Welcome to the Dems-Arlen Spector

[Zulu Warrior]

http://www.thestate.com/nationalpolitics/story/766672.html

Looks like conservatism is having a bad day....

[Johnlodge]

Didn't he kill his wife and start the trend of over-producing music? Oh, wait that's the other guy.

[sarge]

Well, I guess I can't use him as an example of a repug who is not crazy anymore. Welcome, Arlen!

[ccbatson]

He has been a known RINO for a while...better to have honest members. He will probably do more good for Republicans as a foil in the Democrat party anyway. Besides, a converted Democrat, losing in the polls for the Republican primary as an incumbent is a long shot for re election.

[Johnlodge]

He has been a known RINO for a while...better to have honest members. He will probably do more good for Republicans as a foil in the Democrat party anyway. Besides, a converted Democrat, losing in the polls for the Republican primary as an incumbent is a long shot for re election.

http://www.4physics.com:8080/main/TidBit/SpinningTop.gif

[Eastburn]

I've always wondered how honest it is for a politician elected as a member of one party to switch sides mid-stream. Seems if the voters wanted a Democrat (or Republican, for that matter) they'd have elected one. Strikes me that the honorable thing to do is announce they're switching parties for the next election but dance with them that brung ya for thew current term.

[ccbatson]

Honest? Politicians?

[MCP-001]

I'm sorry, this is news why?

[ccbatson]

It confirms the long suspected RINO status of the guy...not really news.

[Lowell]

Now that Rush and Hannity are the de facto leaders of the party, look for more defections. The lunatic fringe is holding sway over the party and no reasonable Rep., and there are many, can feel safe in a primary election. Extremists will win the low turnout primaries and lose in the general.

This is kind of like when Feiger won the Dem primary. The shoe is on the other foot now.

[gazhekwe]

I heard Mitch McConnell hoping that the majority won't run roughshod over the minority. Hello? Doesn't he remember the last four years of the Clinton administration and the first six years of the Bush administration? How come it's OK if his party does it?:confused:

[Gistok]

There was one US Democratic Senator who did a party switch to Republican... but he did it in a rather sleazy way... he switched after the election, and after the Democrats lost control of congress in 1994....

Who was this sleazeball??

Why none other than Michigan's least favorite politician... Alabama's Richard Selby!!

[lilpup]

I've always wondered how honest it is for a politician elected as a member of one party to switch sides mid-stream. Seems if the voters wanted a Democrat (or Republican, for that matter) they'd have elected one. Strikes me that the honorable thing to do is announce they're switching parties for the next election but dance with them that brung ya for thew current term.That argument might hold for a first term winner but Spector's been around since 1980. I'm sure any in his constituency who have been paying attention are well aware of his policy positions.

[Detroitej72]

Another sign that the Republican Party is sliding farther to the fringe right, and out of touch with mainstream America.

Keep up the good work dittoheads.

[Glowblue]

He has been a known RINO for a while...better to have honest members. He will probably do more good for Republicans as a foil in the Democrat party anyway. Besides, a converted Democrat, losing in the polls for the Republican primary as an incumbent is a long shot for re election.

Not really. PA is a heavily Democratic state, so Specter flipping greatly increases his chances of re-election. Especially if the Republicans put up a right-wing nutjob like Toomey.

[oladub]

Voted for Bush's Wall Street bailout. Voted for Porkulus. Guess Senator Spector is a big spending, big government/Goldman Sachs kind of guy. Now, maybe, he will be better able to represent his corporate friends on the other side of the aisle.

Top 5 Contributors, 2003-2008, Campaign Cmte (http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=n00001604&type=I&mem=)
ContributorTotal
Blank Rome LLP$235,450
Comcast Corp$111,100
UPMC Health System$100,750
GOLDMAN SACHS$99,100
Kline & Specter$88,650

Top 5 Industries, 2003-2008, Campaign Cmte (http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2008&cid=n00001604&type=I&mem=)
IndustryTotal
Lawyers/Law Firms$2,558,680
Securities & Investment$927,899
Retired$860,345
Real Estate$812,666
Lobbyists$724,737

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=n00001604#cont

[firstandten]

Not really. PA is a heavily Democratic state, so Specter flipping greatly increases his chances of re-election. Especially if the Republicans put up a right-wing nutjob like Toomey.

Spector felt he put too much time and effort as a senator to go down in the republican primary to a right winger only to have that person lose to the democrat in the general election. He was also upset with his parties position on stem cell research which is close to his heart.

[East Detroit]

When does Al Franken take his seat?

[ghettopalmetto]

There was one US Democratic Senator who did a party switch to Republican... but he did it in a rather sleazy way... he switched after the election, and after the Democrats lost control of congress in 1994....

Who was this sleazeball??

Why none other than Michigan's least favorite politician... Alabama's Richard Selby!!

Ahem, don't forget Strom Thurmond, who switched parties because the Democrats weren't racist enough anymore.

[oladub]

Specter condemned Jim Jeffords' party switch in 2001

"Senator James Jeffords of Vermont appears in 2001, announcing his departure from the Republican party.

When the Vermont Republican became an independent, Specter lost a committee chairmanship in the Senate's resulting power shift. An angry Specter proposed a ban on such party switches."
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-specter-jeffords29-2009apr29,0,2430682.story

Specter was also trailing his Republican primary opponent by 20% in recent polls. The Republican base, it seems, is getting cranky about the Wall Street bailouts and about to give their party an enema . It was a good time for Senator Spector to jump ship.

No one has mentioned that Reagan started off as a Democrat or that Specter was a registered Democrat before becomming a Republican.

"In 1965, Specter ran for District Attorney, on the Republican ticket as a registered Democrat. He handily beat incumbent Jim Crumlish, and subsequently changed his registration to Republican."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arlen_Specter

[jiminnm]

I guess this means more Senate hearing on steroids in MLBl and on establishing an NCAA Football championship.

[ccbatson]

Political expediency...far too many politicians have very little integrity, exactly the opposite of the way it should be.

[Detroitej72]

The Republican Party used to stand for: limited government, low taxes, protecting the constitution, and anti-abortion.

Now it stands for: large government, stripping the constitution of civil liberties, huge deficits, higher taxes on the working folks, anti abortion, anti gays, anti any religion that is not conservetive protestant, and corporate welfare.

It is no wonder why some think it will slide into a regional, southern- based party of the fringe element.

[ccbatson]

True on a few counts, but backwards. The neo statist (a Mark Levinism) RINOs are pro big government, true conservatives are not. Arlen Spector is a member of the former, not the latter.

[Detroitej72]

True on a few counts, but backwards. The neo statist (a Mark Levinism) RINOs are pro big government, true conservatives are not. Arlen Spector is a member of the former, not the latter.

So, by that definition, Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, and the like are RINOs. Hell, Reagen, the god of the right wing, was not a true conservetive, as he was the first one to realise the neo-con agenda of spending like a drunk sailor and leaving future generations the bill.

[Mikeg]

With his defection, "Snarlin' Arlen" Specter will no longer be a minority member of the Senate Judicial Committee and thus, he can no longer be relied upon by the Democrats to break a Republican hold on sending President Obama's judicial nominees to the Senate Floor for a full vote. That leaves Lindsey Graham as the Dem's most likely go-to guy for advancing Obama's judicial nominees, especially controversial Supreme Court nominees.

A Cornell University law professor explains the arcane Judiciary Committee rules on his blog (http://www.dorfonlaw.org/2009/04/how-specters-defection-could-make-it.html). Maybe Joe Biden will come to regret his intervention now that David Souter has announced his retirement.

[ccbatson]

Unfortunately some of those examples are true (not all)...Liberal like spending and open borders for GWB as illustration. This leads to the weakness that allowed liberal policies to take hold (like socialized housing) which led to our economic crisis.

[Detroitej72]

Unfortunately some of those examples are true (not all)...Liberal like spending and open borders for GWB as illustration. This leads to the weakness that allowed liberal policies to take hold (like socialized housing) which led to our economic crisis.

You mean corporate entities like Countrywide Mortgage and the like who made vast sums of money passing, err, I mean selling lousy mortgages bundled together until the music stopped and somebody was left holding the hot potato.

You neo-cons sure choose to ignore reality, don't you?

[Danny]

YAY!

The Democrats are winning! They are taking over the government and there's nothing that the neo-cons can do to stop the liberal progess in the United States. We're cleaning up the Bush mess.

Welcome Spector.

[oladub]

YAY!

The Democrats are winning! They are taking over the government and there's nothing that the neo-cons can do to stop the liberal progess in the United States. We're cleaning up the Bush mess.

Welcome Spector.


"Neoconservatism is not the philosophy of free markets and a wise foreign policy. Instead, it represents big-government welfare at home and a program of using our military might to spread their version of American values throughout the world." " While most conservatives no longer defend balanced budgets and reduced spending, most liberals have grown lazy in defending civil liberties and now are approving wars that we initiate. The so-called “third way” has arrived and, sadly, it has taken the worst of what the conservatives and liberals have to offer. The people are less well off for it, while liberty languishes as a result.""Power, politics and privilege prevail over the rule of law, liberty, justice and peace. But it does not need to be that way. Neoconism has brought together many old ideas about how government should rule the people. It may have modernized its appeal and packaging, but authoritarian rule is authoritarian rule, regardless of the humanitarian overtones." - neo-CONNED (http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm)

Neoconservatism - Iraq surge, foreign interventionism, bases all over the world, increased social spending, Patriot Acts, wiretapping, printing fiat money , increased debt, AIPAC support, Wall Street financed, big government.

Winning Democrats! - Afghanistan surge, foreign interventionism, bases all over the world, increased social spending, Patriot Acts, expanded wiretapping, printing fiat money , increased debt, AIPAC support, Wall Street financed, big government.

YAWN!

[Mikeg]

YAY! The Democrats are winning! They are taking over the government and there's nothing that the neo-cons can do to stop the liberal progess in the United States. We're cleaning up the Bush mess. Welcome Spector. "Cleaning up the Bush mess" by welcoming a Senator who President G.W. Bush supported and campaigned for during his last successful re-election?

Welcoming a Senator who cannot even make a coherent response to some softball questions and who rubbed the members of his new caucus the wrong way with his remarks about his seniority being an "entitlement"?

Specter was all over the map in his "Meet The Press" appearance (http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090503/pl_politico/22026) last Sunday:



During that interview, Specter said, “If we had pursued the war on cancer.... Jack Kemp might be alive today.... This medical research has prolonged or saved many lives, including mine.” Specter's argument makes no sense at all since he admits that medical research in the war on cancer has saved his life, but apparently since Jack Kemp died from his cancer, the "war on cancer" is now a political liability to be hung around the neck of the Republican Party. This piece of cheap demagoguery ranks right up there with John Edward's claim during the 2004 campaign that "If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk, get up out of that wheelchair and walk again."
When asked about a reported agreement between himself and Senate Majority Leader Harry "Pinky" Reid over keeping his seniority earned as a Republican, Specter responded, “That’s an entitlement. I’ve earned the seniority, I will be treated by the Democrats as if I’d been elected as a Democrat.”
Specter also put his new party on notice that they can't count on him any more so than the Republicans could: “I have shown, repeatedly, my independence — willing to cross party lines — when I thought the interests of the American people and Pennsylvania required it. If I see that there are other issues where I feel as a matter of conscience, I will continue a filibuster against legislation." Go ahead a welcome a new Democrat Senator who in his first interview suggests that he has no qualms about joining a fillibuster against Democrat-supported legislation. Just don't go calling him a "neo-con" or some other empty epithet when Snarlin' Arlen's conscience tells him he needs to impede "liberal progress" in the Senate.

[Mikeg]

He will do what they want in order to get them to support his reelection campaign.You too can support his reelection campaign if you unwittingly visit Snarlin' Arlin's "Specter for the Cure - Turning Research into Cures" (http://www.specterforthecure.com/) web site and click on the "Donate Now" button.

From his "Specter for the Cure" web site:
In 2010, Arlen Specter will seek re-election to the United States Senate. Without Arlen Specter back in the Senate to see it through, Specter for the Cure could be lost to the ordinary politics of Washington that kills real change.

With his unsurpassed record of support for medical research, helping to return Senator Specter to the Senate is a powerful statement on behalf of those suffering with disease.

Become a member, today, of Specter for the Cure. All lawful contributions, of any amount, will be gratefully welcomed.....

Paid for by Citizens for Arlen Specter
This guy is even lower than John Edwards - at least Edwards didn't specifically include a campaign fund-raising appeal with his emotional political exploitation of those looking for a cure for their currently incurable medical conditions.

[ccbatson]

In the big picture, if he losses (pretty likely), this little traitor act will leave him a nasty legacy. Pretty dumb for an Octagenarian IMO.

[Detroitej72]

In the big picture, if he losses (pretty likely), this little traitor act will leave him a nasty legacy. Pretty dumb for an Octagenarian IMO.

The polls from his state seem to show he will win re-election, due to the decline of Republican voters in PA.

[Mikeg]

"Welcome to the Dems" all right:

Senate Democrats Deny Specter Committee Seniority (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2009/05/senate_democrats_deny_specter.html?hpid=topnews)

By Paul Kane - Washington Post, May 5, 2009

The Senate dealt a blow tonight to Sen. Arlen Specter's hold on seniority in several key committees, a week after the Pennsylvanian's party switch placed Democrats on the precipice of a 60-seat majority.

In a unanimous voice vote, the Senate approved a resolution that added Specter to the Democratic side of the dais on the five committees on which he serves, an expected move that gives Democrats larger margins on key panels such as Judiciary and Appropriations.

But Democrats placed Specter in one of the two most junior slots on each of the five committees for the remainder of this Congress, which goes through December 2010. Democrats have suggested that they will consider revisiting Specter's seniority claim at the committee level only after the midterm elections next year.......

Without any assurance of seniority, Specter loses a major weapon in his campaign to win reelection in 2010: the ability to claim that his nearly 30 years of Senate service places him in key positions to benefit his constituents. Tonight's committee resolution, quickly read on the Senate floor by Reid himself, contradicts Specter's assertion last Tuesday when he publicly announced his move from the Republican side of the aisle. He told reporters that he retained his seniority both in the overall chamber and in the committees on which he serves......

[ccbatson]

Hopefully the beginning of an ugly end to this traitor's career.

[Gistok]

Hopefully the beginning of an ugly end to this traitor's career.

cc... when calling people who switch party a traitor, keep in mind that your idol.... Ronald Reagan, did so as well...

[Mikeg]

Ronald Reagan switched parties while he was a private citizen - four years before he first ran for public office - therefore he could not have betrayed anyone.

[Detroitej72]

I suspect he is a fan of Sen. Shelby who also switched parties...after the Republicans took control of the Senate, but since he is a Republican, he is therefore not a traitor.

[ccbatson]

I'll bite...Hooray for Ronald Reagan for betraying the Liberals.

See the difference is that he (Reagan) shifted to the good party...you know, the one that lowered taxes, and bolstered individual liberty (the American way), from the party that, as it turns out, is hell bent on transforming the US into the new USSR.

[rb336]

I'll bite...Hooray for Ronald Reagan for betraying the Liberals.

See the difference is that he (Reagan) shifted to the good party...you know, the one that lowered taxes, and bolstered individual liberty (the American way), from the party that, as it turns out, is hell bent on transforming the US into the new USSR.

the tax cuts created a 2-year recession that only ended when reagan decided to send deficit spending into overdrive

ya know bats, your thinking is drifting further and further from reality into paranoid delusion. I am not saying that as an insult, i am saying it with all sincerity -- you need help

[Mikeg]

The Democrats are the party that is on the right side of history so get used to many many years of policies that you do not like.Forget about that "right side of history" business, elections are typically decided on pocketbook issues and voters have short memories (as do our legislators, unfortunately). You better hope that the economy recovers in time for the 2010 mid-term elections because voters typically punish the party in power if the economy is in a recession.

However, I like your rabid, partisan enthusiasm - keep on encouraging the Dems to over-reach on their social agenda while at the same time propping up troubled banks and industries and also trying to borrow and spend our way out of this deep recession. That's a recipe for failure in 2010.

[firstandten]

It's not rabid - it's fact. Perhaps you were living under a rock for the last couple of years? What does the Republican party have going for it? Who will lead it? What is going to be their platform that will be anything significantly different from the last time? I don't think that Republicans have come to fully realize how badly the have lost and how badly their party has fallen. Perhaps you missed the latest polls showing that only 20% of the population self-identify as Republican and the polls showing Obama - despite all the problems that the country is having - is still polling very high. The Republican attempt to blame the Democrats for the recession that started under their watch has failed. Moderate Republicans are abandoning ship in a desperate attempt to rescue their own careers. The Republicans in Congress have a dismal approval rating.

Good luck trying to regain 31% of the population by 2010 (next year). Tea bags ain't gonna do it.

The GOP just can't seem it get it right. The listening tour which I thought was a good first step turned into a teaching tour once the head of the party Rush got wind of this.

"Eric Cantor on Morning Joe again bowing to Rush Limbaugh after he said the GOP needs to go on a "teaching tour".

Scarborough: So let’s start with Rush Limbaugh, who seems to be mocking the idea of a listening tour. What do you say to Rush?
Cantor: You know, Joe, really, this.. this is not a listening tour. You know, think about what we saw a couple weeks ago on the tea parties. The American people are very frustrated that they really see a government in Washington that doesn’t hear them, that doesn’t respond to their needs and, frankly, are upset at a government that doesn’t work.
What the National Council for a New America is, is an opportunity for us to go out across this country to talk about our conservative principles and to appeal to as many elements in our society as we can and to really talk to them as a higher level and say, look, there are some transcendental goals that we’re all about in this country, and they can best be achieved through conservative principles of freedom and opportunity.
That’s what this movement is really about.
He also manages to talk in circles and not answer Mike Barnicle's question when asked just what the GOP's plans are for health care.

Barnicle: You just raised the issue of health care. We live in the only civilized nation in the world, where if unfortunately if your child gets sick with a really terrible illness, you might find yourself in bankruptcy court in order to pay the bills. So, without the pretty language, without using any big words, can you tell me, what's your health plan, what's it going to cost, how are you going to get it done, how can you work with the Democrats in concocting, coming up with a health plan that works for everyone?
Cantor: First of all, let me just go in here and address the assumption here in the discussion. We also have a health care system that, in reality, if you are sick anywhere in this world and you can afford it, you can come here for your care because we do have access to the best care, but you're right, there are too many people who don't have access to that care, so what we need to do is to be able to address -- number one -- the coverage and access to insurance, and number two, to be able to demonstrate that we can bring down cost.
Now this notion that we are somehow going to allow the government to take over providing the care because that's going to address the cost factor, is just a false start. You can't assume that this place in Washington is going to do things efficiently. What we do know is that we need to promote the ability for people to -- number one -- if they lose their job, they don't necessarily lose their health care -- number two -- if they are sick and they have a pre-existing condition, we must allow for them to access affordable coverage, because that's a huge issue right now, how people can access coverage when they are sick, and that has to do with expanding the risk pools, giving people the ability to access much more affordable coverage. Right now, we are so tied to a third-party payer system that, you know, people are at a whim cut off from access to care. so we've got to go back to centering our focus on patient/doctor relationships.
Go back to focusing your on patient/doctor relationships? That's all I've heard from these people for the last eight years. No new ideas and more of the same. As TPM noted even Joe Scarborough didn't think much of his appearance. Later in the show he said Cantor and the GOP need to come up with an alternative or stay off the stage (http://tpmtv.talkingpointsmemo.com/?id=2482091). Ouch."


this is why slimshady is correct with his assumptions. At least Obama is trying a reasonable solution whether it works or not really nobody knows, the thought is it should work and by his approval ratings the people at least are appreciating the attempt.

[Detroitej72]

I'll bite...Hooray for Ronald Reagan for betraying the Liberals.

See the difference is that he (Reagan) shifted to the good party...you know, the one that lowered taxes, and bolstered individual liberty (the American way), from the party that, as it turns out, is hell bent on transforming the US into the new USSR.

1.Most Americans will be paying less in taxes under Obama's plan than Reagan.
2. Reagen inflated the national debt farther than any Democratic president in the last 50 years.
3. Reagen sure bolstered liberty to the people of Latin America and Iraq by supporting dictators as leaders.

Any more myths you want me to debunk?

[ccbatson]

1. If a mere 5% of the population pays more in confiscatory and socialistic taxes, we will have lost liberty and the hope of the American Dream. Not to mention the fact that this 5% of producers are the engine of the economy.

2. Obama is blowing that record out of the water as we speak.

3. Reagan was never the President of any country besides the US.

[Detroitej72]

1. If a mere 5% of the population pays more in confiscatory and socialistic taxes, we will have lost liberty and the hope of the American Dream. Not to mention the fact that this 5% of producers are the engine of the economy.

2. Obama is blowing that record out of the water as we speak.

3. Reagan was never the President of any country besides the US.

1. Its called equal taxation.
2. That remains to be seen.
3. Reagan sure didn't practice what he preached, now, did he?

[ccbatson]

Not even liberals call it that...that call it progressive taxation, and it certainly is not equal.

The only thing that remains to be seen is by how much he is going to break this disastrous record...he has only been in office for 4 months or so....scary.

How does that third comment about Reagan apply to the subject at hand?

[Detroitej72]

How does that third comment about Reagan apply to the subject at hand?

He claimed to stand for freedom and liberty, all the while supporting dictators around the world.(like our friend Saddam) I guess he felt if folks lived in other countries, they didn't deserve liberty.