Breaking news: Bud Fox is reporting that Barack Obama offered Joe Sestak a job in order to get out of the Senate primary race
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
Breaking news: Bud Fox is reporting that Barack Obama offered Joe Sestak a job in order to get out of the Senate primary race
More on this developing story when it becomes available.
Comments (61)
TPS... so you decide who is racist? dunno maybe we should ask my African American wife if its racist to say that ? or should I ask my mixed race kids? .... hmmm nope apparently not.. dickhead.— PAEnglish
Comment removed.
---}}} Tps, while the "big butts" stereotype is not inherently racist, it can be used in such a manner... {{{--- legatus, it wasn't the use of that term, per se, which made johnny's post racist - it was his use of that term along with only black women as a reference and in reference to Obama. But anyway, to defend extremists by attacking me remains unparalleled. FYI - previously at Attytood, I've been told by a "conservative" that "boyz" is a gay term, and so I must be gay. Now, you're telling me that it's a "black" term - and so I must be a racist. You "conservatives" really have a hard time figuring things out, don't you? Anyway, in reality, you were wrong about how I use the term. My use of the term is meant to express endearment - similar to how I use the term "our beloved ARts." You boyz never fail to amuse - such as when you laughably try to deflect the flat out racist of "conservatives" like number three. And for that, I am appreciative - not disparaging.— Talking point sleuth- Tps, while the "big butts" stereotype is not inherently racist, it can be used in such a manner...and john carey's post could easily be construed as such. Similarly, your consistenly and deliberate misspelling of "boyz" is not inherently racist...but you must admit that this spelling is closely associated with African-American culture, as in "Boyz II Men" or "Boyz in Da Hood". As such, and since you only use this spelling when ridiculing your adversaries...i.e., you use it disparagingly, not complimentarily...your usage can also be construed as racist in much the same way as carey's.— legatus
- ---}}} TPS and who made you the thought police ? {{{--- Heh! PAEnglish is either so thick that he doesn't recognize the racism of john carey's post, or is just too dishonest to acknowledge its racism. How many more of Attytood's "conservatives" will likewise line up to expose their ignorance and/or dishonesty? You boyz are absolutely hilarious.— Talking point sleuth
- TPS and who made you the thought police ? what gives you the right to call people racist?. Your a white jew correct ? so wtf do you know?— PAEnglish
- ---}}} Talking point sleuth why are big butts racist?{{{--- They aren't, number three. However, the reference to a racial stereotype, two black women, and a black president is obviously racist. It really is amazing how Philly.com racist scum try to pretend they're not racist. As odious as john carey's racism is, at least he has the stones to be open about it.— Talking point sleuth
- Do you really think the White House said, "if you don't run against Spector we'll give you this position"? Why wouldn't "we have this position for you but we don't want to have to refill for a few years so we have to be sure you will stay in it for a while" work and not be illegal?— towman
- "Obama announced a series of new steps to deal with the aftermath of the spill, including continuing a moratorium on drilling permits for six months." This will clean up the spill how?— RG
- ""The American people should know that from the moment this disaster began, the federal government has been in charge of the response effort," Obama told a news conference. He was responding to criticism that his administration had been slow to act and had left BP in charge of plugging the leak." Way to own that failure.— RG
Talking point sleuth why are big butts racist?- Breaking News: Obama has announced that he will wear his cool red windbreaker and NO Saints baseball cap to the Gulf Coast tomorrow.— A Friend
- buttermilk, I have the same question. And thanks to bird and Jerry for correcting BillHicks.— pj katauskas
- Comment removed.
- Thanks, john carey, for being so open with your racism. Of course, that shouldn't be any indication whatsoever that any other "conservative" that is similarly obsessed with hatred for Obama is even the slightest bit racist. Heh!— Talking point sleuth
- Comment removed.
- The complete lack of coverage and concern by these newspapers and Philly.com concerning the oil spew in the Gulf.....is PATHETIC. There's not a story out there that matches that one, not even close.— andrew69
- ab - best summary so far. I would have loved to have been in the room when Obama and Rahm first heard Sestak's comments.— Mirror
- Comment removed.
- Sestak was probably offered the job. He just didn't know the quid pro quo was illegal, novice that he was. The administration knew what the were doing, they just overestimated Sestak's political acumen.— abnrgr
- I don't really care whether he was offered a job or not. It may not be pretty, and it may not even by legal, but it's part of politics and I don't really believe it harms the process. It bothers me a lot more when it is used, as it was by the Clinton Administration, to buy an actual vote, like Marjorie Margolies' vote for a tax increase. That said, either Sestak or the president is lying through his teeth, and that does matter to me.— Fascinated
- the "this is small potatoes/not illegal/what happens in every election/only a misdemeanor at most" arguments ring hollow. This could be a big deal if anything close to what Sestak alleges happeneded, did happen. While we don't know the details, we at least deserve to know, don't we? Can't we at least agree to that?— Bud Fox
"Birdie, maybe you need to read the law more carefully. An offer doesn't have to be directly made." MSL, I have to admit I wasn't intently following the '82 Senatoral race in California - I was more involved in defending my bong, shot, n beer crown from all challngers - but the fact that Hayakawa didn't run and was never given a position in the Reagan administration seems to make the argument moot. I also have no context for the Rollins quote. If it was a response to a direct question about Hayakawa based on Hayakawa's statements that he wasn't sure he would run for re-election than it seems harmless. I don't think anybody would have a problem if Obama was asked about Sestak and he said "I don't know his plans but if he doesn't run for re-election I'd like him in my administration" (OK I'm sure somebody would have a problem, but not me). Sestak is the one who has made this offer sound sleazy and he needs to be more detailed in his account because until someone does this won't go away.— bird11- Usaul BS.. if a conservative does it we have blog after blog dredging and redredging it, until it rots on the bone. But a democrat does anything illegal its nothing to see here folks or Bush did it first, this is becoming pathetic.— PAEnglish
- "so all you Obama haters get off your hypocritical high horse" Good point, no one should criticize him even though he promised the most open and transparent admininstration.— RG
- Typical politics, so all you Obama haters get off your hypocritical high horse because this has been going on in all political parties since the wheel was invented.— borncynic
- My interpretation of this is that we conservatives are looking for every possible piece of dirt we can throw at Obama to see what sticks. Very similar to what was done to Bush. We (liberals and conservatives) have figured out that we can damage an administration beyond repair by attacking everything possible continuously and just generating enough negative noise to drown out the administration's message.— IggleFan68
- First things first, impeachable offense?? Are you friggin' kidding me?? By the "letter of the law" a misdemeanor was committed if Sestak's comments are true. I honestly think that the administration should come clean and say exactly what happened because it really isn't that big a deal. I'm sure in some backdoor Washington wink, wink, nudge, nudge way this happens in every election - and I am willing to bet it is even worse at the local level. MSL is right (wow, I never thought I'd type that sober, maybe I'm drunk) there needs to be a law change that addresses this issue. I'm not sure what that would be and regardless the only way it will come to light is if politicians dime out their own party. The only reason IMHO this even came to light was that Sestak was trying to portray himself as "the outsider" and now his comment has come back to bite him in the @$$.— bird11
- Comment removed.
- Blago and his defense team have to be loving this.— TomM
- All you liberal idiots are nucking futs. The Messisah, Obuma, commits a crime and should be impeached, but of course, instead of facing the facts here, somehow you'll blame Bush and think it's ok. I seriously hate the moronic though process of you people. It does not surprise me in the least bit that this country is the way it is. LOOK IN THE MIRROR LIBERALS.— Mr Norristown 6
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- If George W. Bush had done it... Actually, President Bush wouldn't have done it. He had the guy thrown in prison instead.— SteveMG
Breaking news: Jim Cramer advocating more gubmint stimulus to boost the economy. Isn't it time to end the myth that the economy is too big to fail?- "Slight correction: Joe Sestak is reporting that Barack Obama offered Joe Sestak a job to get out of the senate primary race." . . . . Bud, if your source is Sestak himself, and not what you've read or heard via the 'old media', then please give us all the details Joe has given you.
- The Hatch Act apparently makes any question of a 'quid pro quo' meaningless. If Sestak accepted the job, he would've been legally required to end his campaign. You'd have to have a law making it unlawful to offer any politically active person a government job.
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- Um, to all the folks who are like "you would be hollering if Bush did this," well, didn't he? Tom Ridge would have easily beaten Specter in a primary in 2004, given his broad base of appeal and the general dislike of Arlen Specter even back then. But Bush pulled out all the stops to get Specter re-elected. It's not hard to look at his appointment of Ridge in 2001, a year before his term was over and two years before the Senate Primary season (roughly the same timeframe as Sestak), as being a way to keep the PA GOP primary field free of any major threats (Toomey being in the pocket of the Club for Growth, and thus outside Bush's range of influence). Specter won, and then limped it out. And that's just one example of electoral politics influencing the choice of who gets plum positions in the highest level of our federal government. What really steams people off is that this example was so blatant, and people hate reminders that our society does not ultimately reward such positions on the basis of merit.— Vox
- Comment removed.
- "Putrid Chicagoland politics." . . . . Yes, the stench of backroom deals. The 'smokeless' thing to do would've been to spread rumors about Sestak's illegitimate black child, his mental instability, or his homosexuality. We need to restore the honor of Rovian politics. .
- Comment removed.
- The problem with prosecuting the crime is proving intent to make the offer conditioned on a political favor. What if the administration simply thought he was a good candidate for the job? Naturally you would expect him to drop what he's doing in order to accept it.
- According to birdie's statement of the law, the crime is a misdemeanor offense (a felony is punishable by more than a year's imprisonment). And if Sestak is right, yes it's a crime.
- "Ed Rollins....said Hayakawa would be offered an administration post if he decided not to seek re-election. No offer has been made directly to Hayakawa, Rollins said." . . . . . . . Birdie, maybe you need to read the law more carefully. An offer doesn't have to be directly made.
- job was offered. so what. but the Obama administration is perpetuating the no-comment policy, which singularly has fanned the flames of this idiotic endeavor. Bottom Line: Obama administration is non-transparent and Washington POLITICS-AS-USUAL and absolutely nothing like it campaigned to be. And not releasing the details and the truth simply follows it positively being non-transparent. The job is not the story, the lack of openness about the offer is the story.— zen
So someone in the White House committed a felony and is trying to cover it up but it's no big deal because it's the most transparent administration in history. And yet you wonder why journalism is dying? If you put 10% of your anti-GOP effort towards looking at the Democrats honestly, the party would be finished. Meanwhile available cash is shrinking at Great Depression era rates, President Obama is *still* blaming W (despite being on the job a year and a half with his party running Congress) and North Korea and Iran are getting more bellicose. Change we can believe in.- Thank you Will! Slight correction: Joe Sestak is reporting that Barack Obama offered Joe Sestak a job to get out of the senate primary race. Also, since when did legitimate news sources instead of hearsay become a requirement for Attytood?— Bud Fox
- Who is Bud Fox? I'm being honest here, but the only Bud Fox I can think of is Charlie Sheen's character from Wall Street. And BillHicks, you really need to stop watching MSNBC. Even CNN is saying that if someone did offer Sestak a job to drop out, the law was broken. In a nutshell, Sestak would be offered something of value (a higher job apparently) under the condition he dropped out of the Senate primary, which is a federal election. It is a felony to tamper with a federal election. The news here would be that Obama did it himself. If he did, that might be grounds for impeachment. It would be considered "bribery," one of the three grounds in the Constitution for which a President can be impeached.— buttermilk67
- Also Bill you need to read Media Matters more closely. Here is what was reported in 1981 "In an interview earlier this week, Ed Rollins, who will become the president's chief political adviser in January, said Hayakawa would be offered an administration post if he decided not to seek re-election. No offer has been made directly to Hayakawa, Rollins said. Similarly, Hayakawa said in a statement, "I have not contacted the White House in regard to any administration or ambassadorial post, and they have not been in contact with me.".....now contrast that statement with Sestak's statement that "“I was asked the question about two months ago about something that happened last July. No one ever had asked me the question, ‘Did someone offer you something to get out?’ I answered it honestly, yes,” Sestak said. “And then I said, ‘Stop. I’m not going to get into what was a deal offer, because I’m not going to get out for a deal. I’d only get out for the something that was right to do.’ And here’s what I believe – this kind of deal-making in Washington is kind of what soured Americans and quite frankly soured me, but I honestly believe this ...” Sestak added.— bird11
- Bill, if Sestak is telling the truth how can 18 USC 600 not apply?? Here is the law: "Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both."— bird11
- "President Reagan's political adviser Ed Rollins planned to offer former California Sen. S.I. Hayakawa a job in the administration in exchange for not seeking re-election." ---- "Sen. S.I. Hayakawa on Wednesday spurned a Reagan administration suggestion that if he drops out of the crowded Republican Senate primary race in California, President Reagan would find him a job." ---- where's that Special Prosecutor for the Rollins guy - he's still around and we can indict him now for that job offer.— pal
- this is breaking news? you are pathetic— luces
- "More on this developing story when it becomes available." So, I guess you'll never be mentioning this again after the regime sends out the silencing orders to the media.— Dumpy1133
- Not so fast Bill ... [ABC News Story] According to the seven Rs on the Senate Judiciary Committee ... the offer would appear to violate federal criminal laws, including 18 U.S.C. 600, which prohibits promising a government position as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office.— JerryCurlan
- All you left wing kooks know that if Bush did this, you wouldn't dismiss it so quickly. The 0bama admin says it didn't offer the job, Sleestak says they did. One of them is lying. Quid Pro Joe, Let Us Know!— fafafooey
Hate to tell the right wing this, but the White House offering Sestak a job to get out of the Senate race isn't illegal. Not very ethical perhaps, but not illegal. I know the talking heads on FOX told you otherwise, but this is another example of them filling your head with hot air and misinformation. And your patron saint, Ronnie of Raygun, did the same thing in the eighties, offering a California senator a position if he would get out of his race. Funny, there weren't any calls for an investigation then.- UPDATE: Philadelphia Inquirer confirms rumor : "Democratic Senate nominee Joe Sestak went a long way in his primary fight with Arlen Specter by stressing trust and accountability. So the Delaware County congressman needs to be more forthcoming about his allegation that the White House offered him a job if he would stay out of the race. When asked about the accusation, as he was again Sunday on NBC's Meet the Press, Sestak says, yes, the offer was made. But he won't say what it was, or who made it. This too-cute-by-half stance may allow him to tout his independence and outsider credentials - important in an anti-incumbent year like this one. But by not being specific, Sestak is covering up what appears to be the ultimate insider deal - and a potential crime. This broad-brush accusation of corruption may be unfair to the Obama administration, but the White House reaps no great sympathy thanks to its inept, infuriatingly vague approach to the issue. For example, here's spokesman Robert Gibbs on Sunday: "[L]awyers in the White House and others have looked into conversations that were had with Congressman Sestak. And nothing - nothing inappropriate happened." How Nixonian of what was supposed to be the most open administration in history. Let's try this approach instead: Both Sestak and the White House should release full, detailed accounts of their conversations. These accounts should include offers made, if any; the names of those who made the offers; and the names of anyone in the chain of command who was aware of any deals and approved them. Such details might elicit a giant shrug from the electorate, and end the matter. Or they might require further investigation. Either way, voters have a right to the facts. Make it so, Joe. "— bird11
- Talk about man bites dog!
hahahaha, good one Will.— potus
1
Popular Posts
Search this blog:
Blog Roll
- Andrew Sullivan
- Blinq
- Blogorrhea
- Blonde Sagacity
- Free Republic
- Instapundit
- James Taranto
- ScrappleFace
- The Corner
- Buzzmachine
- Eat the Press
- Editor and Publisher
- Media (Huffington Post)
- Media Bloodhound
- Mickey Kaus
- Pressthink
- Romenesko
- The Inksniffer
- A List of Things Thrown Five Minutes Ago
- Above Average Jane
- BlankBaby
- Citizen Mom
- Keystone Blog
- Metroblogging Philadelphia
- Phawker
- Philadelphia - America's Hometown
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philebrity
- Philly Future
- Phillyblog
- Phillyist
- The Clog
- The Next Mayor
- Welcome to Phillyville
- Young Philly Politics
- Afro-Netizen
- All-Spin Zone
- Atrios
- Bad Attitudes
- Billmon
- Booman Tribune
- CorrenteWire
- Fables of the Reconstruction
- iFlipFlop
- Kiko's House
- MyDD
- Philly (Dragonballyee)
- Rowhouse Logic
- Slacktivist
- Suburban Guerilla
- Tattered Coat
- upyernoz
- AmericaBlog
- Andy Borowitz
- BuzzFlash
- Crooks and Liars
- Cursor
- Daily Kos
- David Sirota
- Drudge Report
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Fire Dog Lake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Hullabaloo
- Jesus' General
- Jon Swift
- Josh Marshall
- Juan Cole
- Kevin Drum
- Mad Kane
- Majikthise
- Matthew Yglesias
- Oliver Willis
- Raw Story
- Swing State Project
- Talk Left
- Taylor Marsh
- TBogg
- The Carpetbagger Report
- Think Progress
- War and Piece
- Wonkette
- A Citizen's Blog
- Balls, Sticks and Stuff
- Beer Leaguer
- Dick Polman
- Phillies Nation
- Philling Station
- Shallow Center
- The 700 Level
- The Good Phight
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: