What Fresh Hell Is This?

May 7, 2010

Sestak Tied With Specter In New Poll

A new poll by Muhlenberg College/Morning Call has Joe Sestak tied with Arlen Specter at 43% in the Democratic primary for US Senate.

Incumbent Specter started out with huge lead but Sestak has been rapidly rising in the polls. Party-switcher Specter had the backing of President Obama and the Party bosses and now some are freaking out.

Pennsylvania Dem chairman T.J. Rooney has called a Sestak win "cataclysmic," but I still agree with Pittsburgh City Paper's Chris Potter long ago (well, long in terms of politics) prediction:
So I gotta think that Sestak could hold his own against Toomey, Specter, or anyone else. He's already had lots of practice: Sestak noted that regularly mixes it up on FOX News and other such forums.

But that, of course, only raises the real problem he faces this year: Republicans like Monica Douglas know how dangerous Sestak can be. Democrats, though, don't watch FOX.
Sestak will be in town today, by the way:
Congressman Joe Sestak and Pittsburgh Residents Shine a Light on Specter’s 30 Years of Failed Promises, Strategizes for Next 30 Years

Friday, May 7 at 12:30PM

Hill House Association, Conference Rm A
1835 Centre Ave
Pittsburgh, PA 15219

RSVP on Facebook or to Info@JoeSestak.com


Heir to the Throne said...

I hope Sestak wins.
Sestak & Specter Cheer Gun Control
Joe Sestak was flat out lying about NRA’s endorsement in the race. About a week and a half before they ever debated, NRA had already endorsed Pat Toomey in the US Senate race.

Heir to the Throne said...

Can one of you progressives back up/defend this statement by Joe Sestak where he repeats a bogus feminist talking point?
"1.5 woman out of 5 in the first year on a campus will have rape attempted against them or actually been raped."

Also why couldn't he say 3 out of 10 women or a 30% chance?

Blue Number 2 said...

Simple web search there HTTT. It's called Google.


Heir to the Throne said...

Blue Number 2
How about a study or link from people who do not think the Duke Lacrosse players are guilt of rape.

Heir to the Throne said...

Here is a result for a Simple web search there Blue # 2.
Look like feminists/Sestak are increasing the “one-in-five to one-in-four"
The Campus Rape Myth
Funny that crime is going down but feminist have working on this "problem" since 1987 and rapes on campus have increased.
I suspect the the definition of rape includes any sex that the woman regrets.
Such as the Hofstra False Rape Case which feminists still define as rape.

Blue Number 2 said...

Really HTTT? This is the issue you want to take up? You really want to minimize this problem? You want to defend the idea that it's trivial? Of all the things out there, this is what you have a problem with...that "maybe" the prevalence of college rape is overstated?

Of all the things that are going on in the world, this is the issue that is most important in a Democratic Senatorial primary that I'm guessing you aren't qualified to vote in?

EdHeath said...

You know, HTTT, some people have admitted that some rape statistics have been exaggerated. Because apparently some conservatives don't care about women being raped until it reaches a critical mass. Otherwise, if its just a few women, well, they were asking for it.

Meanwhile, you know about the no fly list, people who are possible terrorists and therefore not allowed to fly on American planes (unless they can establish their innocence). Well, Republican Senators are blocking legislation that would prevent these people from buying guns.

Yeah, some liberals messed up on their early stance on the Duke Lacrosse rape case, but you, HTTT, want to see people dead. I assume you applauded when Poplawski killed the Pittsburgh Police, since he was just exercising his second amendment right to deprive children of their fathers.

Heir to the Throne said...

Blue #9 I have a number of issues with Sestak's honestly (see NRA’s endorsement in the 1st comment) But repeating the feminist's overstated campus rape claim was low hanging fruit.

Ed I trust you will extend the removal of Constitutional rights of people on the no fly list to the 1st (Free Speech) and 4th (unreasonable searches and seizures.)

I believe the ACLU has something to say about the lack of due process in the no fly list.

Are the No Fly List and Selectee List constitutional?

The ACLU believes that the entire system of watch lists is unconstitutional, because it treats people as guilty without a trial, and deprives them of their freedoms without due process. The system will not make us safer, because it is an inherently inaccurate and ineffective security method.

Of course, progressives and the NAACP had no respect for Due Process in the Duke Lacrosse rape hoax.

jaywillie said...

Heir, if that is the line of attack conservatives are going to take against Sestak if he should win the Dem primary then you guys have got absolutely nothing.

That's some weak sauce. Are you idiots really going to go around and deny that rape and sexual assault don't happen on college campuses just because you're still bitter about the Duke case?

I think a far more pertinent question will be to exactly what EdHeath brings up - why are ppl on the terrorist watch lists allowed to buy weapons? I'm sure PA voters will be much more interested in hearing whether or not Pat Toomey supports the sale of weapons to possible terrorists or ppl w/ ties to terrorism.

Of course, if I was voting for someone as far to the right as Pat Toomey I wouldn't want to talk about the issues either.

EdHeath said...

HTTT, you are saying you agree with everything the ACLU says? Or do you just raise the ACLU when it suits your purposes?

For eight years the Bush administration wiretapped at will, denied rights to both American citizens and foreign nationals (despite "All men are created equal") and the no fly list existed during the Bush administration; nary a peep from you or any other conservative about al that (maybe a peep here and there, but no serious attempts to address these issues). Now that a Democrat is in office, suddenly you side with the ACLU. Don't lecture me on hypocrisy until you own up about what Bush did.

That said, yes, the no fly list procedure could be improved. An individual should be allowed (in person, I should think) to inquire as to whether they are on the list and if they are, make an appeal to be removed. I think that limiting their ability to purchase firearms is one of those reasonable restrictions on gun purchases that the Supreme Court has written about approvingly (I would think especially if there is a mechanism to appeal the no fly status). It was the Bush administration and Republicans like your self that wanted to allow wiretapping of all Americans, not just suspected terrorists, essentially illegally searching every person’s phone records. I’m sure the Obama administration wants to address illegal wiretapping and the no fly list. Oh wait, the Republicans are continuously blocking legislation in the Senate, so the Obama administration can only advance legislative priorities very slowly. So addressing how the Bush administration wrecked the Minerals Management Service is proceeding too slowly, and we ended up with the Gulf suffering one more environmental disaster.

All of which has nothing to do with the original post. Sestak appears to be a somewhat more progressive Democrat than Arlen Specter. If you are a registered Democrat, you can vote for Sestak. If not, then you can’t. Nothing you say here matters, but I am happy to suggest alternative views to your view of “reality”.

EdHeath said...
This comment has been removed by the author.