Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Calling Specter Out for Calling Sestak Out

John Baer of the Philadelphia Daily News was the moderator of the only Sestak/Specter debate held last Saturday night.  Here’s a quote from his recap (full link):

“Right after the debate, still at his lectern, Specter snapped at his Senate challenger: "Do you want to continue this?" I heard him say "fisticuffs" and thought there'd be some action. But he then rendered an unceremonious, wave-of-the-hand, tight-jawed dismissal and, boom, he's out the door.”



Some thoughts about this…

  1. Specter’s judgment should be called into play to challenge an Annapolis Grad to a fight – Sestak could probably kill him with a pencil.
  2. If Specter is getting that angry it means that Sestak is closer than the polls are revealing.  He is inside Specter’s head and ripping out the wires.  Specter is imploding.  You want 6 more years of this?
  3. This challenge was probably staged.  An 80 year-old challenging a 50-something to a fight is a lose-lose for the 50-something.  If Sestak takes the bait and beats the crap out of the 80 year-old the public would be outraged at the “elder abuse”.  Kudos goes to Sestak for being a warrior who knows when not to fight.
  4. If you want to take the temperature down in public discourse – Specter needs to be rung up for trying to raise the temperature by getting physical.  Is Specter still responsible for his actions?
  5. Did Specter like it when he was physically challenged last year during his summer Town Hall trot thru the state?  Why would he subject someone else to the same treatment that he didn’t like? 
  6. Keep in mind he challenged a sitting US Congressman to a fight.  Were there any laws broken by the attempt at physical intimidation?

Specter, back in the day, if nothing else, was disciplined.  This whole thing should backfire on Specter as a way to get sympathy.  It just makes him look pathetic.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

Read This article: Specter won the debate and is the right man for the job. He deserves to be there for six more years and keep PA on the right track.

http://www.philly.com/dailynews/columnists/john_baer/20100503_John_Baer__Senate_debate__It_was_Smilin__Joe_vs__Snarlin__Arlen.html

joe the nerd said...

I am sure Mr Baer will be pleased you take everything he says as gospel.

please break out of your little paper bag and think for yourself.

you'll be doing us all a favor.

David Diano said...

Joe-
Baer may have heard the word "fisticuffs", but he didn't say he heard a whole sentence like.

Which of the following seems more likely:

1) "Do you want to continue this? It's not like it's fisticuffs."

2) "Do you want to continue this? How about we engage in some fisticuffs, instead?"

joe the nerd said...

David,
To even bring the idea up for discussion show a real lack of judgment of Specter's part.

It goes back to what I have been saying for about a year. Specter has lost a step. He'll lose more over the next several years.

David Diano said...

Joe-
I disagree that it was a "subject of discussion". The very idea that Specter suggested a physical altercation is preposterous.

It sounded to me like Specter was making a sarcastic comment to Sestak (who is well-known for having no sense of humor). I think the Navy removed Sestak's sense of humor when they installed that giant attitude stick up his ass.

You want to take the Baer's ambiguous "fisticuffs" reference and interpret as an actual challenge. Fine.

How about Baer's un-ambiguous description about Sestak whining about Specter having notes? Specter understood the rules and applied them. Sestak didn't understand the rules, and whined because Specter was more prepared.
Boo. Hoo.
How is Sestak going to handle complex Senate legislation if he can't even understand the rules of a debate that his team negotiated?

joe the nerd said...

Specter is already going down.
4 points separate them according to the last poll by Muhlenberg.

Baer is the one who put it out there.

This may gain traction against Specter, and rightfully so.

David Diano said...

Joe-
Baer put out that Joe was a whiner, too. If the Sestak fans are taking "fisticuffs" as a serious remark, then you have run out of ammunition.

As for that daily poll, it went from Specter +6 to +9 to +4. I don't see you touting it going from +6 to +9, so I wouldn't put much stock in +9 to +4.

That corresponds to a 20-point variation in the Apr 29th one-day sample vs the Mar 3rd sample in Sestak's favor.
But the previous change of +6 to +9 corresponds to a 12-point swing toward Specter in the Apr 28th one-day sample vs the Mar 2nd sample.

After May 18th, you and the ex-Sestak campaign staffers should look for a job at a farm where they need a chicken count on the unhatched eggs. :-)

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
mary clyne said...

, Specter is a republican I do not care if he change sides he only change because the polls showed he would lose. We need progressives and liberals competing in all states

PS Finally get the hang on how to post on your blog , sorry about the repeats as anonymous

merlallen said...

who the hell would vote for someone who switched parties just to get reelected?? I'd vote for the Republican who remained a Repub before I'd vote for Specter.
Besides, he's 80 years old. Past time to retire.