Arlen Specter: Sestak Wasn't Partisan Enough as an Admiral

by: Chris Bowers

Thu Jul 09, 2009 at 20:19


Congressman Joe Sestak has been arguing that Arlen Specter is a "flight risk" for Democrats. Arlen Specter has found a graceful way to rebut these claims, arguing that Joe Sestak wasn't enough of a partisan during his time as an Admiral:

"Congressman Sestak is a flagrant hypocrite in challenging my being a real Democrat when he did not register as a Democrat until 2006 just in time to run for Congress," Specter said in the statement. "His lame excuse for avoiding party affiliation, because he was in the [military] service, is undercut by his documented disinterest in the political process."

Of course, Sestak was an Admiral on active duty until only a couple months before February 2006. So, what Arlen Specter is really doing here is criticizing Sestak for not being partisan enough during his time as an Admiral.

Lots of officers, including Colin Powell, do not register with a political party when they are still in the military. The basic idea is that you don't want to politicize the military leadership.

Would Arlen Specter rather that all Admirals and Generals state their political preference for the whole county to see? I'm sure that wouldn't cause any problems at all.

Now, I am a partisan, and I argue that more Democrats should be active partisans. However, it also strikes me as Honduran-ly obvious that high ranking military personnel should most definitely not be partisans while they are still in the service.

Further, to call a veteran a "hypocrite" for only becoming a partisan after he left the service is to deny all veterans the right to fully participate in American political life. Once you leave the service, you should be allowed to become as much of a partisan as you want, free from charges of "hypocrisy" simply because you served your country in a non-partisan way.

Specter's ignorance of the enormous difficulties active duty service personnel face in voting (see here and here, for starters) was a nice touch to this classy attack.

Arlen Specter hasn't been a Democrat for very long, and he clearly still needs practice acting like one. As the Sestak campaign itself says, this is a Republican-style Swift Boat attack on Joe Sestak's military record, pure and simple.

Chris Bowers :: Arlen Specter: Sestak Wasn't Partisan Enough as an Admiral

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
you got the rationale, you need the SOUNDBITES (0.00 / 0)
to attack that lying fascist toady piece of shit.

We SHOULD be HAPPY our senior military stays the hell outta politics,

UNLESS you're a lying duplicitous piece of human garbage who will to ANYTHING to destroy an opponent.

We need rhetorical punches in the mouth on this bullshit, not freaking tomes explaining their inaccuracies and misrepresentations.

rmm.

It is too full o' the milk of human kindness To catch the nearest way


Don't Worry (4.00 / 2)
Dude, Arlen Specter's big, dumb mouth is basically writing Sestak's ads for him.

[ Parent ]
Wait a minute, Senator Spector (4.00 / 2)
How partisan can a person that switches parties actually be?

If the goal is to be as partisan as possible, shouldn't you still be a Republican...or a Democrat...I can't remember in which party you claim partisanship.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


I Smell Something... (4.00 / 2)
Seems to be a whiff of desperation in the air coming from the general direction of Senator Specter.  If this is the best he can do, he better start making retirement plans.

Three and four star generals/admirals (4.00 / 1)
almost have to be officially non-partisan. That is because you don't really get promoted to three stars or four stars, instead you get assigned to a three or four star position. If by some odd chance you decided to stay in the service after your term as Vice-Admiral, Admiral, Lieutenant General, or General expired you revert to your permanent two star rank. Which is why people at this level almost invariably retire after their appointment runs out, unless of course they are moved up to the next level.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V...

(Which of course has led some doofi in the blogosphere to claim that Sestak is not really a three star admiral at all.)

But to return to partisanship, all three and four star military positions are subject to specific Senate approval and it is in nobody's interest to have some prospective four star general or admiral be specifically identified with one political party or another. That is nobody cares that some Master Sergeant or Navy Commander is a known Republican, the Captain of the last ship I was on in the Navy was basically a raving wingnut. Which would have given me a lot of pause if years later I heard he was being promoted to head Seventh Fleet.

People on the fast track to top military command are well-advised to keep their political cards tight to the chest, essentially Spector is blaming Sestak for putting country first during his military service.


I wrote on this on (0.00 / 0)
dkos this morning.  Excellent post, Chris.

Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search