Holy shit I love The Nation magazine. I’ve been reading it for almost two years now; I subscribed right around the 2004 election. And in this week’s issue, they printed their second article not only addressing the PA senate race, but the Progressive candidacy of Chuck Pennacchio.
I got word of the story via Liz’s post on the Pennacchio blog. The article is supposed to be accessible to subscribers only, but that print page link may do the trick. But to quote just a bit from it:
The Casey controversy illustrates the perils of early intervention by Washington Democrats in the process of selecting Senate candidates at the state level; in their drive to find a strong contender, DC power brokers often bet on candidates who are more conservative than the grassroots activists who form the party’s base. It’s especially frustrating to Pennsylvania activists, who watched national Democrats elbow out of the contest Barbara Hafer, a popular prochoice woman who’d won a number of statewide races, to make way for Casey. “A lot of women feel ignored, like the boys decided that this is a throwaway issue,” Kathy Miller, outgoing president of the Pennsylvania chapter of the National Organization for Women, told the Philadelphia Daily News.
There is similar frustration in Tennessee, where another Senate candidate anointed by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Congressman Harold Ford, came out against an anti-Alito filibuster on the day civil rights groups endorsed the last-ditch effort to block the nomination. Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP’s Washington bureau, described the move by Ford, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, as “deeply concerning to us.” Ford’s primary foe, State Senator Rosalind Kurita, hasn’t made a big issue of Ford’s stand. It’s a different story in Pennsylvania, where Chuck Pennacchio, a college professor and former Congressional aide, has positioned himself as the progressive alternative to Casey on issues ranging from abortion rights to the Iraq War. Along with another candidate who’s challenging Casey, attorney Alan Sandals, Pennacchio seized on Casey’s defection to the Alito camp. “Democrats will have a choice between a watered-down version of Rick Santorum and a strong Democrat who will consistently stand with them on the issues they care about,” argues Pennacchio. Recalling that his party lost when it ran a social conservative against Santorum in 2000, Pennacchio says: “An antichoice Democrat cannot beat an antichoice Republican in a high-profile race.”
Aaaaand, they even mentioned the PA Zogby poll that the MSM won’t touch with a ten foot pole. The Zogby Poll which I wrote about here indicates that any Democrat on the ballot beats Sen. Man on Dog and Chuck Pennacchio fares the best out of all of them once people know everyone’s stances on the issues. What does this show? That A) PA wants a Democratic senator representing them in DC. B) That when given very quick rundown on the issues [choice, stem cell, PAC $, Iraq war/withdrawal, universal healthcare, raise min. wage, NAFTA/CAFTA, SCOTUS] they choose the real Democrat in the race, Dr. Chuck Pennacchio.
The money will come in from across the country in boatloads [in individual donor amounts, no PACs!] when Pennacchio wins the primary on May 16th. And then there’s the name recognition argument. People whine and bitch about how Casey has etter name recognition and that everyone should just accept it and roll over and die. Fuck that. Help boost Pennacchio’s name recognition! You can’t boost name recognition by saying you can’t.
Thank you The Nation for saying things that need to be said.
