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

[oreo]

So what, they have a filibuster majority, they WILL hang themselves with their own rope.

DITTO--with a fillibuster proof democrat congress & senate they will not be able to blame republicans for the mess they are creating.

Good riddance Arlan Spector--take Susan Collins & Olympia Snow & put D's behind their names too--PLEASE.

BTW--Susan Collins is currently under attack by the left--as she refused to sign the 787 Billion dollar economic stimulus bill if it included the 1.9 BILLION dollars in CDC research. Now that we have the "swine" flu--she is out there trying to defend her remarks over the 787 economic stimulus bill. I WONDER IF SHE IS HAPPY THAT SHE SIGNED THAT BILL NOW?

"What comes around goes around" he.he.he.

 

[Chris]

The fate of the country will now boil down to....

Al Franken?

 

[Harry Dresden]

Billionaire Soros is a mostly behind the scenes money man that supports a lot of democratic issues. I've heard him speak a few times.

Rush and Ann are the current public faces of the republican party.

Which is more influencial? It's hard to compare apples and oranges.

MONEY is more influencial than talkers .....the guy is another Bobo 101 student.....

 

[Old Rocks]

I figure that as long as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter continue to be spokespersons for the republican party, a once great party will be relegated to being the party of southern whites and Miami Cubans.

I suspect that the Miami Cubans will eventually grow up.

Really? Because the way I look at it...George Soros is the big gun for your democrats. Fact is that Soros has a lot more influence over the dems than Ann, or Rush do over the repubs. Care to refute that FOGGIE?

Just keep thinking that. The Rushpublican Party is rapidly approaching having the same revelance as the John Birsh Society.

 

[sealybobo]

You Republicans will do much better when you learn to govern as well as you play politics.

acoording to Bobo the Dems know how to govern.........im sorry i guess he hasnt seen what is happening to California since they have been in charge....

I thought Arnold was in charge of California.

Bottom line is that all your right wing talking points aren't working on me, nor are they working on America. What do you have left? Bunch of southern racist white old grey haired rich dudes and a couple bitches?

Now we have 61 votes with Franken. You're wrong. If all this doesn't prove to you how fucking wrong you and your kind have been, nothing will. Now go think about it. Think about how you are one of the last remaining WHIGS defending your dead fucking party.

I know you guys don't think it is over and you will continue to be dicks for a very long time. In fact, we are counting on it.

 

[Old Rocks]

Spector would do anything within his means to keep his seat, a man with no backbone.

why shouldn't he keep his seat?

the repub party wants everyone to be a radical right winger.... and they were going to stick it to him by giving him a primary.

when lieberman stuck it to the dems by running as an independent... no one on the repub side was much troubled by it because it kept us from dumping him.

A little difference between Liebermann & Spector. Most of the registered voters in Connecticut are registered INDEPENDENTS-not republican or democrat.

While democrats in Connecticut were furious with Liebermann's support of the Iraq war--it was independents that re-elected him.

And it will probably be independents and democrats that re-elect Spector. As well as a few more Dems for the Senate. The Rushpublican Party continues their rush to oblivion.

 

[Old Rocks]

The fate of the country will now boil down to....

Al Franken?

Gotta love it!

 

[Sarah G]

why shouldn't he keep his seat?

the repub party wants everyone to be a radical right winger.... and they were going to stick it to him by giving him a primary.

when lieberman stuck it to the dems by running as an independent... no one on the repub side was much troubled by it because it kept us from dumping him.

A little difference between Liebermann & Spector. Most of the registered voters in Connecticut are registered INDEPENDENTS-not republican or democrat.

While democrats in Connecticut were furious with Liebermann's support of the Iraq war--it was independents that re-elected him.

And it will probably be independents and democrats that re-elect Spector. As well as a few more Dems for the Senate. The Rushpublican Party continues their rush to oblivion.

Rushpublican.. I like it.

 

[sealybobo]

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.

Really? Well let's test that... Thus far, what we have is a default concession by this member that there is no truth to the assertion: "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. " and a vehement rejection that the GOP did't go left enough to suit this individual...



Here we have the classic leftist (Democrat) aversion to the overt defense of the United States.



Classic leftist aversion to FUNDING US national defense.




Classic feigned aversion to Lobbyist... This is typical of this deceitful ideology. The Lord of the Idiots itself, SWORE he would not have a single lobbyist in his administration; only to come to office and appoint dozens of lobbyist as the first order of business. The suggestion that Lobbyist are a GOP phenomenon is beyond absurd and the fodder advanced by the common fool.



Great guy... and the only member of the Bush Administration to realize a federal conviction; and this on a bizarre case where he was charge and tried on a series of statements he made from his direct memory, which were found to be in error with the official record... It's a sad case where we're all treated to recognize that we can all be charged, tried and convicted for crimes which amount to absolutely nothing, where the prosecutor fails to maintain prudence in his prosecutorial authority. It's very unlikely that anyone could answer specific questions on their history from 5 years past; and not end up in prison, where the prosecutor takes the position that where one's testimony can be proven to be inaccurate; against an alternative record.

Imagine that the FBI flashes a badge and asks you what you had for Lunch on April 28th, 2004; you declare that you always have a poached egg and a garden fresh salad for lunch... yet, 9 months later you find the FBI again at your door, only this time to arrest you for your 'false testimony' and hear on the radio, as your being transported to the pokey, the prosecutor giving a press conference, stating that you testified to poached eggs and a salad, but credit card receipts and testimony from wait staff, proves you had egg salad and a slice of dry toast.

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

And here, the member simply vomits long discredited lies... but that is what liars do... no isn't it?

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. Basically, they were acting too much like Republicans.

So then what you're saying is the GOP was corrupt because they spent too and failed to adhere to American principles of sound prudent governance... OKA: governing like DEMOCRATS HAVE ALWAYS GOVERNED AND ARE GOVERNING NOW!

Ironic ONLY by your having opened this post by vociferously denying such...

Hey, the 06 elections say I am right, the 08's prove I am/was right, polls prove I'm right, arlen spector jumping ship should tell you something. Franken winning should tell you something.

Your shit isn't working. You are wrong. Wrong for America.

You guys don't realize your ideology is flawed. Its like communism was a good concept but corruption ruined it? Same with your free market capitalism.

You were too arrogant and obvious with all your tax breaks to the rich and trickle down not winning.

You defended Bush but then in the last second tried to distance yourselves from him, yet you all seem to be lead by Rush, Fox News. And you don't even know who you guys are. Do you like Rush? Is he strictly entertainment? You don't even know. But we know he's your leader.

So call us socialists. Fuck you! We're coming for some of your fucking money. You didn't use it to hire and it didn't lower the cost of your fucking products. YOu are all liars and hypocrites.

I've been trying to help you for years. I would prefer two good choices when I go vote. I told you, the Dems are the only option right now. Them and Ron Paul possibly. That may change, but for right now, the GOP is a dead party. You can't argue. I'm right. Always have been.

Yes, spread the wealth. Yes, we are entitled to "your wages"!!! LOL.

We're all in this together.

It takes a villiage to raise a child!!!

 

[WillowTree]

fIGURES,,

 

[DiamondDave]

I figure that as long as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter continue to be spokespersons for the republican party, a once great party will be relegated to being the party of southern whites and Miami Cubans.

I suspect that the Miami Cubans will eventually grow up.

More complete ignorance...

Rush, nor Coulter, nor Savage, nor any of the other commentators/entertainers, are the spokespersons for the REP party... just as Ogerman or whomever else is not the spokesperson for the DEMs...

 

[sealybobo]

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.

So as predicted, the member returns with absolutely NO MEANS TO DEMONSTRATE or even advance sustainable reason which would imply the basis for a RIGHT TO THE PRODUCT OF ANOTHER MAN'S LABOR...

What we were treated to was more of the worn out rationalization which simply points out that there are rich people and poor people and the rich are morally obligated to help the poor... Sadly, that moral obligation is a personal matter, not one of governance, and while MOST WEALTHY PEOPLE GIVE SUBSTANTIAL SUMS OF THEIR MONEY TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF THE POOR; THERE IS NO RIGHT WHICH THE POOR POSSESS WHICH ENTITLE THEM TO THOSE CHARITABLE DONATIONS.

And of course the member comes with absolutely NO CONCERN for the MORAL OBLIGATION OF EACH INDIVIDUAL TO NOT SET THEMSELVES TO SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH FORCE ANOTHER TO PART WITH THE PRODUCT OF THEIR LABOR TO SUSTAIN THEM...

Thus it is simply incontestable that this member Sealy-what'sherface, has conceded that her position is baseless, her ideology subversive to the founding principles of America and that she is unaware of ANY RIGHT which entitles her or ANYONE else to the product of another man's labor...

We should thank the member for her time and recognize that she's done the very BEST SHE COULD! God bless'er!

Sorry buddy, but we are all in this together. This isn't every man for himself. And yes, the rich person who has the luxury of living in this great country of ours, is subject to the rules our government make. One of those rules is socialism. They pay more because the poor pay less.

Don't you see the point of the story I provided you? OF COURSE NOT! I'll make it simple.

Our government makes the rules and those rules are designed so we don't turn into Mexico. If we followed your way, we would have a very small ruling elite class and the masses would be poor as fuck. To avoid that, we have things like the death tax and social services that THE RICH PAY FOR!!!

I don't need to convince you I'm right. We're convincing your elected officials to jump ship. Thats much better than convincing you, willow and allieblabla and retardedgunnysgt whatever

 

[sealybobo]

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.

if it took the dems 20 years Bobo and "WE" booted them out in the 80's....what the hell happened in 94?.......perhaps the GOP learned from those guy's "WE" booted in the 80's......you would have to be pretty damed stupid to actually think these current guys are any better OR to think they have actually learned to be a little more for the country then their party or themselves......"they are Politicians....they know not what they do".....Christ said that....so we have know for at least 2000 years....

The GOP this decade is better or worse than the GOP of the 90's. True or False Harry!!!

See my point. Don't think because the Dems were bad back then that they are bad today. And don't think because you had a boner for Reagan that this is his party. Things change.

Ok, fuck saying either party is good. One party is better, and that's the Dems. That may change, but America has spoken, and they pretty much agree with me buddy. So does Spector.

 

[sealybobo]

I figure that as long as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter continue to be spokespersons for the republican party, a once great party will be relegated to being the party of southern whites and Miami Cubans.

I suspect that the Miami Cubans will eventually grow up.

More complete ignorance...

Rush, nor Coulter, nor Savage, nor any of the other commentators/entertainers, are the spokespersons for the REP party... just as Ogerman or whomever else is not the spokesperson for the DEMs...

Here's your spokesman. He emailed me this bs this morning.

I hope Arlen Specter's party change outrages you. It should for two reasons:

First--Specter claimed it was philosophical--and pointed his finger of blame at Republicans all over America for his defection to the Democrats. He told us all to go jump in the lake today.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe a word he said.

Arlen Specter committed a purely political and self-serving act today. He simply believes he has a better chance of saving his political hide and his job as a Democrat. He loves the title of Senator more than he loves the party--and the principles--that elected him and nurtured him.

Second--and more importantly--Arlen Specter handed Barack Obama and his band of radical leftists nearly absolute power in the United States Senate. In leaving the Republican Party--and joining the Democrats--he absolutely undercut Republicans' efforts to slow down Obama's radical agenda through the threat of filibuster.

Facing defeat in Pennsylvania's 2010 Republican primary due to his left-wing voting record, and an end to his 30 year career in the U.S. Senate, he has peddled his services--and his vote--to the leftist Obama Democrats who aim to remake America with their leftist plan.

As recently as April 9th, Senator Specter said he would run in the Pennsylvania primary next year as a Republican. Why the sudden change of heart? Clearly, this was an act based on political expediency by a craven politician desperate to keep his Washington power base--not the act of a statesman.

His defection to the Democrat Party puts the Democrats in an almost unstoppable position to pass Obama's destructive agenda of income redistribution, health care nationalization, and a massive expansion of entitlements.

Arlen Specter has put his loyalty to his own political career above his duty to his state and nation.

You and I have a choice. Some will use Specter's defection as an excuse to fold the tent and give up. I believe that you are not one of those people. When Benedict Arnold defected to the British, George Washington didn't fold the tent and give up either.

He grit his teeth more determined than ever to succeed. That's what I'm asking you to do today.

Join me in this fight by making a secure online contribution of $25, $50, $100, $500 or $1,000 right now to build our army of supporters and defeat Democrat candidates like Arlen Specter in next year's elections.

Stand with me. I need your support today.

Sincerely,

Michael Steele
Chairman, Republican National Committee

 

[editec]

Why bother? There's no significant differences between the two parties.

He did it because he would have lost the REPUBLICAN PRIMARY.

The die hard Republican rank and file Republican Partisans are anything BUT co-conspirators in the SINGLE PARTY SWINDLE.

They're being duped, of course by the Masters of the RNC, but at least they;re HONESTLY partisan.

Same with the die hard DEM partisans. They're also being duped by the DNC.

Well, Spector saw the handwriting on the wall and realized he'd probably win the general election but needed to be in the race to win it.

Toomey will win the Republican primary then get killed in the General election (assuming Obama's bailout plan doesn't blow up in his face, first)

 

[editec]

The extreme positions of the Republicans FAILED the AMERICAN PEOPLE.

The all American workers not making $250,000 a year or more are losers attitude lost the Republicans both Congress and the Oval office.

Bush's policies FAILED to serve enough Americans, gang.

The Republicans LOST, the Dems didn't win.

 

[jillian]

Really? Because the way I look at it...George Soros is the big gun for your democrats. Fact is that Soros has a lot more influence over the dems than Ann, or Rush do over the repubs. Care to refute that FOGGIE?

Billionaire Soros is a mostly behind the scenes money man that supports a lot of democratic issues. I've heard him speak a few times.

Rush and Ann are the current public faces of the republican party.

Which is more influencial? It's hard to compare apples and oranges.

Soros dictates the direction of the democratic party, don't be naive about that for one moment. He is shoving millions of dollars in one way or another to the party. That money ain't free, and it does have a price tag. I wonder how much Ann, and Rush are shoving to their party? In that respect it is apples and oranges. But to tell you the truth...I would go with the entertainment of Ann and Rush over the hard hand of Soros. just sayin...

soros is just a boogeyman thought up by the karl roves of the GOP to get "the base" ticked off.

wanna know where the REAL money comes from?

C-O-R-P-O-R-A-T-I-O-N-S.....

the difference is that there's a less OBVIOUSLY corporatist agenda on the dem side because they throw the odd bone to the middle class and working people.

don't get caught up in the deflections they want to throw your way.

 

[del]

i find it interesting that specter is heroic for leaving his party to preserve his seat, but lieberman was vilified for doing the same.

 

[jillian]

i find it interesting that specter is heroic for leaving his party to preserve his seat, but lieberman was vilified for doing the same.

lieberman should have run as a republican. i think THAT's what ticked off the dems. but i'm sure there's some truth to the whole "whose ox is being gored" thing.

it's not the first time Spector has changed parties, btw. From what I understand, he became a repub to win a D.A.'s race...

you know, the real conservatives (not the extremist nutcases) should actually not be so upset about this.

the dems are going to owe Spector HUGE.... and on issues where he's the 60th vote and is to the right of the party?

he's going to hold a LOT of sway.

I would think we'd understand why he might enjoy the role of power broker.

 

[del]

i find it interesting that specter is heroic for leaving his party to preserve his seat, but lieberman was vilified for doing the same.

lieberman should have run as a republican. i think THAT's what ticked off the dems. but i'm sure there's some truth to the whole "whose ox is being gored" thing.

it's not the first time Spector has changed parties, btw. From what I understand, he became a repub to win a D.A.'s race...

you know, the real conservatives (not the extremist nutcases) should actually not be so upset about this.

the dems are going to owe Spector HUGE.... and on issues where he's the 60th vote and is to the right of the party?

he's going to hold a LOT of sway.

I would think we'd understand why he might enjoy the role of power broker.

why? what ticked off the dems was that he supported the war and did not gently go into that good night. he'd be a hypocrite to become a republican if he didn't support most of the republican "platform". i assume he didn't.

i doubt very much that specter is to the right of anyone currently in the senate with the exception of bernie sanders. his balls are in a democratic vice until he secures the dem spot on the ticket. he'll do what he's told and like it. serves him right.