BREAKING NEWS: Arlen Specter switching parties to give Democrats 60 votes in Senate

[CrimsonWhite]

Well he did it! Arlen Spector has become a Dem. and I for one welcome him.

To borrow an old Reagan line, Spector didn't leave the party, the party left him.

The question now is, when will Susan Collins and Olympia Snow of Maine make the switch?

Nah. Snowe won't leave the party. Spector has always been a RINO, but Snowe is a true moderate. She is more moderate than most give her credit for.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

The Fix - Specter To Switch Parties

Specter To Switch Parties


Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter will switch his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat and announced today that he will run in 2010 as a Democrat, according to a statement he released this morning.


Specter's decision would give Democrats a 60 seat filibuster proof majority in the Senate assuming Democrat Al Franken is eventually sworn in as the next Senator from Minnesota. (Former Sen. Norm Coleman is appealing Franken's victory in the state Supreme Court.)


"I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary," said Specter in a statement. "I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election."


He added: "Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans."

GET THE HELL OUT! And take the leftist in PENNSYLVANIA WITH YOU! And good RIDDANCE ... BITCH!

 

[ABikerSailor]

Like I said......I'll bet anyone that by 1 June, at LEAST 2 other GOP types follow Specter and switch as well.

 

[Chris]

The Republican Party is crumbling before our very eyes.

Our long national nightmare is over.

 

[Richard-H]

Well, the Republicans had almost total power in Washington, and they completely failed. Now it looks like the Dems are going to get total power in Washington and we'll see how they do....

But if they turn out as bad as the Republicans, I'll guess we'll have to give the socialists a chance next....

 

[sealybobo]

Well, the Republicans had almost total power in Washington, and they completely failed. Now it looks like the Dems are going to get total power in Washington and we'll see how they do....

But if they turn out as bad as the Republicans, I'll guess we'll have to give the socialists a chance next....

It took the Dems who we booted in the 80's 20 plus years to get corrupt and bad.

It took the GOP no time at all. I say they came in to power in 2000 already corrupted.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Well, the Republicans had almost total power in Washington, and they completely failed. Now it looks like the Dems are going to get total power in Washington and we'll see how they do....

But if they turn out as bad as the Republicans, I'll guess we'll have to give the socialists a chance next....

How about alphabetical order and let the Libertarians go before the socialists.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Well he did it! Arlen Spector has become a Dem. and I for one welcome him.

To borrow an old Reagan line, Spector didn't leave the party, the party left him.

The question now is, when will Susan Collins and Olympia Snow of Maine make the switch?

Well that is patently FALSE... The GOP is the home of American CONSERVATISM... IT was NEVER the party of progressives, liberals... and it sure as HELL isn't the party of Progressive liberalism TODAY.

Now what's more, Specter came to Federal office during the enlightenment of the Ronald Reagan period and the GOP is now VASTLY farther left than it was during the Reagan Years, so all this nonsense that the GOP has swung Right is simply baseless NONSENSE.

The simple fact is Specter knew he had NO CHANCE of getting re-elected as a Republican, and he was right. I have set aside money to send to CONSERVATIVES running against liberals in the NE in 2010; and there are MANY more that feel the same way... those that intend to do everything within our means to shut the Left down in this coming election and to see to it that CONSERVATIVES.. read: AMERICANS are elected and that has absolutely NOTHING TO DO with the GOP. If the GOP candidate is a Moderate/ Centrist/ Progressive... we will contest their seat to the extent of our means.

The GOP tent is ENORMOUS, we invate all AMERICANS to take part in our party, as long as they hold true to the bed-rock principles of sound leadership and virtuous, prudent governance... and FTR: voting for 4 trillion dollar budgets, bailing out companies that succumbed to leftist policy failures and sweeping entitlement programs is NOT part and parcel of such principles.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Communist comes before Libertarian.

(just trying to be alphabetically helpful.........)

 

[sealybobo]

Well, the Republicans had almost total power in Washington, and they completely failed. Now it looks like the Dems are going to get total power in Washington and we'll see how they do....

But if they turn out as bad as the Republicans, I'll guess we'll have to give the socialists a chance next....

How about alphabetical order and let the Libertarians go before the socialists.

We're afraid of their "every man for himself" montra. No social programs, no social services, no social security, privatize everything.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Like I said......I'll bet anyone that by 1 June, at LEAST 2 other GOP types follow Specter and switch as well.

From your key-board to God's lips... MAKE IT SO #1...

If you're not dedicated to the principles of set forth in the US Charter: Get the hell out!

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Communist comes before Libertarian.

(just trying to be alphabetically helpful.........)

Well socialism must come before communism, so we're back at the same.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

The Republican Party is crumbling before our very eyes.

Our long national nightmare is over.

ROFLMNAO...

So the flight of Leftists who never belonged in the GOP is a sign of the GOP crumbling? How so Chris... and please be as specific as your intellecual limitations allow.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Well, the Republicans had almost total power in Washington, and they completely failed. Now it looks like the Dems are going to get total power in Washington and we'll see how they do....

But if they turn out as bad as the Republicans, I'll guess we'll have to give the socialists a chance next....

Well the sentiment in that position rests wholly in how you're defining 'bad'... If runaway irresponsible spending is at the root of 'bad' then the Dems have already destroyed the level of 'bad' the idiot 'centrists' of the GOP did...

So how are YOU defining 'bad'?

 

[wihosa]

"IT was NEVER the party of progressives"

Ever hear of Theodore Roosevelt? A great American progressive and a Republican.

Reagan's era was the antithesis of enlightenment. It was this era that started the unraveling of the great American middle class.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Well, the Republicans had almost total power in Washington, and they completely failed. Now it looks like the Dems are going to get total power in Washington and we'll see how they do....

But if they turn out as bad as the Republicans, I'll guess we'll have to give the socialists a chance next....

It took the Dems who we booted in the 80's 20 plus years to get corrupt and bad.

It took the GOP no time at all. I say they came in to power in 2000 already corrupted.

Just to be cruel, I'll ask this member to explain with some discernable degree of substance, what she's basing this position upon.

Using the same time period you've referenced here; when, exactly did the Dems do anything different than what they're doing right now? I mean to ask: To what SPECIFIC CORRUPTION are you referring? As far as I can tell, the corruption to which you assign to the GOP is that they simply behaved as Democrats... After all, that is why we (Americans) are upset with them and it seems clear that the reason YOU are upset with them is that the GOP didn't go DEMOCRAT ENOUGH...

So what exactly are you complaining about: and please be as specific as YOUR intellectual limitations allow.

Now just to be fair, it should be noted that this member will NOT return to offer a substantive basis in reasoning and when she fails to do so... she concedes, if only by default that her position is just more inane drivel of the leftist variety...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Well, the Republicans had almost total power in Washington, and they completely failed. Now it looks like the Dems are going to get total power in Washington and we'll see how they do....

But if they turn out as bad as the Republicans, I'll guess we'll have to give the socialists a chance next....

How about alphabetical order and let the Libertarians go before the socialists.

We're afraid of their "every man for himself" montra. No social programs, no social services, no social security, privatize everything.

It's "mantra" and what you're afraid of are the principles on which America is founded...

It's no secret that you're afraid of those principles... it's what makes your ideology such a bleeding MENACE.

You have NO RIGHT to the product of another man's labor... PERIOD. FOR ANY REASON.

Now you'll surely disagree... but here's what happens when you disagree... I ASK YOU TO TELL ME WHAT RIGHT YOU HAVE TO THE PRODUCT OF ANOTHER PERSON'S LABOR; and that is where you FAIL.

So tell me: WHAT RIGHT DO YOU HAVE TO SOMEONE ELSE'S LABOR?

The member will now NOT be able to provide us with a RIGHT which she has that would entitle her to the product of someone elses labor. And when she fails to do so, she concedes, if only by default, that her fears are unfounded pablum, which amounts to nothing but her having folded to the weakness of her own personal character.

 

[sealybobo]

Well, the Republicans had almost total power in Washington, and they completely failed. Now it looks like the Dems are going to get total power in Washington and we'll see how they do....

But if they turn out as bad as the Republicans, I'll guess we'll have to give the socialists a chance next....

It took the Dems who we booted in the 80's 20 plus years to get corrupt and bad.

It took the GOP no time at all. I say they came in to power in 2000 already corrupted.

Just to be cruel, I'll ask this member to explain with some discernable degree of substance, what she's basing this position upon.

Using the same time period you've referenced here; when, exactly did the Dems do anything different than what they're doing right now? I mean to ask: To what SPECIFIC CORRUPTION are you referring? As far as I can tell, the corruption to which you assign to the GOP is that they simply behaved as Democrats... After all, that is why we (Americans) are upset with them and it seems clear that the reason YOU are upset with them is that the GOP didn't go DEMOCRAT ENOUGH...

So what exactly are you complaining about: and please be as specific as YOUR intellectual limitations allow.

Now just to be fair, it should be noted that this member will NOT return to offer a substantive basis in reasoning and when she fails to do so... she concedes, if only by default that her position is just more inane drivel of the leftist variety...

Typical Republican talking point. The GOP did bad because they acted too much like Democrats.

My fucking ass. Launching a bullshit war? Doubling the debt in the name of defense? Jack Abramoff? Scooter Libby.

Bush and Co. pre planned the invasion of Iraq before he even STOLE the Florida Election.

Do you even have to ask?

So go back and research why the Dems lost power in the 80's. Too much spending. Corruption charges. Basicallly, they were acting too much like Republicans.

 

[sealybobo]

How about alphabetical order and let the Libertarians go before the socialists.

We're afraid of their "every man for himself" montra. No social programs, no social services, no social security, privatize everything.

It's "mantra" and what you're afraid of are the principles on which America is founded...

It's no secret that you're afraid of those principles... it's what makes your ideology such a bleeding MENACE.

You have NO RIGHT to the product of another man's labor... PERIOD. FOR ANY REASON.

Now you'll surely disagree... but here's what happens when you disagree... I ASK YOU TO TELL ME WHAT RIGHT YOU HAVE TO THE PRODUCT OF ANOTHER PERSON'S LABOR; and that is where you FAIL.

So tell me: WHAT RIGHT DO YOU HAVE TO SOMEONE ELSE'S LABOR?

The member will now NOT be able to provide us with a RIGHT which she has that would entitle her to the product of someone elses labor. And when she fails to do so, she concedes, if only by default, that her fears are unfounded pablum, which amounts to nothing but her having folded to the weakness of her own personal character.

A quarter of all the delegates to the Constitutional Convention had voted in their own state legislatures for laws that would have helped debtors and the poor and thus harmed the interests of the rich.

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

So what did motivate the Framers of the Constitution?

Along with the answer to this question, we may also find the answer to another question historians have asked for two centuries: Why was the Constitutional Convention held in secret behind locked doors, and why did James Madison not publish his own notes of the Convention until 1840, just after the last of the other participants had died?

The reason, simply put, was that most of the wealthy men among the delegates were betraying the interests of their own economic class. They were voting for democracy instead of oligarchy.

As with any political body, a few of the delegates, "a dozen at the outside" according to McDonald, "clearly acted according to the dictates of their personal economic interests."

But there were larger issues at stake. The people who hammered out the Constitution had such a strong feeling of history and destiny that it at times overwhelmed them.

They realized that in the seven-thousand-year history of what they called civilization, only once before, in Athens - and then only for the brief flicker of a few centuries - had anything like a democracy ever been brought into existence and survived more than a generation.

Their writings show that they truly believed they were doing sacred work, something greater than themselves, their personal interests, or even the narrow interests of their wealthy constituents back in their home states.

They believed they were altering the course of world history, and that if they got it right we could truly create a better world.

Thus the secrecy, the locked doors, the intensity of the Constitutional Convention. And thus the willingness to set aside economic interest to produce a document - admittedly imperfect - that would establish an enduring beacon of liberty for the world.

As George Washington, who presided over the Constitutional Convention, wrote to the nation on September 17, 1787 when "transmitting the Constitution" to the people of the new nation: "In all our deliberations on this subject we kept steadily in our view, that which appears to us the greatest interest of every true American, the consolidation of our Union, in which is involved our prosperity, felicity, safety, perhaps our national existence."

He concluded with his "most ardent wish" was that the Constitution "may promote the lasting welfare of that country so dear to us all, and secure her freedom and happiness..."

Since the so-called "Reagan revolution" more than cut in half the income taxes the multimillionaires and billionaires among us pay, wealth has concentrated in America in ways not seen since the era of the Robber Barons, or, before that, pre-revolutionary colonial times. At the same time, poverty has exploded and the middle class is under economic siege.

And now come the oligarchs - the most wealthy and powerful families of America - lobbying Congress that they should retain their stupefying levels of wealth and the power it brings, generation after generation. They say that democracy doesn't require a strong middle class, and that Jefferson was wrong when he said that "overgrown wealth" could be "dangerous to the State." They say that a permanent, hereditary, aristocratically rich ruling class is actually a good thing for the stability of society.

While a $1.5 million trigger for the estate tax is arguably too low - particularly given the recent bubble in real estate prices - that doesn't invalidate the concept of a democracy defending itself against oligarchy. Set the trigger at 10 million, or fifty million. Make sure that family farms and small businesses are protected. And make sure that people who have worked hard and earned a lot of money can have children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren who will live very comfortably.

But let's also make sure that we don't end up like so many Latin American countries, where a handful of super-rich families rule their nations, and democracy is more show than substance.

The Founders of our republic fought a war against an aristocratic, oligarchic nation, and were very clear that they didn't want America to ever degenerate into aristocracy, oligarchy, or feudalism/fascism. We must hold to their vision of an egalitarian, democratic republic.

 

[Chris]

Once Al Franken is sworn in the Republicans will be irrelevant for the next two years.

What a great day that will be for America.