philly

As predicted, the event was a disappointment. I had mentioned that prospective attendees were asked to fill out a RSVP along with a field where you could type in a question to ask Junior Casey. I had remained optomistic [as promised] all while I sat towards the front for the talking to begin. My optimism was stabbed as Ray Murphy said there would be all of five questions during this "town hall" meeting. Five pre-selected questions. What the fuck? I was surprised that I wasn't asked to fill out a vote pledge form to be let inside this Unitarian Church. What happened to open mics?

Jen Murphy was first up to the podium. Shorter than the other speakers, she got a mic in the face of my frame - sorry Jen, it was the best one. She is one of the lead organizers of Philly for Change (I think the chairwoman?) and a person I've seen at countless events all over the place for the last two years. She noted how great it was to see such a large turnout for the event. The church was full with people standing in the back by the entrance. Among those in the standing room only section were PA State House Rep Babette Josephs (PA-182) and Democratic primary challenger Alan Sandals. Later outside, I saw Tom Knox; you know, one of those guys running/not running for mayor in 2007. Jen noted that Philly for Change was a broad grassroots movement and said it was ironic that we were all there grassroots style while across town (15/Walnut) Ward Leaders were picking who would be on the ballot running for City Council. I thought that was ironic since Junior Casey was picked by a few people at the top of the Democratic party and had the field cleared for him in the primary. That's not very grassroots.

Ray Murphy was up next at the podium. Ray is the guy behind Philadelphians Against Santorum [I still haven't registered Philly Against Idiots, but it's in the works]. I don't share all the same views as Ray on things, but I can't say enough about the energy he brings to a project. I've never been involved in a project with him up close and personal, but I know of his involvement in tons in the last two years. Ray said that 85% of the PAS group approved the endorsement of Junior Casey in the Senate race. He also said that the top three issues members brought up for this race were healthcare, gas and Iraq. A minute later, he said healthchare, jobs and Iraq. I'm not sure which is the correct three. He was also the one who broke the news that there would be all of five questions asked and indeedy that they were pre-selected ones from those submitted online prior to the event.

And then it was time for the candidate.

Junior Casey emerged from the double doors behind the podium to a big cheer from the crowd. I had my hands full with my 80-200mm lens snapping away up front. He said that he'd sum up the campaign in two words: "New direction" which to me translates into a big fat fucking "I'm not Rick Santorum so vote for me" which is total shit and not a reason to vote for a candidate. He summed up Man on Dog's candidacy as "More of the same" which I'd amend to read: "More of the batshit crazy same" but otherwise on the money. He also noted that this was going to be an ugly campaign, but that he would be ready for the smear campaign and that the Repugs have already been publicly vocal about how negative they'd be going. Later Monday night, I saw the newest Man on Dog smear ad where a bunch of men were sitting around a dark poker table smoking cigars and labeled as criminals and people under investigation. It was a good commercial. Casey takes a lot of nasty 527 monies. So does Man on Dog.

He went right into his stump on his differences with Man on Dog. The issue of pay raises. He said that Man on Dog voted for three pay raises as Senator while voting against an increase in minimum wage thirteen (I think that's the right number) times. He pointed out Babette Josephs in the back of the room as a champion of the minimum wage. A good thing too since she's been shilling full force for him for a year now hook line and sinker. No mention of the pay raise fiasco here in PA which he signed and then later filed suit for. No mention of moving towards an actual living wage either. Not that anyone is talking about that CRAZY idea.

On Iraq, he said that Man on Dog didn't have the courage to stand up to his president and ask the tough questions. He didn't mention anything about getting the fuck out of Iraq. Maybe I missed it. I may have been snapping away while he said this, but I didn't catch it. He said that Pennsylvania needed an independent Senator to talk tough in DC. Heh.

He said a little bit in regards to healthcare. About how 43M Americans are without coverage. I'll remain without coverage until the 90-day evaluation period ends for me at my new gig which will make it a solid 1.5 years without coverage. He mentioned that there were 8.3M children without coverage and that he's had a plan (C.H.I.P.) since the beginning of the campaign. Great. but what about those 34.7M adolescents, adults and seniors without coverage? Yes, it's a start (all PA children are already covered by C.H.I.P.), but by introducing the issue, he leaves quite an awkwardly large hole to fall face first into when the issue is pushed a little bit to discuss those 34.7M people.

He said that if his campaign was about one word, if not many others, it would be: Priorities. He said he'd focus tax dollars on priorities. That there should not be a vote in the Senate (he initially said all of Congress) to raise salaries until there was a rise in the national minimum wage. He wants to restore honesty and competence to U.S. foreign policy. He didn't give any hints as to what U.S. foreign policy in regards to anything should be at any point of the night.

He seemed hurried throughout the night as if he had a couple fundraisers to rush off to after the event which was annoying. After his stump, he stuck around to answer the pre-selected questions.

First up was Jennifer Jordan from Queen Village. She asked how he distinguishes himself from Man on Dog considering they were both pro-life candidates. He started off by saying how his opinion on choice was probably different than the majority of the people in the room, but that people must respect each others opinions. I respectfully think his opinion is a piece of shit. His stance on the issue of choice is shit. I don't give a fuck if he thinks we should provide more family planning services or have more birth control available or have ECPs widely available. You also need abortions as an option. Making abortions illegal doesn't make them go away, it only makes it more dangerous for women, especially poorer women who doesn't have thousands of dollars to fly to another country to have an abortion if it were to be illegal here in the U.S. He asked what should Americans do when a woman who finds out she has an unwanted (still not using "unintended") pregnancy and chooses to have the child. Maybe he should ask what should Americans do when a woman who finds out she has an unintended pregnancy and decides to abort.

Question two was from Mary from West Philly. She asked about the prospects of stricter gun control in Philadelphia. He responded right off the bat that he was a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. Hey, so am I! He also said that most of the people in the room probably disagreed with his opinion - I agreed with him on that one too. He said that we should find a common ground instead of talking about more stringent gun control laws. What the fuck?!?! He told some anecdote about a gun store in Upper Darby, which is in DelCo, not Philadelphia County. He lost me on that one once he went off topic. Tangential yes, but I don't think it addressed Mary's question.

Number three was from Elaine who works with seniors. She asked about his plan for Social Security in relation to Man on Dog's. He said that Man on Dog doesn't have a plan. That Social Security was a problem, but it was not a crisis and that Medicare was a bigger and more urgent/pressing an issue to take on. He said that as Treasurer, that he is a custodian and fiduciary of the state pension and that Senators should take more of a role like a fiduciary to restore fiscal responsibility.

Josh Richards asked a good question in regards to Casey's thoughts on campaign finance reform. Casey said that he spends far too much time fundraising as do all candidates. He said that politicians spend way too much money on elections. He said that fundraising takes away from time that should be spend with constituents and actually legislating. He called it a major priority and that he'd get to it once elected and during his first six year term. He said he had no plan whatsoever and that he'd think more about it during the first term. What a shit for brains answer. Saying that you're out on the road fundraising all day and that finance reform is a priority, but not so much of a priority that you'd take action now while fundraising, but instead start to think of it after election fundraising is just plain shit for brains.

Last question was from the Secretary of Philadelphians Against Santorum. I didn't catch her full name, but I think it was Gwynned? She asked of Casey's plan to beat Santorum and Philadelphia's role in the race. He took the second part first and said that Philly would play an integral role. He mentioned that it was Philly that delivered PA to Kerry in 2004 and without it, the state would've gone red. A solid margin in Philly wins the state. He then said that the most important thing to do to win the race is to raise money. Astounding that he'd say this right after the campaign finance question. It's as if he just has a database of answers to stock questions in his head without a proper boolean variable telling him to not say certain things in relation to other recent answers. I just sat there dumbfounded that he'd say this. Not to connect with the people. Not to take the issues to him. Not to show the voters how he'll implement his plans. To raise money was his number one priority and my thoughts on his overall hurried state seemed more true than at any point of the night.

Ray came up to thank Casey and Casey walked back through the double doors. But not before a whole bunch of people from the audience screamed out repeatedly "WHAT ABOUT IRAQ!!! WHAT ABOUT IRAQ!!!" I couldn't believe that there wasn't a question about Iraq in the five questions asked. Pathetic.

I spoke to a person who had been following the race closely for some time now as I made my way out of the church. I leaned over and said "More of the same bullshit, eh" to which he looked back at me with a shrug. After a pause, he said, "He's getting better?" Getting better six weeks out from election day is a pretty shitty spot to be in. The candidate shouldn't be getting better and leaving a partisan crowd screaming at him to answer the biggest most pressing question on the minds of all Americans (let alone Pennsylvanians). The candidate should be really honing the message with little tweaks here and there to be nice and polished. This stone is still quite rough around the edges and seemingly missing huge chunks as well. I almost had to break out laughing at the people asking me to volunteer for this douchebag. Completely blows the Iraq question on Meet the Press and then doesn't address it at any length in front of this crowd. This guy sucks. Schumer, Reid and Rendell are to blame. Those fuckers.

All photos by ME.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 19th, 2006 @ 2:55 am. You can subscribe via RSS 2.0 feed to this post's comments. You can comment below, or trackback from your own site. Your comments will be moderated [if you have never previously commented] but will appear as soon as humanly possible.