sestak and Murtha go way back, and Sestak's ability to help his constituents will be far greater for having backed Murtha, and by extension, Pelosi. That show of loyalty will be remembered, I'm sure, even though it was not a winning vote.
Also remember that until recently, Hoyer was a supporter of the war. How in the world is Sestak supposed to back him?
Good points. Besides, I don't recall any "Darts" for Weldon puckering up to kiss Tom DeLay's rear-end on years of votes.
The real tests for Sestak will come if/when he chooses to buck the party on a vote. Either the party will be viewed as wrong or he will.
BTW, does anybody know what committees Sestak will be sitting on?
www.cashill.com
check it out PA 7 Watch!!!!
Thanks for the link, Anonymous 3:41. Best laugh I've had in a long time...it's amazing how insane wingnut conspiracy freaks are drawn to one another.
For those who have better things to do with their time, let me summarize:
Clinton and Sandy Berger picked Joe Sestak to run against Curt Weldon because they needed to cover-up their involvement with shooting down TWA Flight 800.
And the guy who's peddling this story spent two and a half hours spinning his tale to Weldon and Caso in Washington this past July. Weldon, of course, was mesmerized by it and undoubtedly believed every word of it.
The fellows then spent the rest of the day complimenting each other on their snazzy tinfoil hats.
Anonymous-
Don't knock the tin hats. It keeps the terrorists from reading their minds. A peek into the twisted mind of conspiracy nuts like these guys would probably fall under the category of torture for telepathic terrorists.
Sounds, far-fetched? Well, the REAL truth behind Able Danger that Curt couldn't reveal was that Able Danger's operatives were in fact psychics. They were able to predict 9/11 attacks weeks after the fact. I got to meet one of them for a private demonstration. after careful examination of an ordinary newspaper, he could predict the previous night's lotttery number.
investigate yourself instead of just believe what everyone is throwing your way in that Sestak "really" wanted to be the next 7th district congressman or was he set up only to rid
Curt of his seat, that he maintained with overwhelming support from the 7th district for 10 terms...NOW...WHY would the 7th district who went for a democrat president would choose a republican for 10 terms and than all of sudden lose by 12%? Politics=Dirty Game!
A lot of incumbant Republicans were beat this year, not just Weldon. The WHY is very simple:
1) The majority oppose Bush and the war in Iraq.
2) Weldon was a Bush cheerleader and then forced to cut-and-run from Bush by the President's unpopularity.
3) There was a tremendous desire to flip control of Congress.
4) People are less swayed by Weldon's fear-mongering (terrorists in the supermarkets).
5) No WMD's and Able Danger discredited, again.
6) Oh, yeah. Sestak's daughter didn't get raided by the FBI.
to answer your checklist:
1.) I agree with this one...the thing though is, September 12, 2001
everyone was all about it...funny how impatient America is....
2.)Not true, know where he stands before you make these blanket statements like the rest of the people who oppose the war...(fyi..., our world is a much different world, people need to grab a hold of that and realize its not a over night battle....)
3.)I agree, but Weldon was for the 7th district, not Congress, which Sestak has no clue on, since he just "moved" back...now there's a man who knows this community! unbelievable!!!
4.)Again, when it(terroism) happens in our neighborhoods while Democrats take over and we see it more first hand, you will want to take back that point you just made....soon enough it will happen! Do NOT tell me its NOT going to happen, b/c it will if we stop fighting it over seas, it will be our seas that will see it!
5.) Ok...dirty politics, there is more than you see with your naked eye at the world of politics, you've got to agree with me on this. right? or are you just another leech off the media!
6.) His daughter is...what 6 years old! also, again why did this happen 3 weeks before elections, when it was "thrown away" by the Supreme Court 2 years earlier!! Nothing Happened...my conclusion is that you probally are a leech with the media, you believe it all like all other gullible DELCO residents, apologize for the slam, but it just frustrates me what and how much people believe from the media without doing the research themselves!!!!
According to Anonymous' post:
6.) His daughter is...what 6 years old! also, again why did this happen 3 weeks before elections, when it was "thrown away" by the Supreme Court 2 years earlier!! Nothing Happened...my conclusion is that you probally are a leech with the media, you believe it all like all other gullible DELCO residents, apologize for the slam, but it just frustrates me what and how much people believe from the media without doing the research themselves!!!!
It seems that "not doing the research" is a good way to come up with a post like the one quoted here. What are you referring to with the statement "...when it was "thrown away" by the Supreme Court 2 years earlier!!"
Maybe you mean the Republican-controlled House Ethics Committee (not the Supreme Court) that did a quick review of the Weldon ethics violations and apparently dismissed them. Even Weldon would not show the letter he said he had absolving him, leading us to draw our conclusions. And this committee should not be trusted to evaluate its own party's members - that's not true oversight.
Signed,
Media Leech, gullible DELCO resident
HERE IS YOUR ETHICS COMMITTEE....
Republicans
Doc Hastings, Washington
Judy Biggert, Illinois
Lamar Smith, Texas
Melissa Hart, Pennsylvania
Tom Cole, Oklahoma
Democrats
Howard L. Berman, California
Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Ohio
Gene Green, Texas
Lucille Roybal-Allard, California
Michael F. Doyle, Pennsylvania
Looks pretty even to me there...MEDIA LEECH, gullible DELCO resident
...again you do not understand politics to make those quick blanket statements....
It seems that you don't understand the politics of how things work in House Congressional committees. Yes, the number of members of each party is even, but the power is not. Lack of oversight is a big problem, another quick blanket statement there...and a true one, whether the above poster agrees or not.
Anonymous-
Wow! You are one of the most clueless to post here yet.
Your point-by-point "answers" to my checklist didn't even match up.
1) On Sept 12, 2001, I wasn't "all about it" going after Iraq. Iraq never had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks. I supported going into Afghanistan and opposed the Iraqi effort that diverted effort from capturing Bin Laden (more of a threat than Saddam).
2) Um, Weldon certainly was a Bush cheerleader. Lots of Bush-Weldon signs in 2004. Weldon even stated in an interview that he was going to run away from Bush (got to be close to run "away").
3) "Weldon was for the 7th district". Sort of. He handed out plenty in earmarks and patronage, and the FBI is investigating how much got kicked-back to his friends and family. Weldon also voted for sweetheart deals for drug companies, big oil, etc. Weldon opposed the mimimum wage increase, claiming it was bad for business. Weldon shirked his responsibilities on national issues, which ultimately impact negatively on the 7th district.
4) "When terrorism happens" next, it will be the result of Bush/GOP failures of the past six years which have bred more terrorists and weaken our international position. We've stretched the military too thin and lost the trust of potential allies.
5) ? What the heck are you talking about? Dirty politics? Weldon touted non-existent WMD's by mischaracterizing discarded/degraded weapons from a decade before. Able Danger was farce and discredited by more than just one source.
6) Supreme court? Man, you are clueless. Read Seventh Watch's posting.
In a committee, the chairman (party controlling congress) decides what matters get brought up, investigated, and voted upon. When previous GOP ethics committee chairman looked into DeLay, he was replaced by Hastert's hand-picked man. GOP didn't want any investigations.
As anonymous Weldon supporters go, you have made a rather poor showing and embarrassed yourself. Without anymore campaign staffers to draw from, the ranks of "anonymous" Weldon supporters must be pretty thin. Going to get thinner when investigation results become public.
1.) "So, no. I'll not thank him nor make any appologies. Any good will from his early career has long since been spent."
2.) "I'm not about to thank Weldon for his "years of service"
3.) "His years of service gave him more opportunities for taking advantage of his position than we'll ever even find out about."
4.) "He used his campaign funds for lifestyle with expensive meals and trips and labeled them "campaign meetings".
5.) "People are less swayed by Weldon's fear-mongering"
...said by David Diano
David, well it looks like your opionion is conclusive and abrupt... you "hate" curt weldon and love the "democrat" form Virginia, thats fine, i am not going to change that, but at least recognize, curts accomplishments and why he was voted in 10 terms...20 years!!!!
Seventh Watch...thank you for taking the "higher ground" and being professional about your debate and arguments, even though i am family of Curt, I still respect your stance....
Chad-
Let's be clear. Tom DeLay accomplished a lot for his district as well, but at the expense of the rest of the country. Curt is like the diet-cola version of DeLay. Fewer calories (dollars) but same bad after taste.
I wonder what you'll all say if Curt gets convicted?
Even if he is exonerated (unlikely), I still disagree with his votes on National issues that I feel have hurt millions of Americans and led to the deaths of many thousands in Iraq. This outweighs any pork/earmarks he brought into the district.
Again david, its like an old record with you, for some reason it just doesn't stop....your stance is clear and abrupt, i am sorry you have felt this way about curt, as i have seen in other post by you, you clearly push the DEMOCRAT button at the polls...
Thats just not how i vote...
I really do hope that Sestak can take this county to another level, since this is MY county, but being away for many years i just find it very hard...Time will tell, right?
Duh. Of course I pushed the button for the Democrats. The right-wing GOP policies have finally been revealed for the failures and fiascos many of us feared. The RESOUNDING defeat of Weldon and Santorum is a significant indictment of their hypocrisy of "more honest government" as lobbying and corruption broke all previous records.
Chad, some people want to believe Bush, Santorum and Weldon are honorable people. The vast majority saw that their rhetoric did not match obvious reality and voted accordingly.
I don't see Sestak taking "this county to another level". He's not the "Second Coming". He was able to bring more attention to key issues than past Democratic candidates and thus allowed us to flip one seat out of 435.
Weldon (and the Delco GOP machine) was greatly resented by many businessmen that felt coerced into contributing to the machine lest some misfortune fall upon their businesses, zoning requests, court hearings, etc.
There are plenty of people that gave to Weldon publicly, but privately couldn't wait to get rid of him and weaken the corrupt Delco GOP machine. These aren't just Democrats registered as Republicans, but rather life long Republicans that felt Curt had gone astray and they were looking to clean house. Sestak was the viable alternative for which they'd been waiting.
While Curt may have been an okay Congressman 20 years ago, he ended up part of the problem rather than the solution.
okk, thats enough... good words david! nice opionion....thats about how i see it...hope our "predecessor" can meet all YOUR needs!
by the way your opionion is your opionion, please do not lump all politicians together! but apparently you already do that! thats ashame...but i guess its very typical with the American society!!
I don't lump all politicians together. Just the bad ones. Therefore, I did lump Bush, Santorum and Weldon because they have initiated, promoted, defended and refused to acknowledge their many policy failures.
I have absolutely no idea what you mean by "hope our 'predecessor' can meet all YOUR needs!" Did you mean successor?
I'm a highly educated person with a diverse set of computer skills during a technical boom. My well-being is does not rely upon earmarks, kickbacks, and the other patronage aspects of Weldon's tenure (or Sestak's either). However, I have hopes that Sestak will be a factor in some healthcare reforms to lower my insurance rates and set up better medical infrastructure for my old age. I choose based upon expected votes on national policies. I think the Democrats will do a better job spending my tax dollars on the things I care about that benefit society: lower drug prices, public transportation, environmental cleanup, civil rights, etc.
I'll get back to you in two years....
"I don't lump all politicians together."....
"Duh. Of course I pushed the button for the Democrats."
said by david diano
hahah!
LOL. Nice try.
a) Four is not "all".
b) By "not lumping" I meant that just because I feel the GOP leadership is corrupt, that doesn't mean that I fell all the Republicans are corrupt.
See you in two years.
so 2 years later, has curt been taken down yet with the charges brought against him at the election of 06?
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home