Barber’s video has him talking to three actors playing President Washington, Samuel Adams, and Benjamin Franklin. He rails against the IRS, progressive income tax, and tyrannical government repressing small business. He calls Sam Adams a brewer and Washington a distiller—obviously they would understand his point of view.

Leave aside the fact that Samuel Adams was not a brewer (for a time he worked in his family’s malt business). Mr Barber has been watching to many TV commercials for Sam Adams Beer.

He is correct that George Washington had a distillery. Most plantations and large farms in early America has one. The ad has the Washington character saying “Gather your armies,” when Barber asks them “Are you with me?”

Where Mr. Barber goes off the track is he assumes Washington would rise up in rebellion if the government taxed small businesses. If you payed attention in history class you know exactly what Washington would do, in fact what he did, when distillers resisted paying taxes to the central government.

In 1794 the federal government needed revenue and imposed a tax on distilled spirits. The farmers in western Pennsylvania and other places resisted the tax. It was called the Whiskey Rebellion. What did President Washington do? He sent the Army to suppress the rebellion and arrest rebels. It was the only time in American history when the President lead troops in the field.

Unfortunately for Mr. Barber if President Washington said “raise your armies” it would be to crush the tax rebellion not to support it. If you do not know history you make stupid statements where the facts are well known. It would be less embarrassing if he had not raised the issue of taxes on distilleries.

Of course, Mr Barber says his commercial is misunderstood. “They need to not look so deep into things,” Barber said, “It’s definitely not an inciteful call to arms.” Maybe it isn’t, but if you are going to claim the Founders support your cause make sure history is on your side.

Joe Sestak is a retired Navy Vice Admiral. He is the highest ranking military officer to ever serve in Congress. The attack on Admiral Sestak backfired. It angered most veterans so much that they worked hard for Sestak.

Senator Specter turned Democrat solely because he would lose the Republican Primary to Pat Toomey. He had a reputation for bucking the Republicans. However, his voting record endeared him to few voters of either party. In the end, his change of party to save only one job, his own, did not work.

Senator Specter claims Representative Joe Sestak missed 127 votes. I can neither confirm nor deny that statement. Unlike Senator Specter, I do not have the staff and the direct access to the database of the Clerk of the House of Representatives to count the votes. All I could do was go to the web site of the Clerk of the House of Representative and check the votes on the few specific days the ad listed.

I checked and printed the roll call for every vote on those days unless Senator Specter listed a specific bill for a date. I came up with 29 votes which I could identify in this manner.

Of the 29 votes 11 were unanimous votes.
Near unanimous votes were 11. I defined near unanimous as any vote where 5 or fewer House Members voted against a bill or resolution.
There were 9 votes where a bill or resolution was contested but passed.
There were 2 votes for bills or motions which failed.

First let me take the two votes which failed. One was a motion to adjourn the House. It failed mainly because most Democrats voted against adjournment.

The other vote which failed was on a more important issue. On January 18, 2009 there was a series of votes on the budget for the Departments of Commerce and Justice and for related agencies,most of the votes were on amendments. The vote which failed to pass the total Ayes was 165 and Noes 245. But please note 236 of the Noes were Democrats.

Among the Unanimous Votes were such vital issues as a resolution to “Commend the Real Salt Lake soccer club for winning the 2009 Major League Soccer Cup.” Another unanimous vote was a resolution for the “Korean War Veterans Recognition Act.” That vote was 421 to 0. Do not misunderstand I am a Korean War veteran myself but this was a symbolic resolution with no real world impact. Finally, there was a 423 to 0 vote “Recognizing the historical and national significance of the many contributions of John William Heismen to the sport of football.”

Not one of the votes which Senator Specter listed would have been changed if Representative Sestak would have been present and voting. Are there votes which would have been changed if Representative Sestak had voted? I do not know because the Senator gives no information. I do not even know what period of time the 127 votes refers to.

Senator Specter has a staff and access to the database of the Clerk of the House of Representatives. If there are votes of real importance, not things like recognizing National Dairy Month another one I did not list above, provide me with the dates and bill number. Without more information I have to assume this saying Joe Sestak missed 127 votes is just another smear on the reputation of an honorable man.

There are so many problems with the ad and its web site that I cannot address them all here. For right now I will only address the most scurrilous claim in the ad. I will address some of the other issues in another blog post. They are unrelated to the subject of this post.

At the very beginning of the ad, over a picture of Vice-Admiral Sestak and one of some sailors a voice says, “Joe Sestak relieved of duty in the Navy for creating a poor command environment.” Immediately the voice goes on the claim Representative Sestak missed too many votes.

I watched the video of the ad and started searching diligently on the web site and on Senator Specter’s campaign web site for anything that even said what the statement that Joe Sestak was relieved of duty was talking about. I could not find any information to back up the claim and since I did not know what incident was being talked about I was not sure where to check.

I checked the web site again Friday morning and realized I had failed to check the blog link on the Home Page. Timing becomes critical at this point in my little story.

I printed out the entire blog which talked about both Representative Sestak’s naval career and how many votes he missed in Congress. The printout of the blog has a date and time of 4/23/2010 7:1 AM.

I was writing an email about the ad to someone and went back to the blog to double check something. I was surprised to see the blog had been completely rewritten. I printed out the entire blog again. The date and time of that printout is 4/23/2010 7:30 AM. The most relevant change here is all references to Vice-Admiral Sestak’s naval career had been expunged within 20 minutes.

My first thought was Senator Specter has been getting a lot of negative feed back about this claim and he has instructed his staff to remove it from the web site. I was optimistic enough to think he will simple do another television ad.

I went back to the Home Page of the http://noshowjoe.org web site and checked to see if the video had been removed. The video was still there.

Trying to be fair I thought, OK he is having the web site redesigned and that cannot all be done in 20 minutes even if a large chunk of a blog can be erased that quickly.

Since I was going to be out of town all day I decided I would recheck when I got home. I rechecked Friday evening and the offending video is still prominently displayed. The screen print clearly shows the video link and the date and time of 4/23/2010 8:28 PM.

“What Others Are Saying About Joe Sestak Being “Relieved of Duty” is the title of the blog article. It starts, “As Cong. Joe Sestak tries to re-write history about being relieved of duty in the Navy, here’s what others have to say about Sestak creating a ‘poor command climate’.”  I will not address all of the anonymous statements but the first one is typical.

Navy Times, March 20, 2006:

Mullen relieved Sestak form his position as deputy chief of naval operations for warfare requirements and programs (sic, this is a formal job title and is improperly not capitalized in the blog) and switched him to the office of vice chief [sic]. The Navy does not comment of the movement of flag officers. But a Navy official who declined to be named said Sestak was relieved due to an “extremely bad” command climate, adding that although analysis from Sestak’s shop was highly regarded, “saying it was not a pleasant place to work would be an understatement.” (Bold text is in the original text of the blog.)

First, we have a statement by a Navy official who declined to be named. The whole statement is pure hearsay. The statement could be by a 4-Star Admiral or a junior sailor. Is it from someone who thought his former boss made him work too hard?

Whoever made the statement (and I certainly am not familiar with Navy Times to think they might make up a fabricated story for ratings) though he or she clearly does not like retired Vice-Admiral Sestak he has to praise his work ethic and results. “[A]lthough analysis from Sestak’s shop was highly regarded….”

Joe Sestak retired from the Navy in 2005 to help care for his daughter who had brain cancer. About a year later someone unknown makes a partially derogatory statement for some unknown reason and the Navy Times thinks it will make an exciting story about an officer who has already left the service.

Please think about what was happening in 2005. The United States was deeply involved in two wars in Asia. Every branch of the armed forces was feeling the strain of what was clearly going to be a long term commitment. Admiral Sestak was in command of a key office in conducting warfare.

In 2010, a “current admiral, who ask not to be identified speaking out against a former colleague.” This one says Admiral Sestak’s desire to reduce the size of the fleet was actually widely held of the years.” However, he thought Sestak had a “tyrannical leadership style.” [again bold in the blog article].

Whoever this admiral is he gets totally ridiculous when he said, “In today’s Navy there’s no way a guy like Joe Sestak would be able to have been as quote-unquote successful rising through the ranks.” [Before you ask, no the whole blog article is not in bold face.] I consider an officer who goes from Ensign in 1974 to Vice-Admiral in 2005 to have done quite well in rising through the ranks. Vice-Admiral is the second highest rank in the Navy. Had the Navy really changed so dramatically between 2005 and 2010?

One place Senator Specter claims the Navy Times had reported that Joe Sestak had been fired for a top Navy post two years ago. But it is the Navy Times saying what The Hill has written. The Navy Times is not an official publication of the Department of the Navy. Still, I could believe the Navy Times would be in a much better position to get information from the Navy than a newspaper which reports on Capital Hill.

Finally we come to something a little closer to the time when Admiral Sestak resigned from the Navy. On taking command as Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Admiral Mike Mellens reassigned Vice-Admiral Sestak. In his second act as CNO, Mullens tranferred him to be special assistant to Vice Chief of Naval Operations—until further notice. According to the Specter blog the Navy Times said Admiral Sestak was considered an intellectual heavyweight in the Navy, “but Mullen reassigned Sestak to points unknown on his opening day of business as the new CNO.”

I do not know about Senator Specter but I certainly do not consider a transfer to the office of the Vice Chief of Naval Operations to be points unknown.

Specter or the Navy Times (I am not always quite sure which I am reading) says, “The official reason for Sestak’s removal: poor “command climate.” Senator Specter please show me an order or a letter of reprimand with the statement “poor ‘command climate.’”

Unless you can provide better proof than anonymous statements by people who both praise and condemn Representative Joe Sestak please pull the ad “No Show Joe” and remove the link to the video from the web site. You owe Representative Joe Sestak an apology unless you can verify your claims.

Our little group of veterans probably could not have achieved more at the rally if we had 100 people there. We did not think we would be able to get into the rally. The newspaper had said you had to get a ticket from Senator Specter’s office yesterday. As the woman issuing the tickets told me when I ask, due to a communications problem not as many people as expected could come. Basically they were desperate for any warm bodies.The crowd was so sparse they had herded most of the people right up to the base of the stage. They ask us to not wear our Sestak buttons. Ironically, their attempt to keep us back away from the stage and not letting us wear our buttons made us stand out so we could not be missed.Every Specter supporter was wearing a Specter label even if they were not carrying a sign. Of course no one could bring any signs from outside of the hanger at the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Airport where the rally was held. We were perfectly willing to take off our Sestak buttons but obviously we would not take Specter signs or wear Specter stickers.

I must acknowledge that the people of Scranton and Wilkes-Barre could not have been more polite and helpful. We were getting along so well with most of the Specter supporters one of them gave one of our people fresh batteries for his camera.

When Specter looked over at the Handicap Seating where I, a Navy veteran using a walker, and a World War II veteran were sitting (of course they put us in the back row) he could not miss us because there were only a handful of people in the rows in front of us. I have to admit the World War II vet looked healthier than me or the Navy man. He was there despite just having a kidney removed six weeks ago.

When he looked to the rear of the hanger there stood a former Army Captain wearing his flight jacket. He sort of stood out with his unit patches and all the accouterments. In the back somewhere was a young woman wearing an Army PT shirt. The rest of our little group of about 12 were not wearing anything clearly military. But since they were obvious because they had no labels or signs.

When Senator Specter looked around and saw us in the audience he turned a little pale, just for a second or so. This would not have been too bad except we got to talk to the press before he arrived.

I am sure Vice-PresidentP Biden was a little disappointed that there were so few people there from his birthplace and childhood home, Scranton. But is he was you would never know it. Biden was in great form. If he flubbed anything I sure did not catch it.

Senator Casey was enthusiastic and supportive of his colleague. I have never seen him not overjoyed to speak before any collection of Democrats.

We were there to ask Vice-President Biden to speak out against Senator Specter’s accusation in the “No Show Joe” ad that Admiral Specter had been relieved of duty for “creating a hostile command environment.” I will address that issue in a separate blog post.

A reporter from one of the newspapers who had already heard our side and Senator Specter about his mean spirited attack during the press scrum as they were leaving the stage. Senator Specter actually tried to tell the reporter that he had never said anything negative against Sestak. The reporter was able to exactly quote the line from Specter’s ad. When the Senator had no answer the reporter told him that there would be an article in his paper on the subject.

We got great interest from all of the press. Every reporter, all the way from the Associated Press to the local Fox station ask to speak to our star. The Navy man with the walker had a great story to tell. I believe every reporter ask for and got his home phone and cell phone number. They wanted to be able to ask him any further questions they might have. At least one reporter specifically wanted to do a more detailed interview by phone. By that time the surgery six weeks ago was clearly taking its toll.

The airport opened the hanger doors so we could watch the Vice-President and two Senators board and take off.  The only people who did not get to see it were the first ones out the exit. I am sure Richard Nixon took of more quickly when he left the White House but even Nixon turned around an waved to the crowd. Vice-President Biden, Senator Specter, and Senator Casey climbed those stairs and took off as quickly as Air Force 2 would go.

Atlantic Magazine published a special issue recently on the future prospects of the US. The conclusion of James Fallows, a regular contributor who has spent years in China and other countries, is that our prospects are better than any other country on earth if we can solve one problem, the way our government is working. Most letter writers who have been printed in these pages would agree, I believe, with that assessment.

When I was walking the streets campaigning for election candidates in the past couple of years, the people I spoke with agreed that the lack of honesty and integrity in governing officials is what upsets them most. I think the two perceptions are connected.

Democratic governing can only happen through good faith bargaining and if duplicity and selfish maneuvering takes priority over commitment to the common good, governing itself grinds down to short-sighted positioning based on the latest polls and powerful influences. The far-sighted and often hard choices that constitute good governing just doesn’t happen. I think many would agree that is our current situation.

I am sending to both political parties in the county a modest document to address that situation. It is a Pledge to Voters for candidates to ascribe to. It promises truth-telling and giving priority to the common good, both current and future.

The pledge is general and abstract. It’s hard to imagine anyone who could disagree with it. That is the starting point, where we all agree. But by putting this point of agreement into words and repeating those words over and over, slipping into evasive and self-serving patterns of behavior becomes a little less common. And little by little our level of political discourse should rise to a more cooperative confrontation of the serious dangers to our common welfare.

I ask the readers to urge your party and the candidates to speak the pledge at the beginning of every public presentation. Don’t accept the protest “I already do that all the time.” Insist on the pledge being spoken because unspoken assumptions are more easily ignored. Here is the pledge.

My Pledge to Voters

By electing me to office you the people bestow on me your trust in my integrity and dedication, Therefore I hereby commit myself:

1. to support and advance democracy and the Constitution;
2. to speak and promote truth even while leading citizens to support the common welfare;
3. to put the common welfare, both current and future, ahead of the welfare of any individual or group;
4. to conscientiously discharge the duties of my office;
5. to model good citizenship;
6. to acknowledge when I fall short of these commitments;
7. to practice these principles both during campaigning for election and during my term of service if I am elected.

John Rose

I take a look at this individual who has been charged criminally, does that mean he’s going to get his Miranda warnings?

Does that mean the only kind of information we want to get from him is if he volunteers it. He’s not a citizen of this country. He’s a terrorist, and I don’t think he deserves the full range of protections of our criminal justice system embodied in the Constitution of the United States. (emphasis added)

So Tom Ridge, our former governor, is the person who determines whether a person is a terrorist. That is great news since the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is in such financial straits due to the Bush recession. We can disband all the courts in the state and save billions of dollars a year paying judges, juries, and other court costs. All we have to do is get Ridge to come back to Pennsylvania and pay him $50 million a year to decide the innocence and guilt of every accused person.

I wonder why Tom Ridge never displayed this super power when he was governor? I worked for the state when Ridge was governor; I never realized I worked for God. I wonder if Governor Ridge can use his divine powers to hold the “criminals” in suspended animation or something until he declares they are reformed or he sends them to hell. That way we can eliminate all prisons and save even more billions.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Jonathan Turley Takes on Tom Ridge’s Hackery (videocafe.crooksandliars.com)
• Tom Ridge: Terror suspect doesn’t deserve ‘full range’ of rights (cnn.com)

If anyone has problems with the blog in the future contact John Harvey, the Blog Master.

While the ethics complaint may be interesting, it is just another charge against an official who resigned to avoid impeachment. The real story to me is the subject of the emails and messages going between Palin’s staff and the McCain campaign. Bill McAllister, a communications aide to the governor, sent an email to the McCain campaign asking for guidance about what Palin’s position should be on abortion and sex education.

I need to verify what’s being said on the governor’s behalf regarding two social issues," McAllister writes. "On abortion, she is pro-life, but does she oppose exceptions for rape and incest? On sex education, does she favor an abstinence-only approach or does she allow for contraceptives? [Emphasis added]

The email does not ask what position the campaign wants Palin to take. It asks what her position is. This seems to indicate that even Palin’s aides did not know what her position was on hot button social issues. Or they were willing to say anything the campaign wanted them to say about issues on which the candidate had already spoken. An even more troubling implication is that Sarah Palin is willing to say anything to get elected.

I would suggest that you concider doing what I did. Go to Tim’s web site. Send an email using the form. In addition to expressing your reaction, ask what would have to change for him to vote for the bill if it passes in the Senate. Do not just criticize ask what we can do to change his mind. What would Tim Holden need from Senators Specter and Casey?