I would hate to see comments censored and delayed for approval because of a few bad apples. We all know who these people are. David Diano will insult and become vicious with anyone that criticizes Arlen Specter. It’s sad and divisive. His comments are no intelligent and they bring nothing to the debate. It’s just pure hatred.

There are a few others too, like Bruce Bailey and “Hate Sestak” who can be pretty nasty, but David Diano takes the cake. Personally, I’ve just ignored him and refuse to even engage him or his ilk with conversation because it is obviously fruitless. Perhaps you can just keep an eye on the few people that can’t handle freedom rather than changing the site totally to screen comments?

There always is going to be someone who is abusive. Frankly, many, if not most of us, have been intemperate at times. Your tolerance has been appreciated.

It’s very difficult, if not impossible, to find a satisfatory place to draw a line. Self moderation is the ideal. Feedback from commenters tends to provide an alert when a poster goes too far; but if the only sound (s)he hears is what already is in his/her head, then the alert will go unheeded.

The tone of your call for civility is appreciated.

I kind of resent being placed in the same category as Diano and the Hate guy, just because I’ve chosen to engage them. When I first started paying attention to the comments here, they were posting all kinds of toxic smears about Joe Sestak, and I didn’t think that should go unchallenged. I don’t believe that silence is a good antidote to poison.

If I’ve gone over the line or offended, my apologies. But the tone was set long before I arrived here.

It’s funny how Dan calls for civility and keeping out the personal attacks, and WestPA Luke (who I don’t recall engaging with, and who is anonymous) feels the need to attack me personally.

I’m generally pretty civil with the people that have the integrity to post under their own names. Lee and I get along pretty well. I think the worst think I’ve said about Bruce is that he’s misguide about Sestak’s true nature.

It’s unusual for me to attack another poster unprovoked, though I have gone after some blatant racists and bigots after their posts about Obama or gays. Other than that, I pretty much rise (or lower myself) to the level of my debate opponent.

I agree Hater is pretty toxic, and over the top, but he does give me a laugh, especially with all the 50-cent words.

As for attacking Sestak both personally and politically, I make no apologies. Politically, he’s running a poor campaign, he’s damaging the Democratic party, he damaging the President, he’s failed to honor his campaign promises, he’s failed to help local Democrats in his district. Personally, the charges of him being a “bad boss” and “raving maniac” don’t even scratch the surface of who Sestak is.

I’ve got no problem with Bruce defending (or attempting to defend) Sestak against my “toxic smears”. However, it would wrong to imply that I’ve gone after Bruce personally because we disagree. I’ve defended Bruce as a solid Dem, but one who has a different view of Sestak and his chances than I do. I tend to view Sestak as the poison (or rather a growing cancer) in the party and expose him before he spreads any further.

I think a lot of the people posting here have gone a little overboard. There have been a lot of personal attacks that should not have been made.

I think Bill Healey & FH seem to make the most personal attacks on other posters. It appears that they are trying to get the other posters off a certain subject.

I will single out Mr. Diano (sorry, Dave, I seem to agree with you on most points…). However, your thinly veiled attempts to use certain words (@ss, p1ss, etc) should be eliminated.

If any of us take offense at a certain posting, we shouldn’t hesitate to call that person out about it.

As I too have been the subject of some rather visceral comments, I would like to second my editor’s recommendation.

Despite appearances, those of us who are working for a candidate do not agree with them on everything — and are not cheerleaders. And yes, we have had discussions with opposing viewpoints. I am a woman of convictions and am not a “yes man”. I say what I believe is the truth.

Until May 18, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and hopefully with Dan’s post the comments will be less toxic. But after May 18, let’s get behind those who will take the victory lap and help them emerge victorious on November 2.

Beth Hegedus

Dave from conshohocken

here is rule we could try. you have to list your first name and town. it is also really important that this gets done now. or we can decend to the level of politico.com comments section. And our passions well increase as the senate race between whoever wins and toomey heats up. not to mention the house races. i try to follow one rule personally do not type angry.

Bruce-
You have not offended me at all. I appreciate your willingness to wade into the muck that’s been thrown around here. I just can’t stand it enough to engage in the vitriole here anymore.
I also appreciate your willingness to reconcile with any who might have beeen offended.
I look forward to May 17th.

Dem Voter-
I wasn’t attempting to thinly veil. I have a habit of doing that to get around any profanity filters that blogging sites might use. I actually feel that profanity is perfectly acceptable use of language and don’t agree with censorship among adults discussing adult issues.
One of the reasons I’ll never be a candidate for office is that I would have no qualms about calling someone like Toomey a lying m*th*r-f*ck*r if he presented a claim that was completely false.
On my own blog (which I haven’t used in ages), I started off warning people who wanted to debate against me online to wear cup.

Suburban snapshot-
I think the staffers of the candidates should clearly identify themselves. For example, during the rough-and-tumble with the Meehan petitions or other issues, Lentz’s campaign manager not only posts under his full name, but identifies himself by title.

Bruce is quick to refer to any Sestak detractor as a Specter puppet. Having people post under their real names is a good antidote to both the perceived problem and the response. I do think that puppets and shills detract from the honest discourse. I’m fine with harsh discourse, if people are willing to put their names behind it.

I don’t agree with Bill. I’m not sure if he considers himself an official member of the campaign, but he’s providing a ton of pictures for Joe’s “Go Joe” site and his wife, Gail, is practically a fixture at Sestak’s office and events. BTW, she is a very nice, dedicated Dem who went to high school with Joe and I understand why she likes him. It’s rare that I see her without a Sestak T-shirt. My point here is that Bill is heavily invested in the campaign.

(I’m heavily invested in keeping Sestak out of office, but I was also eager to keep Weldon out of office.)

David – the “Go Joe” site (www.go.joesestak.com)is a social networking site that anyone can join and contribute to.

Saying “he’s providing a ton of pictures” for it is like saying he’s providing a lot of content for his own Facebook page.

No Bruce, I do provide lots of photos and cover many events for the future Senator, I have been a VOLUNTEER with the campaign since April of 09. Have traveled half the state for him.BTW my wife doesn’t always wear a Sestak T shirt,I do.

Thanks for the clarification, Bill (I assume it was Bill…way too easy for anybody to post anonymously, even if it’s by mistake!)

But the idea of what “Go Joe” is all about is still correct – it’s a social networking site for Sestak supporters, similar to Facebook. Sestak supporters should definitely check it out: http://www.go.joesestak.com

I was posting from a different computer,you are correct Bruce that post is from me. I agree all Joe’s supporters can go there for the lateset info.

Bruce-
I love it when you try to challenge me on a computer related point.
First of all, anything ending in JoeSestak.com is owned/controlled by the Sestak campaign.

Second, the site says: “Joe Sestak created this Ning Network.” and has that picture of Joe, his wife and kid from 4 years ago at Abu’s picnic.

Third, Bill Healy is listed as having posted 355 photos. Tom McDonald has 479 posted (some of which are Sestak family photos). That’s 834 of the 979 campaign photos. Either these guys are working for the campaign or they are stalkers. This is clearly an active campaign activity.

BTW, Sestak supporters should definitely check out:
http://specter2010.com/sestak_corrected/

Bill-
1) You’ve been with the campaign since April 09. It must have been tough waiting 4 months for Joe to hem and haw and wait for his wife, kid and dog to give him permission to run.
2) Traveling half the state is pretty hard core. I don’t recall seeing your name in the FEC reports for reimbursements for travel expenses, though I other people getting reimbursed for gas, tolls and parking. How much do you think you’ve spent in in-kind contributions to the campaign?
3) You might well wear the Sestak t-shirts more often than Gail, but it is rare for me to see her without a Sestak shirt. To be fair, I usually see her at Delco Dem events, so there is some selection bias. My point was that she’s a big fan of Joe’s

The overall point is that you are more than a mere Sestak “supporter” on a blog, but rather an active member of the campaign. I, on the other hand, am not even remotely part of the Specter campaign (though I do seem to have a fan-base among the volunteers because some recognize my names at events). I’m more of a Sestak detractor than an Specter supporter.

Thanks for continually giving me a chance to plug Go Joe, David. (Check it out at wwww.go.joesestak.com) By the way, I’m pretty sure that the Ning social networking platform(www.ning.com) works in conjunction with a proprietary website like joesestak.com. Not that anyone really gives a rat’s patoot. But it seemed to matter to you, David.

Hey, David, I did check out the Specter page you linked. I also urge Sestak supporters to read it – get an idea of the petty, vindictive, twisted, propagandizing minds running the show at Specter hq. If you’re at all thinking that Specter might have some redeeming virtue, reading this page will rid you of the thought. Hundreds and hundreds of words of ugly, mean-spirited mudslinging.

Something to really make you proud of our sitting US Senator.

Bruce-
Happy to oblige, because “Go Joe” is “Going” nowhere. My parents and most of my friends can’t even understand a site link like that. Sadly, (and ironically), I have to include you as you muffed the link yourself.
My point with Ning page containing the photos was that it was an official page controlled by the campaign. I doubt that I could post a negative Sestak picture to it.

As for the Specter site: Joe caught paying his workers less than minimum wage? Oooh, what a mudslinger.
Revealing why Joe was really relieved of command? Why not ask Joe to release his military records if he’s going to run on his record?
The removal of Joe as DCNO did occur as one of Mullen’s first orders of business. No transition. Zip.

Bruce, do you acknowledge the reporting of The Hill (and every other newspaper) that the high turnover rate of Sestak staffers (since he left the Navy) is due to him being a slave-driver and unreasonable boss?
We should really get that point clear. Do you believe that outside of the Navy, Sestak is a good/bad boss treating his workers well/poorly?
Hint: if your answer isn’t bad and poorly, you are too far removed from reality to figure out what happened in the Navy.
For the sake of honest discourse, at least admit/acknowledge that Sestak has a poor (civilian) command climate.

What else is on Specter’s site? Defending Arlen’s vote for The Civil Rights Act of 1991 over Joe’s objections to that vote and noting that the overall vote was 93-5. Gee, Bruce, how “dare” Specter defend a 93-5 vote?

The Massa Endorsement? That’s mud that Sestak willingly jumped in. The comments in that section are quotes from John Baer in the Philly Daily News from March 15th.

Bruce, if you think this is “mud”, you aren’t prepared for the next few weeks.

I agree with Dan if for no other reason than the fact that all this battling back and forth makes it impossible for me to read the comments. I just can’t justify spending my time reading online battles between people who clearly just don’t agree with each other and simply don’t respect one another.

So please guys, let’s step up and bring some honor back to political debate.

David — When I write, I do clearly identify that I am working on a campaign. As far as writing under my byline, PA2010 uses unique identifiers i.e., Suburban Snapshot. If you read further into my bio, you’ll see my name is Beth Leary Hegedus and I’m four generations of Leary’s in Montgomery County.

As far as Brian Lentz’s campaign manager posting and using his name, he is not a member of the editorial team on PA2010.

Hope this helps.

About 35 hours later, and after traversing all of the subsequent articles comments, I have to tell you Dan: “nice try”.

Perhaps it simply is too close to Primary Election Day to expect a movement toward civility. Perhaps those who most needed to hear what you said aren’t able or willing to listen. Perhaps we all blame the other guy and don’t possess or exhibit self insight.

I wish that I had some suggestions for you; but unfortunately I don’t.