IME, many (most?) there are Catholics. If they claim to be “ex” Catholics, they still give the Catholic guy/gal a pass in ways that us deists, freethinkers, agnostics, and atheists never would. So people coming up there expect that pass wherever they go. More in a moment on the roots of that as I experience them.

They really do not understand that Protestants, and even many Catholics, not to mention Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, etc., outside Delco really want that wall between church and state to be absolute. As Judge John Jones clearly understood in his Kitzmiller decision.

I think it’s completely accurate, the observation that their self-centered worldview bars comprehension of any other perspective. The worldview is informed by the Vatican, not by pluralism. It is absolutist, not tolerant. It is convinced of its own infallibility. It is grounded in faith and hearsay and top-down-inflicted policy, not in reason and direct experience and consensus.

And it is unmasqued in moments like this–a Catholic running for office who demonstrates that he is ignorant of what this Republic means at its most basic essence. It is unmasqued as what it is: the commitment to converting the United State of America into a theocracy.

But all that aside, what mature person tries to manipulate others in this pandering, cheap way? This I fear is what “progressivism” has become. A bunch of sound-bite button-pushing. Karl Rove Media Thunderdome. Just like the right uses. And this is why it is dangerous: it ends up being used for the exact same kind of reactionary politics.

I am proud of Pennsylvanians who remain a bulwark against the creeping religious extremism of the 20th century that infects the 21st. Believe what you want, but keep it out of my face! My ancestors fought the Revolution to create a place where people would be liberated for all time from church and kings (the First Amendment) and would have the INDIVIDUAL ability to back up their INDIVIDUAL conscience (the Second).

So call me biased and mean, but I don’t vote for Catholics, whether they are “out” or not. You can’t serve two masters (Pope? or Constitution? guess which, and ask Patrick Kennedy about all that!).

You particularly cannot serve the Constitution when your religious leaders have said all along that the Constitution’s way of doing things is wrong, because only the Pope is right or ever can be.

I was educated by Catholics and had many Catholic relatives. They were mostly decent people, hard working, etc., when they weren’t hellbent on “saving me from damnation.” (Sorry, but if I “believed in” god, I could not possibly believe it would have such a taste for pettiness, meanness, conformity, surveillance, and torture! Such god as I would have is more like a mathematician with a killer sense of humor and an amazing toolbox of physics; consider the platypus.)

At bottom these Catholics really do not understand what this Republic is about. Most came to the US late (1870s and later) and hid inside ethnically, racially, religiously insulated enclaves. In the Seventh I’d get this weird impression that they thought they’re back in the Roman Empire or something, holy or otherwise. Their political development stalled long before the Enlightenment.

To this day they huff around thinking they are better than anyone because they are shackled to irrational beliefs about their superiority, and a divide-and-conquer mentality. When someone disagrees, or simply is silent, they assert this superiority…while the rest of us are trying to reason and consensus our way to liberty for as many people as possible.

I really wanted to support Mr. Sestak but he has systematically lost my regard and confidence over the past year to 18 months. Now I’m finding him just…scary.

I used to be one of those “progressives” who wanted more extreme politics. Nowadays I see that gravitas and moderation are the best engines of humane, rational praxis, and the moral and social evolution of humanity.

So guys like Mr. Sestak can run at the local level, and rant in ways that will evolve the political discourse (just as more conservative candidates/politicians can do). But when we get to the level of the US Senate, the next to the last thing we need is the bipolar disorder of Rovian politics. The very last thing we need is more damn religionists using politics to further their holier-and-righter-than-thou narcissism.

On the issues that Sestak is picking, he’s got very little experience or gravitas.

I caught his appearance on CNBC with Toomey. Sestak kept making navy analogies about the economy running aground, fixing leaks, etc. VERY lame. The host, Kudlow, even made a snickering comment about expecting that kind of talk from a former admiral. Joe did manage to slam Obama a bit. Way to go, Traitor Joe.

Sestak’s campaign boils down to “I used to be an admiral. Be impressed. Love me. Worship me. Elect me.”

Sestak’s trying to toss dirt on Specter. It just shows what an outsider/carpetbagger Joe is to Pennsylvania. Specter has nowhere to go but UP in the eyes of Democrats. NONE of the “bad” stuff Sestak is digging up (not a lot of digging required) amounts to a news-flash.

Specter, on the other hand, has a long list of votes where he crossed the isle to help important Democratic causes. That list is news to most Democrats.

Most Democrats don’t know Sestak’s dirty-little-secret about his votes to support Bush in Iraq and funding Cheney’s office. Seriously, most Dems are completely unaware of Sestak’s betrayals of the party.

Sestak loves himself too much to do that from what info ive seen so far. Specter will work him over in a debate

Jack

You are absolutely right about that. We are hearing about everything but the issues. And that is precisely why I said that I had reservations about whether Sestak’s campaign (as opposed to his worth as a senator) is ready for prime time. Sestak has got to be the one to raise and address the issues and stay focused on them, regardless of the distractions raised by Specter. So far, as you implied, he hasn’t been doing it. Sestak needs to be told that.

Also, I understood that Sestak got signed up for it “by accident”. He got committed to going there by a staffer who didn’t consult Sestak’s political “calculator”. He certainly wouldn’t have signed up in the first place, but was stuck and he couldn’t back out.

I forgot about that! Yeah, it’s not necessarily that he showed anti-Semitism going to that; just a little bit of cluelessness about the concerns of our Jewish community in Pennsylvania. Good point.

2) Specter genuinely is in the middle. It’s not always fence straddling. He’s pretty liberal on social issues. While I’m for regulation that prevents fraud and abuse, I do agree that some things are over-regulated or regulated with the wrong set of incentives.

Capt Jack-
The proper balance of tax rates, regulation, etc. has a broad spectrum of opinion, and Specter is to the left of some long-time Dem senators.

There were plenty of Dems that went along with policies that led to the problems we face. Except for Feingold, the Patriot Act was unanimous in the Senate.

If you and the rest of the Sestak team really think you can lay the crisis at Specter’s feet, good luck.

Sestak has no real economic plans or gravitas. The best he can do is support Obama (who is supporting Specter).