Joe Sestak gets Dawn Johnsen enough votes for confirmation

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Jan 12, 2010 at 18:15

Entering the day, 59 Senators were publicly committed to confirming Dawn Johnsen to the Office of Legal counsel in the Department of Justice. Here is a fun timeline on how the 60th vote was secured today:

12:10 p.m.: TPMDC posts a challenge from Joe Sestak urging Arlen Specter to stop blocking Dawn Johnsen's nomination to the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice.

1:30 p.m. Main Justice reiterates Sestak's challenge.

2:55 p.m.: Legal Times piles on the story.

3:48 p.m.: Specter campaign sends a press release to TPMDC and Legal Times saying that he now supports Dawn Johnsen's nomination.

****

This sort of thing happens a lot on the Sestak campaign, and it is pretty great. I have never found it so easy to flip how a Senator votes. I wish it was this easy for all 100 Senators.

Through his his willingness to stand up to the party leadership and primary challenge Arlen Specter, Joe Sestak just got Dawn Johnsen enough votes to be confirmed in the Senate. Think about that--it's pretty amazing. It is certainly the biggest accomplishment of any congressional campaign in the 2009-2010 cycle. Please, show Joe Sestak some love for this:

Join the emal list
Become a supporter on Facebook
Become a supporter on Twitter
Contribute on Act Blue

Chris Bowers :: Joe Sestak gets Dawn Johnsen enough votes for confirmation

Tags: Dawn Johnsen, Arlen Specter, Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania Senate, PA-Sen, primary elections, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

Joe Sestak gets Dawn Johnsen enough votes for confirmation | 16 comments

Time to complete this picture already (4.00 / 3)

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton

by: kovie @ Tue Jan 12, 2010 at 23:26:12 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

I wish we could keep this set-up going, indefinitely. (4.00 / 1)

Sestak pushing Specter from the left, Specter caving.

It's just too bad that the election will have to happen, eventually. After which, I'm willing to bet, Sestak wil turn to the right.

by: willf @ Tue Jan 12, 2010 at 23:30:14 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Yup.... (0.00 / 0)

So will Spector, should he win.

by: MacGumaraid @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 00:16:11 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Why would you bet on that? (4.00 / 2)

Aside from pointless cynicism?

by: TValley @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 00:20:35 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Right, no one ever runs to the left, then moves to the center to govern. (4.00 / 1)

Never ever happened. Not once. That's just crazy talk. Don't know where I got such an idea.

Buffy : Sarcasm accomplishes nothing, Giles.

Giles : It's sort of an end in itself.

by: willf @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 00:33:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

If that is your "analysis" thanks for contributing. (0.00 / 0)

there is far too much pointless "Its going to be bad I am so sure" comments. We all know that disappointment is part of the sausage making iny organization. We all know. We have heard.

I am sure, completely sure, that Sestack already has positions with which I do not agree. I don't agree with some portion of what almost everyone holds near. We all do. I can already name some of the things Sestak likes that I don't.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

by: HousesofProgress @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 12:47:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is amazing news (4.00 / 4)

Go Joe!

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

by: David Kaib @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 00:20:57 AM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

So this is the great Progressive movement? (0.00 / 0)

Support, even financial support, for a war-mongerer like Sestak? Yechhhh!!!! Lemme out of here.

http://washingtonindependent.c...

by: VLaszlo @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 00:59:42 AM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Here? (0.00 / 0)

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

by: HousesofProgress @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 12:48:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

great news! (0.00 / 0)

it would be fuckin' awesome if senate terms where 2 years long...

by: The Big Hurt @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 01:25:18 AM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Yeah I agree, the Senate 6 year term is too long. Move both to four years (0.00 / 0)

have a quarter of the houses elected every year. Let them feel it often and directly, but let Reps govern. Right now at two years Reps have to start fundraising the day they are elected, as the election is just two years away.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

by: HousesofProgress @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 12:50:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Sestak (0.00 / 0)

A while ago I listened to an interview with Sestak on Phila. public radio (WHYY) and he sounded as though he was talking down to us. He also voted for retroactive immunity for the telecoms. They all suck. We're doomed.

by: Non-Compassionate Liberal @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 12:33:37 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

We are certainly doomed, (0.00 / 0)

if we keep putting energy, money, effort, or even hopes in electing the likes of Sestak. He is following the timeworn but still useful script of running a little to the left of his opponent and parlaying the progressive, left, even liberal base to help elect him. Just like Obama did in the primaries. If he gets elected there won't be a dime's worth of difference between him and Specter (just like Obama (vs. Hillary)), but the Progressives will have been shunte towards the depressing task of electing a faux-left progressive and have achieved absolutely nothing. Really a way to destroy a nascent Progressive movement not build one. What disgusting crap (oh here in the New Progressive Movement I guess the spelling is "krappe"). Sestak's support for the massive escalation is not reluctant, it is enthusiastic. This policy in terms of resources wasted and having zero point overshadows his risk-nothing help to Dawn Johnsen, which by itself achieves little.

by: VLaszlo @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 13:08:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

I meant (0.00 / 0)

"massive escalation in Afghanistan".

by: VLaszlo @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 13:09:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

On building a progressive movement (0.00 / 0)

as opposed to shilling for phonies like Sestak, here are a few worhtwhile thoughts:
http://www.commondreams.org/vi...
The reason to be adamant in this regard is that the worst, the very worst, way to build a left-progressive movement(in fact it is a way to destroy any hope of one) is to put energy and effort in weak phony Democratic candidates. Vote for him if you must, but please don't pollute the discussion pretending he has something to offer us.

by: VLaszlo @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 15:47:37 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Regardless of the merits of Sestak (0.00 / 0)

Chris, I don't think you should be crowing about this sort of thing. This sort of public gloating could lead to pressure on Specter NOT to cave in to the left - a la Lieberman. Just quietly accumulate the goodies and avoid "excessive celebration" would be my advice.

sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.

by: sTiVo @ Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 16:50:09 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Joe Sestak gets Dawn Johnsen enough votes for confirmation | 16 comments

USER MENU

New here?
Make a New Account

Have an account? Log in!

Forget your username or password?

Open Left Campaigns