PA-7 Watch: Joe Sestak and Pennsylvania's 7th Congressional District

Joe vs The Sidekick?

2008-01-10T09:52:00.000-05:00

From Today's Daily News:
GOP delays nominations

The Delaware County Republican Party's nomination convention has been postponed from today until next Tuesday, putting off the selection of candidates for the 7th Congressional District and other races.

The party is considering nominating W. Craig Williams, an assistant U.S. attorney working under U.S. Attorney Pat Meehan in Philadelphia, to run against Democratic U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak, according to party sources.

So, if true, the GOP scramble to "duel" Sestak has resulted in the GOP's primary dueler failing to show up and leaving his "second" to take the bullet.

The "W" stands for "Wendell". Wendell Williams does satisfy one of the comic book staples of having names with alliteration. (Lex Luthor, Peter Parker, Lois Lane, etc.)

Bye-Bye to Another Bat-Villian

2007-11-21T09:13:00.001-05:00

In an unsurprising move, Upper Darby Police Chief Michael Chitwood officially dropped out of the race he never officially entered in the first place.

Choice Quotes from the Delco Times article:
"Congressman Sestak and the Democrats don’t have to worry about me," Chitwood said. Duh! We didn't worry about him before.

Chitwood said the scales really tipped on his decision against the congressional bid about three weeks ago during a search for a 4-year-old girl who had gone missing in the Stonehurst section of Upper Darby. Me thinks 5 weeks ago Chitwood saw that Sestak had 1.4 Million in the bank.

The Times noted that "Chitwood has also several times expressed a dislike for fundraising. Sestak apparently does not share that outlook — as of October, the freshman congressman had a war chest of more than $1,420,000."

"It's too early to think about the election; Joe is focused on change from Iraq and the economy to health care," said Sestak spokesman Clarence Tong upon hearing news of Chitwood's decision. Too early to think about election? When during raising the 1.4 mill did Joe stop thinking about re-election? Spokesman is a crappy job, like a pimp without the cool hat.

Finally:
Delaware County Republican Party leader Thomas Judge Sr. said Tuesday a few other potential candidates had also recently fallen off, but there are about three names left on a "short list" of possible Sestak challengers the party is still looking at.

"Nothing's been formalized yet, but we are looking at some individuals," he said.

individuals = "lambs to the slaughter"

Podcast - Inteview with Joe Sestak by Robert Henson

2007-10-23T08:26:00.000-04:00

Here is a radio interview/podcast from The Big Show with Robert Henson in Chester County.

Three New Bat-Villains

2007-09-20T09:36:00.000-04:00

In today's Philadelphia Daily News, Bill Bender takes a peek at three new names being floated to take on Sestak, especially Michael Chitwood.

Chitwood confirmed yesterday that he has been asked by Upper Darby Republican leader John McNichol to consider running for Congress.

If McNichol is backing him, what's McNichol hoping to get out of it? The GOP is certainly desperate to knock out Sestak now, while he is still a freshman, and they perceive him as vulnerable. (Clue: Joe was most vulnerable last year when he had no money, no name recognition, no political experience and running against a popular 20 year incumbent.)

Also on the list are John McMeekin II, a Philadelphia attorney and Radnor school board member, and Stephen Elliott, a deputy assistant secretary at the U.S. State Department.

McMeekin said he is "very serious" about a congressional bid, but would back anyone the GOP selected. Elliott could not be reached for comment.

How serious is McMeekin if he will just go along with whomever the GOP machine picks? There's a little thing called a Primary for those that are "very serious".

The rest of the article focuses mostly on Upper Darby Police Chief, Chitwood. (Let me guess, he's going to run on a platform of "law and order".) I don't know a lot about Chitwood's politics (yet) and it's unclear how his local experience will translate on nation issues like energy policy, education, Iraq, environment and health care. I wonder if he is for or against gun control. Does he think that terrorism is a military or police matter? Would people be concerned that a cop-turned-legislator would be a good defense against the trend to turn the US into a police state?

The article also mentions that Chitwood turned down an opportunity early last year to enter the gubernatorial race in Maine, where he had served as a police chief.

Now, that is interesting. Would the former Weldon-zombies repeat their chant of "carpet-bagger"? While I suspect that Chitwood is tough-as-nails and in good shape for his age, that I doubt he is ready to run a marathon campaign. Chitwood is 63 and I doubt he can maintain the same level of energy as Sestak (who outlasted his staff of twenty-somethings).

My recommendation for Chitwood: end your career with successes in Upper Darby, not as a sacrificial lamb for the Delco GOP machine.

Papa's Got a Brand New bag Blog.

2007-08-31T00:22:00.000-04:00

Since there is nothing interesting going on in the PA 7th race (yet), and we have a lot of local elections... I'm branching off to start a NEW BLOG!

My blog is PA Delco Watch (at PADelcoWatch.com)

My new blog will focus on the races and politics of Delaware County. As far as Joe goes, I'll be free to hold his feet to the fire, if the situation warrants.

Also, NO anonymous blogging:
If you want to post comments, strap on a pair, get a free blogger account, and quit hiding.

Joey the Crank

2007-08-15T08:44:00.000-04:00

Haverford Township's resident crank, Joseph R. Breslin, wrote a letter to the Delco Times. For those that haven't hear Mr. Breslin speak, picture Archie Bunker, without the class. His letter is little different.

His Delco Times letter is supposedly a copy of one he sent to Sestak's office. In the letter, Breslin starts with:

As I stated in an announcement on Nov. 15, 2006, which was never carried by the local press, I will oppose the newly elected Democratic Congressman as a Republican for the 7th Congressional District, and will present issues and a platform each month to strengthen America and return government back to the people.

Gee, not stated in the press, or even during his failed County Council campaign. Only 3 months ago, Breslin was running for County Council, with his stated purpose of preventing Andy Lewis from getting elected. Seeing as how 6 were running for 3 open seats, even if Breslin got more votes than Lewis, he couldn't guarantee that Lewis wouldn't have been in the top 2 of the other 5 candidates. I've never hear anyone say that Breslin was good at math (or any other intellectual skill).

But, here are my questions... If Breslin had actually made it to the November ballot, and even less likely got elected, how was he planning on running against Sestak? And if abandoning a County Council position to run for Congress was his plan all along (since November 15, 2006 as he claims), why did he bother to run for County Council if he never had any intention of serving out his term? (Does this constitute a fraud on the contributors to his failed primary campaign or is Breslin protected by the adage "A fool and his money are soon parted."?)

I guess I should comment on the rest of Breslin's letter. It concerns itself with the fictional proposals for a NAFTA Superhighway. For literate Internet users, it doesn't take much searching to discover that there is no such plan/proposal. It was a political rumor created to fan the anti-immigration crowd and have a phony issue for politicians to oppose.

Breslin is such a lightweight, that I can't even add him to the list of Bat Villians. He wouldn't even make a decent henchman, though if any Bat Villians need a court jester, they needn't look far.

Better Late Than Never...

2007-08-07T00:15:00.000-04:00

On Saturday, Aug 4th, Joe Sestak and 4 other Democratic Congressmen joined the other 126 co-sponsors of a bill to end the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. The new bill, H.R. 1246, The Military Readiness Enhancement Act of 2007 now has 131 co-sponsors.

The purpose of this Act is to institute in the Armed Forces a policy of nondiscrimination based on sexual orientation.

In other words, to stop kicking out valuable soldiers from the military just because they may happen to be gay. Prior to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", the policy was open discrimination and bigotry where soldiers could be interogated about their sexual preferences and removed. The current policy prohibits a direct investigation, but still requires gay soldiers to hide who they are, and is quite simply: "Un-American". Unfortunately, in the 1990's, it was the best policy that progressives could get past the bigots.

Even today, the military classifies homosexuality as a mental disorder, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Maybe they should classify bigotry as a mental disorder.

Not long ago, 55 Arabic translators were discharged from the military once their orientation was uncovered. One in particular had his emails read during a routine fishing expedition looking for fraud in some department. This translator hadn't been asked and hadn't told, but was discharged just the same (and he WANTS to serve). These translators are crucial to the safety of soldiers in Iraq because they translate insurgent communications about ambushes and road-side bombs. There was information about 9/11 that didn't get translated until 9/12 because we were short-handed.

As John Stewart put it on the Daily Show: "Some people rather would rather be killed by a terrorist than saved by a gay hero."

The vast majority of the current generation of soldiers, most under 25, don't have a problem with gays serving openly (and many of them have shown integrity by not ratting out their fellow soldiers). There are still some old homophobic bigots running the show that are preventing progress, but, hey, they can't live forever (just like the slave owners).

It is long past time that the current institutionalized discrimination was abolished.

Back to Joe....
While I had hoped Joe would have been one of the original co-sponsors, I have even greater hopes that his involvment and military credentials will provide some movement on this issue in Congress. For some, it may raise their awareness, for others they may be inspired by Joe example, and a craven few may simple use Joe as political cover to justify support to their less-progressive constituents.
Whatever gets the job done.

Though I still feel very strongly against Joe's Iraq vote last May, I am pleased that Joe is getting it right with his support of a bill that truly honors the soldiers and improves their security.

Spencer speculates on potential GOP candidates for 2008

2007-08-05T10:55:00.000-04:00

In DelcoTimes' Gil Spencer's latest rant about Joe Sestak, he peeks into the minds of the Delco Republican power mongers who are not pre-determining for the voters of the PA-7 region who they will put up against Joe Sestak in the 2008 election.

Spencer talks to John McNichol, recently retired from his Delaware County patronage job, now spending time trying to figure out how Sestak defeated their top elected official Curt Weldon last year, and plotting Sestak's demise. McNichol talks about two potential candidates: real estate developer Tim Pulte and attorney Steve Elliott. Spencer speculates that McNichol prefers Pulte. Spencer quotes McNichol: “The family has a ton of money,” McNichol says, and the candidate would have his own “personal fortune” from which to draw.

It's nice to know that McNichol is holding with long-standing Republican traditions. It would be disturbing to see the local GOP machine appoint their candidate based on something like positions on the issues or track record for service. Anything but complete self-interest and power-mongering would be a complete break with the local GOP ideals!

As far as Spencer's attacks on Sestak in his latest diatribe, he says, "Unfortunately, Democratic congressmen like Sestak have a vested interest in seeing America fail in Iraq." You have to wonder why editor-in-chief Phil Heron allows Spencer to continue to shoot himself in the foot with junk like that.

Sestak's volunteer party, July 27, 2007

2007-08-02T23:07:00.000-04:00

Joe Sestak held a reception for volunteers on Friday, July 27, 2007 at the Media Borough Hall. Joe had just returned from Washington that evening after his week of work in the Capitol.

At the gathering, Joe gave an update on what was going on in Washington, and then took questions. It was an interesting Q&A session. There were many supporters who were angry about impeachment, or should I say, the lack of any impeachment actions to oust Bush and Cheney. And there were lots of people who wanted immediate action on exiting Iraq. There weren't too many easy questions. In fact, I can't remember one. For a group of supporters, they were pretty tough on the freshman Congressman.

Sestak handled all questions diplomatically and described what was going on. On impeachment, Joe described that there are just not enough votes to make impeachment stick, so there is little point in pushing that issue. He would rather work on more constructive actions instead.

On Iraq, Sestak described that the actions on extricating the US from Iraq will define the Democratic Party effectiveness as leaders. And it will have a huge effect on our country and the world. There is not much room for error on this issue. Even though Bush and the GOP started this war, it's up to the Dems to get us out...and the manner is which that is done is critical.

I heard later that Joe stayed until after 11 PM to answer all questions.

Next time, will someone lob him a beach ball question? Just one!

Sestak: Strategic approach needed end Iraq war

2007-07-15T22:25:00.000-04:00

A few days ago Joe Sestak (D, PA-7) wrote a statement about the Iraq war troop withdrawal bill (to remove all U.S. troops from Iraq by April 2008) that was up for vote. Sestak wrote the following, an excerpt from the entire statement in Politico:

We need a strategic approach to ending this war because the consequences of failure are immense. Congress is close, as it should be, to ending this tragic misadventure but we need to set a date certain for a safe redeployment. Ending this war is necessary, but insufficient. How we end it, and by what means, are more important for our troops' safety and our own security. It takes a strategic approach that defines the "end" of the commitment which President Bush once said would not be open-ended. The Congress must define why and how such an approach is in our best interests, including for a stable aftermath in Iraq. It can be done by a timely date-certain; we must define it to the public and the world for it is our responsibility to do so when the consequences are so great for our nation.

Small Business is Good Business

2007-06-23T22:19:00.000-04:00

It's my firm opinion that small business are the backbone of our country. They hire people and keep them. They run the small manufacturing shops and independent stores and places in our neighborhood. They contribute more to the GDP than the big companies that get all the press, and they employ more people too. They are the lifeblood of our nation.

So I was very happy to see the Small Business Administration (SBA) Entrepreneurial Development Act that was introduced by Rep. Joe Sestak was passed in the House a few days ago and now moves to the Senate.

Inc.com says:

The SBA Entrepreneurial Development Act, introduced by Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) will expand the role of both Small Business Development Centers and SCORE programs in helping small-business owners deal with rising Health-care and energy costs, among other challenges.
Two other bills will provide additional services at Women Business Centers and Veterans Business Outreach Centers, while a third creates a customized program for Native American entrepreneurs.
Recent studies show that small-business start-ups that seek government assistance have a better chance of succeeding.

For more on this bill, see the Library of Congress / Thomas listing or GovTrack.us. H.R. 2359--110th Congress (2007): SBA Entrepreneurial Development Programs Act of 2007, GovTrack.us (database of federal legislation) or GovTrack.us. H.R. 2359--110th Congress (2007): SBA Entrepreneurial Development Programs Act of 2007.

Six months of work from Joe Sestak

2007-06-21T18:00:00.000-04:00

In just under 6 months, new Congressman Joe Sestak has been a very busy man. Sestak has been active in Washington and in the PA-7 district. I've run into him at numerous events myself. From his recent email update, he makes these statements and lists the following activities:

During my campaign, I ran on the belief that national security begins at home, in the health, education, and economic security of our people. Those three pillars, along with defense security, give us National Security.

Upon arriving in Congress, I was able to secure assignments on the committees that best serve those four pillars: Armed Services Committee (Defense Security); the Committee on Education and Labor (Education Security and Economic Security); the Committee on Small Business (Economic Security?of which I was honored to have been selected Vice-Chairman); the Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions (Health Security); and the Subcommittee on Regulations, Healthcare and Trade (Health Security).

During the past several months, I have held numerous Summits in the 7th District on the four pillars as a way to bring together local, state and national experts to develop legislative solutions to the issues facing us.

From these Summits, I have gathered numerous proposals for amendments and bills that have become passed legislation, some of which include: two amendments to improve mental health care for our wounded soldiers; an amendment providing student loan forgiveness for Head Start teachers; an amendment expanding small businesses' access to federal government contracting opportunities; and an amendment ensuring the Department of Defense is not duplicating efforts and is reaching out to small businesses.

In addition, the expansion and re-design of the Philadelphia International Airport is the major local issue within the District, as the proposed re-design flight plan by the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") will severely impact the health, safety and economic welfare of the citizens of the 7th District. I have held several hearings in the District, as well as meetings in Washington, DC with Deputy Secretary of Transportation Maria Cino, FAA Administrator Marion Blakey, and House Committee on Transportation Chairman James Oberstar, to review and emphasize the impact of the FAA's proposed Philadelphia airport/airspace re-design on the District. Of most importance, I have recently been successful in getting the General Accounting Office ("GAO"), the investigative arm of Congress, to investigate the cost, efficiencies and environment impact of the re-design to prevent the proposed plan. This accomplishment was due to the factual reports of my assembled FAA Expert Advisory Board that were presented to the FAA. This should be the beginning of the end of the FAA's proposed re-design flight path over the District.
Further, because of what I believe and my previous military career, I have taken a leading role in discussing the primary issue of our time - the "tragic misadventure" in Iraq and strengthening our National Security. This past spring I traveled to Iraq with Republican Senator Chuck Hagel (a Vietnam veteran) and met with Iraq Prime Minister Maliki and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker to discuss the situation over there, as well as visited our proud men and women serving in various regions throughout Iraq. My experiences have allowed me to appear on Meet the Press with Tim Russert; This Week with George Stephanopoulos; Hardball with Chris Matthews; News Hour with Jim Lehrer; Lawrence Kudlow & Co.; PBS's Travis Smiley; and C-Span's Washington Journal, as well as several other newscasts, to forcefully assert that a "date certain" is the best, and safest way, for our troops to redeploy out of Iraq.

Set forth below are more details on the Summits and some of the significant legislation to date.

DISTRICT SUMMITS
Education Security Summits
February 26, 2007 Elementary and Secondary Education Summit with Congressman George Miller, Chairman of the Education and Labor Committee, and Terrell Halaska, Assistant Secretary of Education, on issues dealing with Early Childhood, Special Education, Elementary and Secondary Education, and the Head Start Program.

March 16, 2007 Higher Education Summit with Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Congressman Ruben Hinojosa, Chairman of the Higher Education, Lifelong Learning, and Competitiveness Subcommittee, which brought together Presidents of the District's 11 universities, colleges, and community colleges; Deans of Education and Engineering at various advanced training schools; chambers of commerce; businesses; unions; regional development groups; and principals and superintendents of high schools to discuss issues related to Higher Education and Advanced Training.

May 14, 2007 Congressional Field Hearing on No Child Left Behind with Congressman Dale Kildee, Chairman of the Early Childhood, Elementary and Congressional Hearing Subcommittee.

Economic Security Summits
April 24, 2007 Economic Development Summit with District's CEOs, venture capitalists, local chambers of commerce, business owners, economic development professionals, elected officials, union leaders, and members of the higher education and advanced training communities to discuss and work on strategies enhancing the local and regional economy.

May 21, 2007 Summit on Economic Growth and Resources where panels of Federal, State and Local Agencies presented their resources/programs to assist small businesses and business development.

Health Security Summits
February 27, 2007 Mental Health Parity Summit with Congressman Patrick Kennedy on mental health parity to highlight the need for insurance carriers to provide the same level of coverage for mental illnesses as they do for physical illnesses.

Upcoming June 25, 2007 Health Security Summit that will bring together, doctors, nurses, administrators, experts, and interested parties to debate ways to improve the affordability, accessibility and quality of our healthcare system.

Listed here are the summits regarding the FAA's proposed re-design flight path of the Philadelphia International Airport because of its impact upon the safety and health/welfare of the citizens of the District:

February 9, 2007 FAA Town Hall. Town hall meeting held with FAA Airspace Manager that allowed community residents to ask questions and express their health, environmental and cost concerns directly to the FAA Airspace Manager.

March 12, 2007 FAA Summit. FAA hearing held with Congressman Jerry Costello, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Aviation; local officials; and my FAA Expert Advisory Board to discuss the impact upon Delaware County of the FAA's proposed re-design/airport expansion.

May 12, 2007 FAA Town Hall. My staff and I mobilized residents to turn-out to voice opposition to the FAA re-design plan. Over 2000 residents showed up to voice their displeasure to FAA officials, who commented that the turnout was the largest of any of the 100 meetings that the FAA had held on its re-design plan in the New York-New Jersey-Philadelphia area corridor.

HIGHLIGHTS OF SOME LEGISLATIVE ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Education Security

Successfully passed amendment to H.R. 1429, The Improving Head Start Act, to provide for loan forgiveness of up to $17,500 for Head Start teachers upon completion of a Bachelor's degree and a commitment to work in the Head Start program for at least three consecutive years.

Along with Chairman George Miller and Congressman Dale Kildee, introduced legislation, the Improving Head Start Act (H.R. 1429), to reauthorize and improve the Head Start program, including continual support of parental involvement in local Head Start policy councils; extending eligibility of Head Start for families up to 130 percent of the poverty level; and fund methods to recruit/retain head start teachers.

Helped push, and co-sponsored, passage of the College Student Relief Act (H.R. 5) which cut interest rates on student loans from 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent.
Joined Congressman Chris Van Hollen in introducing legislation, the Keep Our PACT Act (H.R. 627), to fully-fund No Child Left Behind and IDEA by 2014.

Introduced the College Aid Made EZ Act (H.R. 1608), along with Chairman George Miller to streamline and make more user-friendly the Federal student financial aid application process.

Health Security
Successfully passed two amendments - with unanimous support - to H.R. 1538, the Wounded Warrior Assistance Act, to improve mental health care for our wounded soldiers. The First Amendment clarified that 'medical care' as defined in H.R. 1538 includes mental health care services. The Second Amendment requires the Secretary of the Department of Defense to develop a plan to help prevent Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and other stress-related psychopathologies (including substance abuse conditions) from developing in our military service members. In addition, it requires the Secretary to submit to Congress within 180 days a plan for establishing a Peer-Reviewed research program to research the prevention of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and how best to strengthen the psychological resiliency of our military service members.

Helped expand funding for embryonic stem cell research by cosponsoring and voting for the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act (H.R. 3).

Introduced the Conquer Childhood Cancer Act (H.R. 1553), along with Congresswoman Deborah Pryce (R-OH), to encourage and expand support for biomedical research programs for childhood cancer and to establish a population-based childhood cancer database.

Pushed for the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate with drug manufacturers to obtain more affordable medication prices for Medicare beneficiaries by cosponsoring and passing the Medicare Prescription Drug Direct Negotiation Act (H.R. 4).

Passed the Trauma Care Systems Planning and Development Act of 2007 that provides grants to improve access to and development of trauma care systems.
Cosponsored and passed the Conquer Childhood Cancer Act (H.R. 1553) to encourage and expand research programs for childhood cancer.

Passed legislation to create a reserve fund of up to $50 billion for the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) - reducing the number of uninsured children across the country.

Economic Security

Successfully passed - with unanimous support - an amendment to the Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act (H.R. 1873) which will ensure small businesses greater access to federal government contracting opportunities. Over the past five years, the federal government has increased the use of a practice known as "contract bundling," which allows federal agencies to consolidate purchases into mega-contracts ? contracts so large they cannot possibly be performed by a small company. As a result, significantly fewer small businesses were receiving federal government contracts. The Amendment will ensure that more large contracts will be reviewed as to their appropriateness to be bundled, and potentially broken into smaller pieces more suitable for small business.

Helped increase the federal minimum wage to $7.25 an hour by joining Chairman George Miller in introducing and voting on the Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R. 2).

Cosponsored the Family Small Business Tax Fairness Act (H.R. 868) with Congressman Lloyd Doggett to streamline small business joint-tax filings.

Joined Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro in cosponsoring the Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 1338), which provides for more effective remedies to victims of discrimination in the payment of wages on the basis of sex.

Introduced the SBA Entrepreneurial Development Programs Act (H.R. 2359) to assist small businesses through open access to loans, credit and capital.

Passed an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill that mandates that a contract officer must certify that they have done market research, including by using a web browser, to see if small businesses qualify for any contract over $1 million. This is important because 23% of all federal contracts are to be given to small businesses, but currently only 6.5% them are given to small businesses in the 7th District.

Passed the Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research Act that provides support to young researchers, who are the source of some of the most innovative research today.

Passed the 10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds Science and Math Scholarship Act which will increase the number of qualified math and science teachers through education scholarships.

Passed the Taxpayer Protection Act, that will increase IRS outreach to provide taxpayers with stronger protections from identity theft and tax fraud.

Passed the Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act that creates a fair and open federal contracting system so that all businesses - including small businesses - have a fair shot at winning a federal contract.

Passed the Small Business Lending Improvements Act of 2007 that makes capital more accessible for small businesses, which often spur technological innovation.

Passed the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2007 that authorizes $21 billion in funding over three years for the National Science Foundation, including funding for math and science education.

Passed the Technology Innovation and Manufacturing Stimulation Act of 2007 that fully re-authorizes the National Institutes of Standards and Technology - an organization that has enabled breakthrough technologies and improved our safety and quality of life.

Passed the Veterans' Programs Act that creates two new Veteran Business Outreach Centers to help veterans pursue or resume business activities after they leave service.

Passed the Women's Business Programs Act which provides dedicated funding to open new Women's Business Centers, sets benchmarks to measure their success, and provides additional assistance for outreach and low-income areas.

Defense Security

Introduced legislation, H.R. 960, the Enhancing America's Security through Redeployment from Iraq Act, which requires that, no later than December 31, 2007, all U.S. Armed Forces serving in Iraq be redeployed outside of Iraq, either to locations within the Middle East or Southwest Asia regions or other regions or nations, or to the United States.

Voted for H.R. 1591, the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health and Iraq Accountability Act, which sets a date certain for redeploying our troops from Iraq.
Cosponsored and voted for H.R. 1, the Implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act, which is the first comprehensive response to the non-intelligence reform recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

Secured $36.8 million in authorized funding, contained in the U.S. Department of Defense Authorization bill for fiscal year 2008, for vital research efforts in equipment technology, bio-terrorism, wireless technologies and software in the District and surrounding region to assist our men and women in the armed services.
Passed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 that makes military readiness a top priority so that our nation is fully prepared to face today's and tomorrow's threats and challenges, and focuses on improving health care, benefits, and pay for our troops.

Passed the Intelligence Authorization for Fiscal Year 2008 that authorizes the largest amount of funding in history for 16 U.S. intelligence agencies and intelligence-related activities for the U.S. government.

Passed the COPS Improvements Act of 2007 that will put 50,000 additional police officers on the streets over the next six years, and provides funds for COPS technology grants and for hiring community prosecutors.

Passed the Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007 that will improve the security of railroads, public transportation, and buses in the United States.

Passed the Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 that keeps America safe by increasing funding for homeland security supporting first responders, increasing contractor accountability, and strengthening and streamlining the Department of Homeland Security.

In response to the scandal at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, passed the Wounded Warrior Assistance Act of 2007 that includes measures to ensure our troops and veterans receive quality care.

Health Care Summit on June 25, 2007

2007-06-21T17:41:00.000-04:00

From a recent message...
Rep. Joe Sestak

...will be hosting the 7th District's first Health Care Summit at West Chester University, Sykes Student Union Building. The event, which will be held from 8:00AM until 2:00PM [Monday June 25, 2007], will bring together health care stakeholders from across our District and region to create a forum where we can start a dialogue together to address the health care challenges facing our nation today. I believe in the value of fostering a partnership among patients, providers, employers, and their government.

Health security is critical for our collective prosperity, but it is not just an individual's responsibility. To meet the challenges of the future we need healthy, educated Americans who have access to high-quality, affordable health care. We must all be productive and proactive citizens within our community if we are to participate in a health care system that will flourish efficiently.

The Health Care Summit will consist of panels on providing Adequate/Quality Health Coverage, Affordable Health Coverage, and Accessible Health Coverage, and I have invited a wide range of individuals from policy experts to health advocates, nurses, doctors, hospital administrators, small business owners, workforce and labor leaders, and government to share their experiences and viewpoints as panelists.

Sestak campaigned on a platform of addressing health care issues in our country, and this is an excellent step in that direction. It also shows that Joe is committed to getting input from constituents and experts on the issues.

If anyone is able to attend, please comment.

Sestak's Bill to Restore Habeas Corpus: HR 2710

2007-06-21T17:22:00.000-04:00

Last week, Rep. Joe Sestak introduced HR 2710, a bill to "restore the habeas corpus rights repealed by the controversial Military Commissions Act last year", according to the Constitution Project as quoted on The World Monitor.

This is a key action in rolling back one of the many actions of the Bush administration and the previous Republican-controlled Congress encroaching on civil liberties.

Joe knows what the Constitution is supposed to do, and restoring Habeas Corpus gets us back to those Constitutional rights eroded by Bush.

FYI, Habeas Corpus (according to Wikipedia), "is the name of a legal action or writ by means of which detainees can seek relief from unlawful imprisonment. The writ of habeas corpus has historically been an important instrument for the safeguarding of individual freedom against arbitrary state action."

Nice work Joe! Let's get this bill passed.

Weldon redux...too much irony to skip

2007-06-09T23:13:00.000-04:00

Bill Bender, who moved on from the Delco Times to the Philly Daily News, is covering Delaware County. His recent article, Corruption job for Weldon firm, talks about how Weldon's new employer,

Defense Solutions, an Exton-based project-management firm, announced yesterday that it had landed a contract with the Bashundhara Group to assist the corporate conglomerate in "ridding itself of even the hint of corruption and illegal business practices."

Well, if they do end up assigning Weldon to this project, at least he'll know what to look for!

Also included is an update on the FBI investigation:

Meanwhile, Weldon's fate remains unknown, nearly eight months after FBI agents raided the homes and business office of his daughter and close political ally. The probe is reportedly focused on whether Weldon helped the pair obtain foreign lobbying contracts.
An FBI spokeswoman said yesterday that the investigation is ongoing, but declined to elaborate.

Just for kicks, we'll keep our eyes on our old pal Weldon and his friends and family.

Disagreeing with my fellow PA-7 Watch blogger

2007-06-04T23:36:00.000-04:00

I have not posted to this PA-7 Watch blog for a long time, mostly because I haven't taken the time to do so. In not paying attention, I've let a few things go by here that need to be addressed.

DD has posted a few disturbing posts here, taking Joe Sestak to task for his vote on the recent Iraq Ward funding bill, and commenting on the Delco Democratic County
Council candidates. On both of these issues, I completely disagree with DD.

On the Iraq War funding vote, Sestak made his choice and explained why he voted the way he did. This vote was a no-win situation for Sestak. Either way he voted he opened himself to criticism. And the votes were lined up to go the way it went.

Congressman Sestak's top priority is to get the USA out of Iraq. This vote was not going to get us out of Iraq. I believe that Sestak will continue to work towards the goal of getting the USA out of Iraq, and that's why I supported him in the 2006 election and continue to support him now. I'm not a cheerleader, but I do have loyalty and am willing to see things through. I will not I say I support something or someone that I don't believe in. But bashing Sestak on this vote is short-sighted and asinine. And I'm disturbed that DD has done so here.

I'm also disturbed that DD has used this forum to relay his viewpoints on the candidates for County Council candidates. Very simply, this blog is about the PA-7 Congressional elections and candidates. Besides that, I disagree with DD's qualms about the various issues he raised.

We will refocus our blog on our main topic (PA-7) and continue to discuss the pertinent topics as they arise. And it's obvious that we don't always agree! That's simply the way it is in politics I guess.

A different kind of Gasoline Boycott

2007-06-03T00:34:00.000-04:00

A little background first on what Congress is doing...
Recently, the House passed HR 1252: Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act
This act criminalizes price gouging on gas, oil and other fuels. In particular, it also covers market manipulation, large fines and jail-time. Many consumers believe that the oil companies employ Enron-like techniques like shutting down refineries to reduce supplies and raise prices.

The bill was introduce on Feb 28, 2007 by Democrat Bart Stupak (yes, that is really his name and not a GOP "mispronounce" of Sestak) and a few dozen co-sponsors. Joe Sestak eventually, became one of the 125 cosponsors on May 21st and the bill passed the House on May 24th. It is now in the Senate. Even once it passes, there is going to be some lag is setting up rules, oversight, etc.

So, it's a good start, but it's going to be a while before we see some results. But there is something we can do in the meantime.

Okay, now to the boycotting part..
I recently receive emails from three different friends about a new kind of gasoline boycott.

The idea is that since Exxon and Mobil are the biggest companies that they have a lot of influence on the pricing. Therefore, the boycott would be against Exxon and Mobil only and people would still buy to other brands (BP, Getty, Hess, etc.)

The theory is that supply and demand would force Exxon/Mobile to lower it's prices to draw back the customers.

The hope is that seeing the lower-prices, the other stations would lower their prices to keep the "boycotters" from going back to Exxon/Mobil. A few cyles of this "price lowering war" should get prices closer to actual costs.

So, while government enforcement is welcome (and long overdue), we need to realize that we can change the behavior of large companies if we are willing to work together.

There are plenty of places online to find stations charging less than Exxon/Mobil, however one of the best is http://www.phillygasprices.com which is the Philadelphia area section of the nationwide http://www.gasbuddy.com.

A Travesty of a Mockery of a Sham...

2007-05-24T21:03:00.000-04:00

As Woody Allen so eloquently put it: "This ~~trial~~ vote is a travesty; it's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham. I move for a mistrial."

Before I get into how Joe's vote betrayed the voters and the troops, here is Joe's statement (from a cover-his-ass press release):

Following is Congressman Sestak's statement on the legislation:

I served this nation in combat, in Afghanistan and then Iraq. The first was a just war, the second, a tragic misadventure.

I have never deviated from what I said when I began running for this office after 31 years of military service - that a date certain to redeploy from Iraq is the only viable strategy that will change the incentives for Iraqis, and Iran and Syria, to change their behavior and work for stability and an unfailed Iraqi state.

But I've run the Navy's $67 billion annual warfare program, and I know that money is only so fungible....and we will run out of funding this summer for our service members in Iraq.

I also know that there is a greater good than me, this office, our caucus, and our Congress: those who still wear the cloth of our nation and that we, America, sent to Iraq to fight for us.

I cannot vote to have these service members' safety be caught between us and someone we hope will blink - for hope is not a strategy.

But I have great faith that serious, good Americans on both sides of the aisle will come together after this vote and work together for an end date of what can no longer be an open ended commitment in Iraq - not just for our service members' security, but for America's.

1) You HAVE deviated. You voted for date-certain for the April 25th bill to Bush that forced him to veto funding troops because he refused to be held accountable. It was a strong move by Democrats to force Bush to take a position and show the troops, the nation and the world that Congress would not hand Bush a blank check. Then, today you handed Bush a blank check. That is a deviation.

2) Just today, you restate: "that a date certain to redeploy from Iraq is the only viable strategy". What do you think the word "only" means? In this context, it means that any other strategy is NOT VIABLE.
You decided to vote for a non-viable strategy.

3) Then, you try to pretend this vote honors the troops: "that we, America, sent to Iraq to fight for us". WHAT!?!!! They are not there fighting for US because WE were never in any danger from Iraq in the first place. They are there following the orders they have been given (by a thoroughly incompentent President, enabled by a Congress that has abbrogated its duty). Many are there against their will as the result of a backdoor draft and dangerous extensions of their tours of duty.

4) Why would you expect the other side of the aisle to come together? The Democrats just pulled down their pants, bent over and said: "Thank you, Sir. May I have another?" (Have a staff member cue up the Kevin Bacon initiation scene from Animal House for you to explain the reference.) By September, even the Republicans will abandon Bush, but that will be their decision and not the result of leadership from the Democrats.

5) If you are SO concerned about the money running out and our troops suffering, then send Bush a bill taking away the tax-cuts for the rich to fund it. Why is it the troops are the only ones allowed to suffer?

6) BTW, Bush knows that timetables work. He used Memorial Day as a timetable to get 86 of you to cave under the false fear that you would have to explain not-funding the troops to Memorial Day crowds. Well, guess what? Now you have to spend all weekend explaining why you helped Bush hurt the troops.

Would you REALLY like to honor the troops?
1) Outlaw (or refuse to fund) combat tour extensions.
2) End the backdoor draft.
3) Fund the National Guard for US based operations only.
4) Recall the equipment needed to handle natural disasters here at home.
5) Hold the President and Vice President accountable for their actions by demanding realistic timetables and benchmarks.
6) Stop wearing your "31 years" of military service on your sleeve and using it as a talking point along with the self-rightous rhetoric and political speak. Just admit you back off of supporting the troops because you and the other 85 Democrats were too afraid to be labeled as not supporting the troops.

Joe, PLEASE, stop talking like a politician campaigning for reelection. In 2006, you started as a total unknown in February and unseated a popular, entrenched, well-funded 20-year incumbant. You don't need to be in campaign mode for yourself until 2008 actually starts, and quite frankly, I find it distasteful when you've failed to honor a key campaign promise.

There are a whole lot of issues that you have worked on and done a FANTASTIC job. However, Iraq was a key issue and you totally blew this vote and helped 85 other Democrats hand an undeserved victory to Bush and his failed policies that are hurting our troops and breaking our military.

Patrick Murphy voted against the bill as did Bill Brady and Chaka Fattah.

Timetable for Withdrawal or for Joe?

2007-05-23T23:48:00.000-04:00

The Democratic Leadership (and I'm using the term loosely this week) has made a fatal mistake in their efforts to end the War in Iraq and bring our troops home safely.

Many Democrats, including Joe Sestak, are considering voting for the current Iraq funding bill, without timetables, enforcible benchmarks or accountability from the White House.

From the Chicago Tribune:

When Joe Sestak, a Democrat and former vice admiral in the Navy, ran for Congress last year, he told the voters of suburban Philadelphia that the United States should withdraw from Iraq by the end of 2007.

Fueled in part by the anti-war sentiments of Pennsylvania voters, Sestak defeated a 10-term Republican.

Thursday, after months of struggle with the White House, Sestak and fellow members of the House are expected to vote to fund the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan through September. The legislation, however, will not include a timeline to withdraw from Iraq, which until recently was a key Democratic demand. Instead, the $120 billion measure will contain "benchmarks" that the Iraqi government should meet to show progress.

Despite intense pressure from anti-war organizations, Sestak said he would vote for the measure. "The fact of the matter is we have to fund the troops," he said, shrugging off the prospect of facing political consequences. "I've had my 31-year career. This is my passion."

Your passion? Spending taxpayer dollars to fund a war that you've always called a "tragic misadventure"? Prolonging a war that you know only gets worse the more we extend it without end? The REAL fact of the matter is that we do NOT "have to fund the troops" for anything other than a safe pullout. I'll detail the things we can fund later in this piece.

Joe, you need to vote against this bill!!!

Joe campaigned on timetables for withdrawal. From Joe's own campaign website...

I firmly believe in a planned end to our military engagement in Iraq within the next year as the primary catalyst for change in Iraq. This timeline should only be extended if our military experts deem that a few more months are necessary in order to safely execute a complete withdrawal. I understand the Vietnam-like arguments that military disengagement may mean dominoes will fall, resulting in more regional strife and the further waning of U.S. credibility and power. But I counter those assertions with the real likelihood of a prolonged occupation with rising death, injury and cost for an unknown number of years. It will be an occupation that will continue to have goals that are ever changing as they remain elusive. The result will be continued loss of U.S. military and diplomatic international credibility. Polls show a growing majority Arab opinion:

1. that Iraqis are worse off than before the war;
2. that the intervention has produced less democracy in the region;
3. that, in the words of the U.S. inspector general for Iraq, corruption is “pervasive and very serious,” with more than $1 billion missing in one case;
4. that, even in cities proclaimed to be models for rebuilding Iraq, militia fighters of different religious parties clash violently and conduct assassinations, and
5. that unemployment ranges from 25 to 40 percent, even in these cities.

We must use our prompt military disengagement from Iraq to force the three major parties to understand that America has achieved its ends: (1) no weapons of mass destruction threaten us; (2) we have provided a framework for democracy; (3) we have provided resources to begin to revive their economy; and (4) a torturous dictatorship has been removed.
.....
There is a prompt way out of Iraq, and I believe that failing to do so means significantly hurting our other, more important long term interests in the world.

Joe, it's time to cast the vote you were elected to cast. Make no mistake, you and other military veterans were elected to vote to end the war. Your military service should be an innoculation against false criticism that you don't support the troops. But, so what if there is criticism? This is a matter of principle and you REALLY need to honor your campaign promises regarding timetables, hold the line, and convince as many others as possible to do the same.

Democrats in Congress MUST NOT enable Bush to continue his failed policies without Congressional oversight and approval. If we didn't want Congressional oversight, we would have voted to keep Curt Weldon.

Joe, you and the other Democrats need to keep sending funding bills to the White House that demand timetables and benchmarks. Let Bush veto them. Build more support and send another bill. Let the country see who is really looking out for the troops.

Things you can fund or de-fund:
1) Pay the contractors the SAME wages as the troops. The contractors are there voluntarily and their high pay is an insult to the underpaid troops that are forced to be there through a backdoor draft. De-fund the contractors and lets see how patriotic they really are.

2) De-fund all extensions to troop combat tours and anything that supports such extensions.

3) Bring home the National Guard troops and outlaw the use of the Guard outside the United States without a more rigorous set of conditions.

4) Fund a study on how to bring the troops home safely, or at least to pull back to Iraq's borders, as you have previously suggested.

You are part of the majority party that was swept into office to execute the will of the majority, particularly in your district. What the ~~hell~~ ~~heck~~ hell are you afraid of? This vote is a total surrender of principle and leadership.

Joe, if you cannot fulfill the primary mission of your current term, those that oppose the war may impose their own timetable against prolonging your mission into a second term.

As you said, you put in your 31 years and are in Congress as "your passion". So, your vote should match the passion you expoused on the campaign trail, or the voters should find a congressman for 2008 that shares their passion.

Bullet Balloting: Shooting Your Vote in the Foot

2007-05-14T13:03:00.000-04:00

This primary election season, many high profile offices have more candidates than slots available. Some of the candidates and their supporters have advocated the take-no-prisoners strategy known as "Bullet Balloting". This misguided philosophy encourages voters to vote for only one candidate even though they are permitted to select two or more.

For Example: You have a SIX-way race with Fred, Barney, Wilma, Betty, Pebbles and Bamm-Bamm but only the top THREE vote getters go on beyond the primary. The false reasoning goes like this: If you like both Fred and Barney, but really want Fred to win, then you should NOT vote for Barney because that's like a vote against Fred.

This argument is not only wrong, but it hurts your party whether you are a Democrat or a Republican. By under-voting and not picking Barney, you are NOT really helping Fred or your party. Instead you are risking weak and unqualified candidates (Pebbles and Bamm-Bamm) taking Barney's slot when you could have had both Fred and Barney and a stronger ticket.

When you go to the polls on Tuesday, May 15th, consider whether a candidate (or his representative) is asking you to vote for "him and next best others" or for "just him". The selfish candidate that asks you to give up your rights by under-voting is not worthy of your vote. This kind of candidate will not work to support your party and whoever else wins in the primary, but rather will run a me-only campaign come November as well once the going gets tough.

For this election there are three (3) Delaware County Council seats, two (2) PA Supreme Court slots, two (2) PA Superior Court slots and two (2) seats for the Delaware County Court of Common Pleas. Voters that don't make an effort to pick their favorite nine (9) candidates to fill these positions are are shooting their party, their vote, and their Democracy in the foot.

P.S. Feel free to make copies of this blog for your polling place or to send to your friends that vote.

The Power of Three

2007-05-10T23:51:00.000-04:00

As a frequent blogger and commentator on Delco politics as well as a progressive Democrat, I'm no stranger to controversy nor am I deterred by it. Thus, I offer MY opinions and endorsements for the Democratic Primary (and ignite some debate).

Three is a key number this year. There are three seats available out of five for the County Council. This offers not only a long overdue Democratic seat but even the chance of a takeover to restore integrity and representation to Delaware County government.

John Innelli, Ann O'Keefe and Patricia Lewis-West have formed a team of three. This is very important. Given an open primary without official endorsement, at least one candidates tried to hoard his resources and gather endorsements while John, Ann and Patricia formed a team that shows Democrats can work together toward a common goal.

John is uniquely qualified for a leadership role on County Council. He has a well established background in investigating fraud. This is why he is the candidate the GOP fears the most. The Delco budget is around $500 million dollars, nearly double that of Montgomery or Chester Counties. We need John to recover those extra hundreds of millions of dollars and lower our taxes and invest in hospitals, schools and infrastructure.

Ann is from Haverford, which has been at the vanguard of a significant Democratic awakening. Haverford has increasingly voted for Democrats and recently made significant gains on the Board of Commissioners. Haverford is home to Greg Vitali, one of Delco's few Democrats in the State Legislature. This year, the Haverford Democrats under the energetic leadership of Bob Stump are also fielding Commissioner candidates in five wards. All of this strengthens Ann's ability to maximize voter turnout for herself and the other Democratic candidates

Patricia impressed me during her convention speech. I was encouraged by her hands-on approach to dealing with problems in her district. We need people that are not only unafraid of rolling up their sleeves but unafraid of actually facing the public and being accountable. The current council holds meeting when the public is unavailable and then only to project the image of open government as they rubberstamp backroom deals. Of all the candidates vowing to help the November ticket if she loses the primary, Patricia struck me as the most sincere.

Ann and John both ran for county-wide seats in 2005 and received over 40% of the vote, when the electorate wasn't nearly as hungry for change as it is now.

As for the other candidates, I feel I should weigh in on them as well.

Rocco Polidoro is a candidate that I genuinely like and makes me wish I could vote for four people. How can any Democrat not like a guy that has been a thorn in the side of Charlie Sexton? While Rocco paid his dues fighting the GOP machine in Springfield, I think a candidate with a longer track record as a Democrat has a better chance to excite the Party’s base. Rocco did get the top position in the ballot order and is expected to make a strong showing.

Bob Dimond has a solid history with the party. He's a solid party candidate stuck in a large field of louder, hungrier candidates, though none as witty.

David Landau presents a conundrum for me. Though I dislike speaking against a fellow Dem (particularly one that may wind up on the November ballot), I feel the need to voice my concerns. I'm unhappy with the lone wolf style, tactics and choices of associates in his campaign. I was put off by his early claim that he was a "senior" advisor on the Sestak campaign. I was involved helping the campaign back when you could count on one hand the number of workers at headquarters whose last name wasn't Sestak (and still have a thumb left over to hitch a ride). I also attended many fund-raisers, events, picnics and strategy sessions for various local candidates as well as for Casey and Rendell. I didn't notice Landau at any of them. Maybe he'll be endorsed in the final Harry Potter novel this summer and we'll find out he had borrowed Harry's cloak of invisibility the whole time.

From what I have seen, Landau's supporters represent a faction of the Delco Dems that have resisted supporting progressive candidates and initiatives. They also seem to do the most complaining about how the party is run, but yet are never around when we do mailings, have meetings or need people to man the doors and tables at events to sign people in or help set up. However, they do work hard when presented with an opportunity to undermine the current Party leaders who have brought us within striking distance of a Council victory.

The whispering campaign’s message is to vote for only Landau as though he is the only candidate and to under-vote by not picking two other candidates. This mistaken philosophy implies that a vote for another candidate is a vote against Landau. In truth, if Landau supporters do not select their second and third preferences they risk candidates they don't prefer being elected. Voting for only one candidate instead of all three is selfish, short-sighted and just plain foolish. It weakens the party and dilutes your vote.

I ask my fellow Democrats, would you buy a stool with one, two or three legs? Didn’t you teach your kids the moral of the Three Musketeers, “One for all, and all for one”? When you go to the polls on May 15th and are besieged by various supporters, look to see which campaigns encourage you to spoil the chances of a fellow Democrat by undervoting or instead to fill your ballot with your three favorites.

That being said… I will work very hard to elect whichever three Democrats emerge victorious from the Primary, with my only condition being that they all work together to take all three Council seats. All for one, and one for all (and no one for himself).

For Democrats interested in the full slate of candidates (with endorsements for the Judicial races), visit the Delco Dems website.

Blogging Without Spencer

2007-05-07T01:53:00.000-04:00

The Delco Times recently changed the layout of their site.

Besides the facts that previous links no longer work and there is no longer a "search" feature, another casualty of the software change (I decline to call it an upgrade) is that the Blogging with the Editor (Phil Heron) and Blogging with Spencer no longer support replies by the readers. Without the reader feedback, it's no longer blogging, but rather online editorials. Also gone are the past blogs with comments by readers (half the ones on Spencer's blog were from me). This new situation leaves Spencer's Archie-Bunker rantings unchallenged; but fortunately, PA7Watch is here to inject some unwanted reality into Spencer's fantasies. (Phil Heron did reply to inform me that blogging improvements will eventually be installed, but until then....)

In his most recent column, about "stars" that need therapy, Spencer fantasized about Dr. Phil having conversations with Paris Hilton, David Hasselhoff (Knight Rider and Baywatch), Alec Baldwin and Venus Ramey (Miss America 1944). Most men would find Paris Hilton's imagined presence sufficient for a fantasy (conversation or otherwise). Why does Gil need to fantasize about Dr. Phil, Baldwin, Hasselhoff and an 82 year-old former beauty queen? I wonder if Gil was picturing Hasselhoff in swim trunks on the beach or running in slow motion? Seems to me that Spencer is the one needing some therapy.

In his recent opinion column Leaving Iraq now means whole world loses, Spencer misrepresented the desire of the majority to leave Iraq. He starts off with "Some people believe it is time to cut our losses and bring the troops home from Iraq." instead of "Most people believe.."
Spencer follows with "More than 3,000 U.S. soldiers have died. Thousands more have been maimed or seriously injured."
Notice how he leaves out the tens of thousands of Iraqis killed until later when he accuses Reid and the other Democrats of ignoring Iraqi deaths. Even worse, Spencer takes a sober appraisal by Reed that the continued failures by the Bush administration will cost the GOP Senate seats (because they have defied the voters) and misrepresents Reed as "Giddy" about a political windfall. I guess Gil forgot how Bush and the GOP politicized the war, or staged the Mission Accomplished speech with banner as a campaign photo-op. (First Bush claimed the banner was the idea of the ship's crew. Then it came out the banner was produced by Bush team and flown in.)

Spencer criticizes Nancy Pelosi for talking to Syria (as recommended by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group), but conveniently declines to criticize Condi Rice for her recent attempts to engage Syria.

Spencer then predicts that if the Dems succeed in pulling out the troops then millions will die in a chaos that he and the neocons claim will follow. What happened to the neocon predictions we would be greeted with flowers as liberators? Or the war paying for itself? Or those WMD's? Or "Bring it on"? Or things would settle down once we captured Saddam? Drafted a Constitution? Held elections? Put up walls? Sorry Spencer, the neocons haven't gotten a prediction right yet. However, they have promoted lots of fear mongering that things would go badly if the Democrats were in charge.

Spencer also ignores the opinion of the Democratic leaders (and the evidence of our own eyes) that our presence in Iraq has made things worse. The worsing situation in Iraq is the direct result of failed leadership and planning by the GOP and their failure has our troops and innocent Iraqis to pay the price.

Spencer even goes so far as to claim that al-Qaida will get stronger and that "Democratic-advocated retreat will prove Osama bin Laden quite right." Well, Bin Laden working out of a cave has made al-Qaida stronger. Bush with the highest technology ever invented and hundreds of billions of dollars has weakened our own military and reduced our readiness. Bin Laden made it quite clear his goal was to bankrupt the US by drawing us into an asymmetric conflict for which we were not prepared. Stubbornly staying in, when there is nothing left to win, just plays into Bin Laden's hands.

Incompetent leadership emboldens terrorists. The Bush administration, neocons and people like Spencer promoting fear embolden the terrorists because fear is their goal and Americans spreading fear are the ones aiding the enemies. The real enemies are ignorance and intolerance. They are used to recruit new terrorists and used to continue a war that never should have been fought.

The answer is to de-radicalize. Internationally, we must support voices of reason. Nationally and locally, we must become voices of reason and challenge people like Spencer when they implying that those opposed to the war are sympathizers, appeasers, cowards or traitors. It is un-American.

I don't regard Spencer with the same distain as the neocons running the show. Spencer just isn't bright enough to mastermind and craft talking points, he just repeats them. Spencer's not the problem, but he is not the solution either.

The First 100 Days

2007-04-14T22:37:00.000-04:00

I was going to come up with a short list of some highlights of Joe's accomplishments in the first 100 days, but his congressional staff already posted an extensive list on his official House.gov website.

The posting is subtitled: Whirlwind of outreach, accomplishments, and constituent service

Yes, I agree in advance it is a corny, unncessary and self-serving subtitle. If I felt a subtitle was needed, I would have gone with simply: Joe's been busy

The pre-election critics that implied and cried that Joe would disappear to Washington, not to be seen again until 2008 election, need to acknowledge that Joe has been here and active. Even though Nancy Pelosi has this Congress working Monday-Friday (instead of Tuesday-Thurday), Joe has still managed to meet with dozens of community groups and held summits on a range of issues (economic, education, health). His office seems to be doing a good job with Constituent Services as well.

Joe's voting record matches what the voters expected of him. Readers are encouraged check out the list on Joe's House.gov website, using the above link.

The biggest fly in the ointment is the FAA issue. The site contains a statement from Joe and a summary of his efforts so far. I don't know if the FAA can be beaten on this by Joe (or even Weldon), but he is making a serious effort, trying multiple approaches and is far from giving up. I hope his critics are not rooting for failure on this. Even potential rival, Councilman Andrew Reilly, is working with Joe on the issue.

Being a Congressman is a lot of hard work and Joe, if nothing else, seems to have an inexhaustible supply of energy. (I got tired just reading the list of what he's done.)

Anyway, my point is that now that Joe is in office, he should be evaluated on what he is doing as a Congressman. Readers are invited to comment on the past 100 days (please stick to the topic of this thread).

Only Explosion at CAIR Event was Applause

2007-04-08T02:23:00.000-04:00

In today's Delco Times, Stephanie K. Whalen writes: Sestak cheered during CAIR speech

In what will surely be a great disappointment to Gil Spencer, Sestak did NOT call for Death to America. Instead, he gave a rousing speech about CAIR doing the important task of fighting discrimination. From the Delco article:

"CAIR does such important and necessary work in a difficult environment to change such perceptions and wrongs -- from racial profiling and civil rights to promoting justice and mutual understanding -- at a time when it is challenging to be an American-Muslim and pass, for example, through an airport checkpoint," Sestak said during his speech.

To my personal diappointment (but not suprise), Sestak took the easy road to pacify his critics by calling on CAIR to specifically denounce Hamas and Hezbollah. (I guess Joe didn't get to read my earlier blog entry.) If he's going to start singling out groups, he should also have tossed the crowd a bone by including the JDL (Jewish Defense League) which plotted to blow up a Los Angeles mosque in 2001. It hardly seems fair to ask CAIR to denounce only Islamic terrorist groups.
Why does everybody have to denounce things as a litmus test? Sean Hannity is alway using "failure to denounce" as a tactic in place of the real debate.
But, Sestak wants to get re-elected so he made sure to cover his left and right cheeks by mentioning both Hamas and Hezbollah on the record. (If he were a horse, he would have received a sugar cube and a pat on the head.) This gives him political cover in the Jewish community where he has been heavily (and unfairly) criticized.

Outside the Hilton Hotel, things were lively as well. A small group of protesters against Sestak were led by Joe Kauffman of the misnamed group: Americans Against Hate. It seems like the word Against slipped their minds.
On their website Joe Kauffman condemned Congressman Ellison in a piece entitled: "Keith Ellison's Friends, Our Enemies. Also on their site, Kauffman basically accused the Hilton Hotel management of supporting Hamas because CAIR was allowed in the building and his protesters were not allowed on Hilton property. What did he expect a "Protesters Welcome!" sign? I think the Daily Show may another contender for Bob Novak's douche-bag of the week award.

Also, a small group of counter-protesters supporting Sestak showed up outside the event and had some unkind words for Kauffman and his group. (Though kinder than what I might used.)

My conclusions about the whole CAIR affair:

Sestak comes out a winner by handling himself with grace and steadfastness under pressure (with the minimum obligitory politically pandering).

Gil "The Shill" Spencer served up several helpings of intolerance and ignorance, while showcasing a parade of neocon frontmen like Daniel Pipes and Dr. Zuhdi Jasser. We were treated to the open bigotry of Anonymous posters opposing civil rights and the presumption of innocence for Muslims, while embracing xenophobia and paranoia.

CAIR came out ahead too. They took a lot of heat as the anti-CAIR crowd got active. However, the anti-CAIR groups overplayed their hands and exposed their underlying racism. I heard the CAIR event was sold out. I suspect by people showing CAIR support against the propaganda and hate speech. So, the artificial anti-CAIR controversy wound up being free advertising for the event.

The Jewish community disappointed me by allowing itself to be so easily manipulated into turning on Joe like a group of fair-weather friends. They can apologize to Joe in the polling booths in November 2008.

As for me, I felt like a contestant on the show 1 vs 100 (though the Anonymous posters seems more like contestants on Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader?)

I leave you with one of my favorite lines from Spencer Tracy (not to be confused with Gil Spencer) in Inherit the Wind:

Because fanaticism and ignorance is forever busy, and needs feeding. And soon, your Honor, with banners flying and with drums beating we'll be marching backward, BACKWARD, through the glorious ages of that Sixteenth Century when bigots burned the man who dared bring enlightenment and intelligence to the human mind!

Holy Sacrificial Lambs, Batman!

2007-04-07T20:32:00.000-04:00

No folks, the Riddler is not running against Joe in 2008. However, folks are wondering what criminal mastermind the GOP will sacrifice in next year's failed attempt to unseat Sestak.

Before we take a sneak-peak at the potential upcoming Bat-Villians, picture the cartoon opening of the old Batman show with the stream of villians walking right into Batman and Robin's fists.....

Andrew Reilly (aka The Insider): Reilly's term is up on County Council. Congress would be a logical move for Andrew as the County and 7th District are mostly the same voters and precincts. Reilly has plenty of local GOP support.
Why he'd lose: The recent indictment of Haverford's Fred Moran is the tip of the iceberg in a pervasive pattern of Delco government corruption. The 5-member all GOP Council will come under heavy scrutiny this election cycle for all their backroom deals, patronage jobs and general avoidance of Sunshine Laws.
Andrew Reilly's participation on the Council will not survive the scrutiny of a congressional election against Joe Sestak. Also, Reilly's ties to any votes or deals that benefitted pals Curt Weldon and Charlie Sexton will get highlighted as the FBI case against them moves forward.

Pat Meehan (aka The Attorney): Pat's name comes up a lot in the speculation game. He is well known in a lot of high-ranking circles and enjoys a lot of name recognition among the public.
Why he won't even bother running: Pat's got bigger ambitions, like Rendell's Governor seat or possibly Spector's Senate seat. Both state-wide races. Meehan can't afford to waste time raising money and spending it for a local congressional district when it could be used for a more expensive state-wide race. Even if Meehan wins, then he's stuck in a crappy congressional job that will prevent him from working on his 2010 state-wide campaign.
Add to that, the risk-factor. If Joe cleans Pat's clock in 2008, Meehan is dead in the water for 2010. Who is going to back a state-wide guy that couldn't win his own congressional district?

Tom Killion (aka The Lackey): I don't know a lot about Tom Killion, but neither do a lot of other people in the 7th district. Tom is from Middletown. While he might do okay in his own 168th district, he'll get slaughtered in Springfield, Haverford, Radnor and probably Upper Darby. The state GOP was already dealt a blow last election. They won't be too keen to risk losing Killion's seat, only to have Joe take him down as well.

Tim Pulte (aka The Realtor or The TrustFund): Tim Pulte hit the rumor mill in another blog. Tim's not really a Bat-Villian. He'd be more like the innocent Egyptian professor guy that henchmen-wannabees would hit on the head to turn him into King Tut, who would employ them as henchmen.
The Pulte real estate money makes him an attractive sacrificial lamb. He can claim the mantle of a political outsider (but that card trick only works when you are against a long-time incumbant and Joe already used it).
Why he shouldn't bother running: The local GOP can put him on the ticket and then screw him on fund raising as they raise money to preserve their own seats. A Pulte campaign in Delco would be like the Swann campaign. The local GOP will sing his praises and do no real work for him. The local GOP would also milk his campaign coffers by throwing cronies and consultants his way. For Tim's sake, I hope the blog rumor was just a rumor.

disclaimer: This posting is all pure rumor and speculation with a sprinkling of analysis, spin and some humor. I didn't get the updated graphic in time for April 1st.

That said, feel free chime in with any other potential candidates. If you know a real hot-head opponent for Sestak, I'd really love to have a Joe vs The Volcano pun.