A Liberal Democrat Returns to the Fold

Arlen Specter started his political life as a liberal Democrat.

And now the senior senator from Pennsylvania is returning to the fold.

Specter, who has served five terms in the Senate as the last of the old-school Rockefeller Republicans, has finally given up on his long, fruitless quest to revive the spirit of east-coast liberalism within what has become a hard-right party.

"Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right," the senator explained in a statement announcing his decision to leave the GOP fold. "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.

U.S. Senator Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, is now U.S. Senator Arlen Specter, D-Pennsylvania.

The big news, of course, is that with Specter's move Democrats will have 59 members in their Senate caucus (57 Democrats and independents Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut). And the prospect that Democratic-Farmer-Labor candidate Al Franken will soon take the seat he won in last fall's Minnesota voting means that the Specter switch should give the Democrats the 60 seats they need to avert GPO filibusters of legislation and appointments.

For the Obama administration and the Democrats, Specter party switch is the most dramatic development since the election.

The senator's motivations for switching are no mystery.

Specter, who was a liberal Democratic lawyer in Phildelphia in the 1960s before accepting a GOP nomination for district attorney as part of a reform-movement battle to break the city's Democratic machine, has long been the most left-leaning member of the Republican caucus in the chamber. He was targeted for defeat by conservatives -- led by the Wall Street-funded Club for Growth -- in 2004. President Bush and other key Republicans defended him that year, not out of love for Specter but because they did not want to lose a seat representing a blue state.

After he backed the economic stimulus plan that all House Republicans and most Senate Republicans opposed, Specter became the top target of the Republican right. Former Congressman Pat Toomey, who narrowly lost the 2004 Pennsylvania primary to Specter, announced that he would again challenge the senator in 2010; and GOP chair Michael Steele sent conflicting signals about whether the incumbent would have the party's support next year.

At the same time, top Democrats -- led by Vice President Joe Biden, a former senator from neighboring Delaware, and Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, a former Democratic National Committee chair -- have been actively lobbying Specter to change his party affiliation.

Specter's first test will come on the issue of the Employee Free Choice Act. Despite a history of working closely with labor -- and enjoying union backing in key contests -- the Pennsylvania senator sided with Republicans in saying he would support a filibuster to block the pro-labor legislation.

Presumably, the party switch will free Specter from the pressure to maintain his credibility -- and fund-raising prospects with big business interests -- by blocking labor law reforms that he knows are necessary. The senator says now that his position on EFCA is unchanged, but don't take him too seriously.

Watch for the newest Democrat to be at the center of a move to tinker with the measure just enough to secure not just his vote but that of straying Democratic senators such as Arkansan Blanche Lincoln. (In fact, while Specter will need some cover for an EFCA switch, it will undoubtedly be easier to bring him over than Lincoln.)

And watch for Specter to start flying his liberal flag on a number of high-profile issues.

Specter was closely tied to Americans for Democratic Action, the liberal activist group, in his early campaigns as a Republican. The Philadelphia ADA backed his early campaigns on the Republican line.

Major unions, pro-choice, pro-gay rights and environmental groups, as well as supporters of scientific research have backed him over the years. It was not just that Specter voted right now and again, he maintained amiable relations with these groups, as well as with civil liberties organizatins such as the American Civil Liberties Union.

The fact of those relationships destroyed his prospects as a GOP presidential contender in 1996. But they form the basis for the presumption that Specter will finish his career not as a cautiously moderate senator from Pennsylvania but as a reasonably liberal Democrat. The top issue the senator highlighted in announcing his party switch was his passion for expanding funding of medical research. "NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done," said Specter, indicating a determination to become the chamber's leader in the fight to make real Obama's inaugural promise to restore science to its proper place in policy and funding debates.

Democrats who like to hate Republicans and Republicans who like to hate Democrats will misread Specter's declaration that: "My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans." And there will be Pennsylvania Democrats who ponder mounting primary challenges to the incumbent. A challenge would be appropriate, if only to police Specter on EFCA, but it is unlikely to get very far.

Why?

Specter will break from the Democrats now and again.

But don't be surprised if the breaks are to the left rather than the right.

Why the confidence that the senator is returning not just to the Democratic Party but to his liberal roots?

Consider Specter's very good article in the latest issue of The New York Review of Books.

Headlined "The Need to Roll Back Presidential Power Grabs," the article begins:

In the seven and a half years since September 11, the United States has witnessed one of the greatest expansions of executive authority in its history, at the expense of the constitutionally mandated separation of powers. President Obama, as only the third sitting senator to be elected president in American history, and the first since John F. Kennedy, may be more likely to respect the separation of powers than President Bush was. But rather than put my faith in any president to restrain the executive branch, I intend to take several concrete steps, which I hope the new president will support.

First, I intend to introduce legislation that will mandate Supreme Court review of lower court decisions in suits brought by the ACLU and others that challenge the constitutionality of the warrantless wiretapping program authorized by President Bush after September 11. While the Supreme Court generally exercises discretion on whether it will review a case, there are precedents for Congress to direct Supreme Court review on constitutional issues--including the statutes forbidding flag burning and requiring Congress to abide by federal employment laws--and I will follow those.

Second, I will reintroduce legislation to keep the courts open to suits filed against several major telephone companies that allegedly facilitated the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program. Although Congress granted immunity to the telephone companies in July 2008, this issue may yet be successfully revisited since the courts have not yet ruled on the legality of the immunity provision. My legislation would substitute the government as defendant in place of the telephone companies. This would allow the cases to go forward, with the government footing the bill for any damages awarded.

Further, I will reintroduce my legislation from 2006 and 2007 (the "Presidential Signing Statements Act") to prohibit courts from relying on, or deferring to, presidential signing statements when determining the meaning of any Act of Congress. These statements, sometimes issued when the president signs a bill into law, have too often been used to undermine congressional intent. Earlier versions of my legislation went nowhere because of the obvious impossibility of obtaining two-thirds majorities in each house to override an expected veto by President Bush. Nevertheless, in the new Congress, my legislation has a better chance of mustering a majority vote and being signed into law by President Obama.

To understand why these steps are so important, one must appreciate an imbalance in our "checks and balances" that has become increasingly evident in recent years. I witnessed firsthand, during many of the battles over administration policy since September 11, how difficult it can be for Congress and the courts to rally their members against an overzealous executive.

Specter concludes the article by declaring that: "These experiences have crystallized for me the need for Congress and the courts to reassert themselves in our system of checks and balances. The bills I have outlined are important steps in that process. Equally important is vigorous congressional oversight of the executive branch. This oversight must extend well beyond the problems of national security, especially as we cede more and more authority over our economy to government officials."

If he follows through on his pledge to take up the cause of the American Civil Liberties Union and the defenders of our much-diminished freedoms, Specter will be be aligned just with the Democrats. He will emerge as a member in good standing of the wing of the Democratic party defined by his Judiciary Committee colleague Russ Feingold, the Wisconsin Democrat who is the chamber's most progressive member.

Comments (65)

1. Na Na Na Na, Na Na Na Na, Hey, Hey..goodbye.

   Ah the smell of fresh air, when a smell leaves the room--thanks Spector for going back to your liberal Democratic roots. You are just one step in the purge of liberals from the Republican party.

   "Have another hit of Fresh Air"-Quicksilver Messenger Service

   Posted by antisocialist at 04/28/2009 @ 11:46am

2. antisociali-- brand of GOPee leakage to the rescue!

   I'd say there may be another 2-3 sane non-new con repub repubs that may make that very sane choice and leave the now extreme fringe GOPee noisy toilet party.

   All the air freshener can't help when it's already full of excrement.

   Posted by hsuBfools at 04/28/2009 @ 11:54am

3. lye does the trick.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/28/2009 @ 12:07pm

4. a tranny senator.

   that's very metro.....

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/28/2009 @ 12:07pm

5. let the goldman agenda go forth!

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/28/2009 @ 12:08pm

6. Not a surprise. A traitor finally moves to the party of TREASON! Hey, by the way, does anyone think the left, media etc. would treat the Bush administration so sweetly if THEY had scared the living shit out of NY with that flyover yesterday? What happened to : "the buck stops here"? It's really ok though, because I have resigned myself to the fact that this country has rolled over for Obama, he can do no wrong (for now), but what you naive idiots don't understand, is that all the power that you've given to the Federal gov't and the Dem's can and WILL be used against you when they lose power, and, as history has shown, they will lose power. Right now everything is great for you libs, but it's all imaginary( you know: the pie-in-the-sky world that you inept, clinging, useless idiots live in ), so enjoy, because, if you're lucky to live 20 more yrs., I promise you'll regret the Obama presidency dearly, and ALL of our children will be the ones who pay (and I do mean PAY) for your ignorance.

   Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 12:18pm

7. it seems like barry and antisocialist actually think that specter has changed his ideological position, rather than changed his party so that......HE'LL WIN REELECTION IN 2010.

   Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 12:21pm

8. " What happened to : "the buck stops here"?"

   yeah, what happened to that? i recall bush saying in 2003 that he would prosecute those in his own administration who broke the law (see: wiretapping, torture, etc).

   Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 12:22pm

9. Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 12:18pm

   calm down.

   every flip a coin?

   head's you lose, tails they win....

   well, imagine a two sided coin in a two-dimensional universe and you'll get a better picture of the current "system".

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/28/2009 @ 12:25pm

10. "Right now everything is great for you libs"

    yeah, everything is so great.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 12:34pm

11. If Obama doesn't squeeze the 60 vote majority for all its worth, then, yes, the GoldmanSachs fix is in, ditto the MIC & Aipac, &, as the song goes, I guess it doesn't matter anymore.

    Posted by sloper at 04/28/2009 @ 12:49pm

12. it seems like barry and antisocialist actually think that specter has changed his ideological position, rather than changed his party so that......HE'LL WIN REELECTION IN 2010.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 12:21pm

    Wrong Darla, I'm glad he left because he hasn't changed his ideological positions. He is and has been a liberal.

    Posted by antisocialist at 04/28/2009 @ 12:50pm

13. And Darla,

    He was already going to lose in 2010. this is just desparation, hoping that Dems will give him enough support to win. But I think this will be Toomey's seat in 2010

    Posted by antisocialist at 04/28/2009 @ 12:51pm

14. I have resigned myself to the fact that this country has rolled over for Obama, he can do no wrong ...

    Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 12:18pm

    Er, no. I think Obama changing his position on letting the DoJ determine whether to prosecute the creators of the torture program came about because of the dismay and outcry concerning his not looking back at such a major crime. (As all crime is always done in the past,) Obama was wrong to use that flawed logic. Truth and justice are never the wrong ideals to uphold rather than not. And he changed his hard line-- as no one is above the law and looking forward totally contradicted each other. Obama gets it.

    Wish the hsuB/cHeney admin would've changed when they were wrong. Too late now for them to change, but not too late for us to do the responsible correction.

    Not too late for other repubs to see the light too.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 04/28/2009 @ 1:04pm

15. "He is and has been a liberal"

    antisocialist, you calling someone a "liberal" means almost nothing, because anyone to the left of dick cheney is a liberal.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 1:11pm

16. Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 12:18pm

    Due to your Spanish surname, it can and must be assumed that there is an illegal vector of movement across the border in the family history.

    We assume, of course, that you have nothing to hide. Just prove to us that you belong and that it's all legal. If you cannot do so, there will be no other option. The Agents of ObamaNation will be at your door, brandishing fearsome ACORN badges, soliciting you to pay up for what several generations owe to America -- or getting you softened up for the Black Helicopter Express to swoop in and escort you to Obama's Camp Happy with an enhanced educational suite adjacent to that of COMA-UN-AMERICAN.

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 04/28/2009 @ 1:15pm

17. Senator Arlen Specter has never been a conservative, nor a liberal, nor a moderate, nor an independent. He is a trimmer -- a sailor who trims his sails to meet any incoming political breeze.

    Perhaps the most unprincipled of these "trims" came after a dozen rabbis met with him in December 2004 to implore him not to vote for the pro-torture nominee for Attorney-General, Alberto Gonzales. We provided evidence of Gonzales' obeisance to extreme notions of presidential power, including the power to torture. Senator Specter not only voted to confirm Gonzales; he went out of his way to praise him, trashing his obligation to the Constitution in order to kowtow to right-wing Senate leadership.

    Within four years, as the political currents in the country changed, he denounced Gonzales for being exactly who Specter knew he was before. NOW he writes about the dangers of untrammeled presidential power? Humbug. Chazerei.

    He did not and does not deserve the support of serious Republicans, Democrats, independents, or any Pennsylvanian.

    Shalom,

    Rabbi Arthur Waskow 6711 Lincoln Drive Philadelphia PA 19119 215/844-8494

    Posted by awaskow at 04/28/2009 @ 1:23pm

18. Congratulations, Libs!

    Score now: Team Lib 1, Team Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and United States of America 0.

    As Harry Caray would say if he were still alive:

    Libs Win! Libs Win! Holy Cow!

    Posted by sjchermak at 04/28/2009 @ 1:31pm

19. Darlaloon, again, I will ask, what happened to : "the buck starts here"? Now, you, like all loser liberals, immediately respond to a question with another question, when you are afraid to answer said question. I personally don't believe that waterboarding is torture, neither DID Nancy Pelosi when she was briefed on it, and I applaud it's use and hope it's use is reinstated so that we can protect ourselves ( even seditious traitors like yourself )and prevent future attacks, which is clearly what happened in the first place.Now, Darlaloon, I'm going to embarrass you with facts concerning the supposedly illegal wiretapping you claim! August 2008, the Foreign Intelligence Survelliance Court of Review found that these wiretaps were LEGAL and that's a FACT, you dumbass!!!! Furthermore, Obama is actually expanding on our gov't ability to wiretap WITHIN the US. Don't hear you complaining about that, now do we? Also, did you know that Obama is DEFENDING GW's use of this wiretapping in the John Walker Lindh case? How do you feel about that? Before you answer any of these other questions, can you show some, any form of self-respect and simply answer my original question: what happened to : "the buck stops here"? Did you even see what Obama did to NYC yesterday? Did you see Gibbs telling reporters that they'd have to check with the WHITE HOUSE for answers ( earth to Gibbs and all libs: he IS the White House , or at least the speaker of it! ) This is the, by far, most inept, embarrassing, and corrupt administration in the history of the US! Sorry I had to slap you upside yo' head with a dose of reality/facts, darlaloon!

    Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 1:36pm

20. antisocialist, you calling someone a "liberal" means almost nothing, because anyone to the left of dick cheney is a liberal.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 1:11pm

    Uh Darla, did you read the title of Nichol's article?

    "A Liberal Democrat Returns to the Fold"

    Posted by antisocialist at 04/28/2009 @ 1:38pm

21. "August 2008, the Foreign Intelligence Survelliance Court of Review found that these wiretaps were LEGAL and that's a FACT, you dumbass!!!!"

    well, if you say so, barry. so why did they need "Retroactaive Immunity" if everything was legal?

    "Uh Darla, did you read the title of Nichol's article?"

    nichols is living in some sort of time warp. specter supported some of the most radical bush policies, and has stood with republicans on the most important issues of the last 8 years (patriot act, iraq, wiretapping, telecom immunity, etc).

    he is, by no objective standard, a "liberal". and if you actually think he's liberal, then that is all the proof we need to know how far to the right this country has drifted.

    "This is the, by far, most inept, embarrassing, and corrupt administration in the history of the US!"

    barry, thanks.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 1:43pm

22. i love it when conservatives come here and bash obama, thinking that people like myself mindlessly support whatever obama says/does.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 1:44pm

23. Barry is not my name, but I am the grandson of a Basque immigrant, who came to this country with nothing, asked for nothing other than the opportunity to work, created a business (on his own), employed LEGAL immigrants, payed WAY too much in taxes, provided his own health care, food, shelter etc. to himself and his family without burdening the taxpayers, like the majority of losers in this country (see; liberals ) do today! ( Note: immigrant, not to be confused with ILLEGAL-immigrant. Note: this disclaimer must be provided in order to show the difference between a LEGAL immigrant and an ILLEGAL-immigrant for those on the left that are too ignorant to understand the difference)! Anyway, as far as me fearing Acorn coming to my door........I actually pray that they do, because our sherriffs dept. is bored right now, and if that happened, the situation at my house would have them on code red! Bring on Acorn and the Obamanation, because in the end, they're all just inept little twerps thatn can only find power in numbers, kinda like the gangs in Chicago that Barack Obama looked out for!!!!

    Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 1:47pm

24. Why do John Nichols and other liberal writers -- and too many of my friends -- insist on fetishizing "60 in the Democratic Caucus"? Nichols' own discusssion of Blanche Lincoln shows the excessive formalism of that approach. Having 60 Caucus members isn't having 60 votes. U.S. parties are not parliamentary parties.

    The real issue is that Harry Reid & the other D leaders refuse to handle the filibuster issue in a way that would force the Rs to pay a political cost for being obstructionist.

    They need to make the Rs actually filibuster sometimes, especially now on issues that have popular support and the backing of President Obama. They need to threaten the "nuclear option" sometimes. Why don't they?

    John, would you sometime do an analysis of why the Rs are so much more effective at internal party discipline on such matters that Ds? Also at why the Ds were so much less effective at using the filibuster when the Rs controlled the Senate? It seems that "you need 60 votes to pass anything in the Senate" is only true when Ds are in charge.

    Given that situation, I think the Ds should seriously consider changing the filibuster rules.

    Posted by Fudu at 04/28/2009 @ 1:48pm

25. " like the majority of losers in this country (see; liberals ) do today!"

    actually, red states take more money from the federal government than they give back in taxes.

    the bluest states (california, new jersey and new york) give THE MOST in taxes.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 1:51pm

26. "they're all just inept little twerps thatn can only find power in numbers,"

    what a moron! the republicans made it de rigeur to seek "power in numbers"! remember tom delay?

    Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 1:53pm

27. Well, Darlaloon, you obviously can't answer ANY questions, but I'll give you one more chance. You state that it's funny that conservatives think that you "mindlessly" support whatever Obama says/does ( gee, I remember people on this site claiming the very same thing, daily, for the last 8 years, concerning conservatives )! Ok, Darla, then how do you FEEL about the "Pro-tax/Tax-cheats" that have filled Obama's administration, the Lobbyists (Obama claimed there would be none ) in his administration, the NYC flyover yesterday, and the continuation of the FISA program, which you state is ILLEGAL, by YOUR messiah...OBAMA! Let's see you get out of this one!!!! Oh, wait, you'll just do what you always do, you wan't answer the question, because you're a weak, inept, incompetent, uninformed follower!!!!!!!!!!LOL!

    Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 1:55pm

28. Darlaloon is correct in the red state / blue state issue, except, what she doesn't state, is that it's still the conservatives, small business, private sector that pay the taxes in those states too! The conservative/small business/ private sector doesn't include too many liberals. Liberals suck off of the lifeblood of the conservative, small business/private sector. Thank you!

    Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 1:58pm

29. ok everyone, let's write like barry!!!! BARRY, OMFG, LOL!!!?!!!??!?1?! you f*cking conservawacko, wingnut, are YOU opposed to olshjdflahlsdfhalsdhflas!!!!!OMGF!!!!!! OBAMA SUCKS LOL OMFG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 1:59pm

30. " The conservative/small business/ private sector doesn't include too many liberals. Liberals suck off of the lifeblood of the conservative, small business/private sector."

    is there any point in talking to such a stupid asshole?

    barry, on the ignore list

    <click>

    Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 2:00pm

31. Nobody totally agrees about every issue. He might work out!

    Posted by pjcasey at 04/28/2009 @ 2:06pm

32. Rabbi Waskow has it right on the money.Specter is not and never has been a progressive, a liberal, or even slightly left of the GOP center.And, Mr Nichols, please, please do not insult your readership with paens to the Rockefeller Republicans, the people who brought us the Attica massacre. And Arlen Specter, who switched to a GOP candidate for DA as part of a reform movement in the 60's.Uh, that was the same Phillly GOP that was headed by former Democrat police commissioner,Frank Rizzo.DA Arlen Specter defended Rizzo's police state tactics time after time in the mid-late '60s. Specter is an unprincipled, opportunist who will do what his political self interest dictates.

    In his own words explaining his decision: "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."

    Interestingly, there seems to be a direct relationship between Arlen Specter's "political philosophy" and the voter registration trends in his home state. A philosophy that is this pliable, cannot be based on any bedrock "liberal" principles.If his breaks from teh Democratic Party are to the "left rather than the right," as Mr Nichols seems to be predicting, then it is evidence of nothing more than the distance the Democrats still need to go to be trusted.

    Posted by bandinilo at 04/28/2009 @ 2:08pm

33. OK, well I'm going back to work. I'll be back later to show my liberal neighbor this blog, and how I easily clown liberal twerps. I swear, every time I see a liberal on TV get asked a simple question, they always refuse to answer. Why? Aw, who cares. The fact is, Darlaloon got backed into a corner with questions/facts and she refused, like usual, to answer any, because had she tried, she would have embarrassed herself even more so than she has already by showing shear cowardice in the face of reality(now, if that doesn't decribe liberal pussies to a "T")!!!! I have lost count at the amount of times I have cornered loser liberals on this website!!!!! You pussies are tooooooo easy! Next time I visit, can you twerps bring out the BIG-GUNS(LOL), you know, people who can actually debate/answer simple questions, so that it's, at least, worth my time?

    Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 2:08pm

34. antisocialist, you calling someone a "liberal" means almost nothing, because anyone to the left of dick cheney is a liberal.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 1:11pm

    anyone to the left of cheney better be wearing kevlar.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/28/2009 @ 2:10pm

35. Shalom,

    Posted by awaskow at 04/28/2009 @ 1:23pm

    سلام

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/28/2009 @ 2:13pm

36. Ok, one more, then I promise, I'm out! Snowflake always claims he makes lots of money ( seems like he's bragging about it, yet I thought libs were against greed ), so, snowflake, what's your income, how much did you pay in state, fed, and property taxes? I paid 6,000.00 on property taxes alone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I wonder how many Obama voters paid ANY property taxes? How much did you pay, snowflake? And what's the 666 about? Does it make you feel scary cool? And, if a liberal dork like yourself does actually make a decent income, it's surely got to be at the sacrifice of public decency (damn I'm good!). So, are you telling me that you work as a fluffer on a gay porn set funded by Barney Frank? LOLOLOLOLOLOL! Damn, I wish I didn't have to go to work to pay for loser liberal scum who steal my money and enslave me through taxation. I'm still hoping Acorn shows up at my house because I haven't chin-checked a loser-liberal in a long time!

    Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 2:17pm

37. WOW!!! So many from the far, far right leaving their hate messages. If it had been the opposite (a Democrat becoming a Republican) you'd have read things like, 'a great patriot, a very intelligent man, this man cares about his country, etc.,etc.' The far right is becoming desperate as they should be. They're so out of touch with the common people of this country. It is encouraging that they come to this site- if only to display their total lack of understanding of the issues confronting all of us. Maybe, they'll actually learn to think instead of playing the role of the proverbial lemming.

    Posted by Conrado at 04/28/2009 @ 2:21pm

38. Posted by Conrado at 04/28/2009 @ 2:21pm

    this seems likely your first post here so, I will acknowledge your testosterone filled attempt to be recognized here; however you are displaying some real ignorance about others, especially conservatives.

    And you certainly seem to lack a balanced list of reading materials. Otherwise you would probably have known that liberal publications like the New Republic have blasted Spector as a "hack".

    http://tinyurl.com/cp6v89

    Posted by antisocialist at 04/28/2009 @ 2:44pm

39. You neocons are all nuts (thought Arlen Specter as he packed up his bags and switched over.) Really, what was in it for him anymore? The Republican Party, that is. Long unhinged from its non-interventionist roots, now the party of wacko-wing statists, why stay?

    He got out, choosing not to participate in what will be the inevitable repub civil war between the wackos and those few who may try to DRAG the party back to reality. We'll see.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 04/28/2009 @ 2:50pm

40. Liberals suck off of the lifeblood of the conservative, small business/private sector. Thank you!

    Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 1:58pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Speak for yourself.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 04/28/2009 @ 2:55pm

41. Hey, Antisocialist, the New Republic is for people who actually think. Congrats for reading it.

    Posted by Conrado at 04/28/2009 @ 2:59pm

42. Bottom line-- dems could eventually end up with 90 in the senate, but because most are free thinkers, there will still be decent and factions arguing differing points of view.

    Totally dif from the repubs that vote 99% lock(goose)-step.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 04/28/2009 @ 3:03pm

43. Hey, by the way, does anyone think the left, media etc. would treat the Bush administration so sweetly if THEY had scared the living shit out of NY with that flyover yesterday?

    Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 12:18pm

    Apparently, you didn't see Keith Olberman last night. The White House official who authorized this fly-by AND its being kept a secret from local officials was named his "Worst Person in the World" for the day.

    Posted by cka2nd at 04/28/2009 @ 3:04pm

44. Posted by awaskow at 04/28/2009 @ 1:23pm

    Posted by bandinilo at 04/28/2009 @ 2:08pm

    Double Bravo!!!

    An opportunistic swine, even if he does take the occasional good position.

    Posted by cka2nd at 04/28/2009 @ 3:09pm

45. I wonder how many Obama voters paid ANY property taxes?

    Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 2:17pm

    I'm not an Obama voter, mind, but just judging from the large number of suburbanites who voted for Obama, a significant number of them former Republicans, I'd say a LOT of his voters paid property taxes.

    Posted by cka2nd at 04/28/2009 @ 3:13pm

46. I hope his new caucus will listen to him and start reining in the executive branch power grab started by Bush and not exactly denounced loudly by Obama... A truly Tri-cameral government is FAR more important than a two-party system.

    Posted by sjduskin at 04/28/2009 @ 3:17pm

47. antisocialist,

    You and I share a disdain for Specter, although we come at it from the opposite sides of the political spectrum. However, as much as I don't trust him, can't you at least give Specter a smidgen of credit for questioning the growth of the Imperial Presidency and the dimunition of the powers of the Congress, the branch that the founders, after all, intended to be the strongest of the three?

    Or am I perhaps forgetting that you support the Unitary Executive theory when it comes to making war (or whatever the President at the time says is a war)?

    Mask, are you out there? I may need you to check your archives for your debates with anti on these issues.

    Posted by cka2nd at 04/28/2009 @ 3:24pm

48. You and I share a disdain for Specter, although we come at it from the opposite sides of the political spectrum. However, as much as I don't trust him, can't you at least give Specter a smidgen of credit for questioning the growth of the Imperial Presidency and the dimunition of the powers of the Congress, the branch that the founders, after all, intended to be the strongest of the three?

    Or am I perhaps forgetting that you support the Unitary Executive theory when it comes to making war (or whatever the President at the time says is a war)?

    Mask, are you out there? I may need you to check your archives for your debates with anti on these issues.

    Posted by cka2nd at 04/28/2009 @ 3:24pm

    it should not surprise you or anyone else here that I believe that Congress over the past 100 years has exercised far too much power.

    In fact, it seems to me that unless a president is pushing a liberal agenda, those on the left prefer to see presidents with little if any power.

    Posted by antisocialist at 04/28/2009 @ 3:37pm

49. Posted by antisocialist at 04/28/2009 @ 3:37pm

    OK, my memory was on the ball here. Thank you for the reply. I think you are totally wrong, and from my reading of The American Convervative and some other conservative commentators, there are conservatives who would disagree with you. While they may not be happy with what they, and you, would consider Federal overreach, they recognize that both the Congress and the Presidency have shared in that practice, and that the tilt has been toward Presidential (or Administrative) power over the last 70-80 years, at least.

    Posted by cka2nd at 04/28/2009 @ 3:53pm

50. Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 2:08pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    gee - how can you argue with THAT?

    what a genius!

    as a prominent physicist once said of a student's paper...

    that's not even wrong!

    thank god or whatever your tribe is no longer relevant.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 04/28/2009 @ 4:34pm

51. –noun 1. a visible incorporeal spirit, esp. one of a terrifying nature; ghost; phantom; apparition. 2. some object or source of terror or dread: the specter of disease or famine.

    YEP, that is him alright! Enjoy finally coming out of the Demoncrat closet Arlen!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 04/28/2009 @ 6:42pm

52. Have people forgotten the Southern Democrat/ Dixiecrat boulder the Party carried in its gut for generations? They all became Republicans, and it was the party of Lincoln which was the all-embracing umbrella party. Now the descendants of these same wahoos have sunk the Republicans. Duh.

    Posted by JFHill at 04/28/2009 @ 8:19pm

53. "Specter's first test will come on the issue of the Employee Free Choice Act."

    John Nichols, you took the words right out of my mouth!

    Posted by JakobFabian at 04/28/2009 @ 8:32pm

54. Posted by snowball666 at 04/28/2009 @ 5:25pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    lol

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 04/28/2009 @ 9:00pm

55. "In fact, it seems to me that unless a president is pushing a liberal agenda, those on the left prefer to see presidents with little if any power"

    gee, what a surprise.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/28/2009 @ 9:48pm

56. Saving his own political interests. He has no principles. And is obviously a man of no conviction. Pure "Political convenience™".

    Posted by apoorspic at 04/28/2009 @ 10:17pm

57. Have people forgotten the Southern Democrat/ Dixiecrat boulder the Party carried in its gut for generations? They all became Republicans, and it was the party of Lincoln which was the all-embracing umbrella party. Now the descendants of these same wahoos have sunk the Republicans. Duh.

    Posted by JFHill at 04/28/2009 @ 8:19pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Ahhh...yea, the usual unintelligent inaccurate synopsis I would have expected to see from leftist reguarding the Repubicans.

    Posted by comancheamerican at 04/28/2009 @ 10:25pm

58. <i>Posted by comancheamerican at 04/28/2009 @ 6:42pm </i>

    I'm just waiting for all the taglines:

    "Democrats raise the Specter of a supermajority"

    And so on...

    That said, though, I think Specter really has a point (as does Collins). The Republican Party really is tearing itself apart, and I don't think they even realize that by alienating moderates and becoming beholden to the more extreme right, they're condemning the party to electoral irrelevance. I've voted for Republicans for a while, but I don't know that I'd feel comfortable doing so now. If Sarah Palin is the future of the party...count me out.

    Posted by Thrawn at 04/28/2009 @ 10:42pm

59. "I've voted for Republicans for a while, but I don't know that I'd feel comfortable doing so now."

    only now? what about 8.3 years ago, when president shit for brains took over?

    Posted by darladoon at 04/29/2009 @ 12:22am

60. The conservative/small business/ private sector doesn't include too many liberals. Liberals suck off of the lifeblood of the conservative, small business/private sector. Thank you! Posted by barry25 at 04/28/2009 @ 1:58pm |

    Did you ACTUALLY just say that? Wow you don't bother to read do you. You realize just for example the two largest computer companies in America are owned by liberals? Or how about all those small businesses in LA I saw with Obama signs in their windows? Do you read books or do you just make up the facts you want to believe in your head?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/29/2009 @ 02:11am

61. That said, though, I think Specter really has a point (as does Collins). The Republican Party really is tearing itself apart, and I don't think they even realize that by alienating moderates and becoming beholden to the more extreme right, they're condemning the party to electoral irrelevance. I've voted for Republicans for a while, but I don't know that I'd feel comfortable doing so now. If Sarah Palin is the future of the party...count me out.

    Posted by Thrawn at 04/28/2009 @ 10:42pm

    Not only do they not realize it, they are celebrating it, but they don't realize that most of this country is moderate and the more moderates the Democratic party has the more insurmountable they become and those moderates are the ones being taken out of the Republican party either by being beaten or now with a clear switch.

    The more they lean harder right the harder they are going to make it to ever win an election. They don't realize that even with a moderate Presidential candidate they were easily defeated. They like to put on their blinders and say it's just because he's black but they seem to put no credit in people to be able to think for themselves. This is a bad sign for the GOP and ever gaining relevance ESPECIALLY if the things the Demo's are doing actually effect positive change in this country.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/29/2009 @ 02:18am

62. Larry, Barry, and SJCHER remind me of "Ian Faith" in "Spinal Tap"

    Marty DiBergi- Is 'Tap' less popular than it was?

    Ian Faith- No, no, no, no, no. It's just that our audience is becoming more...exclusive.

    Posted by Mask at 04/29/2009 @ 06:19am

63. NEWS ITEM: FORMER REAGAN CHIEF OF STAFF ENDORSES BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA.

    ANTISOCIAL REACTS: "Na Na Na Na, Na Na Na Na, Hey, Hey..goodbye.

    Ah the smell of fresh air, when a smell leaves the room--thanks...for going back to your liberal Democratic roots. You are just one step in the purge of liberals from the Republican party" --- Posted by antisocialist @ 11:46am

    NEWS ITEM: INDIANA, VIRGINIA AND NORTH CAROLINA VOTE DEMO IN A PREZ ELECTION FOR FIRST TIME IN 1-2 GENERATIONS.

    ANTISOCIAL REACTS: "Na Na Na Na, Na Na Na Na, Hey, Hey..goodbye.

    Ah the smell of fresh air, when a smell leaves the room--thanks...for going back to your liberal Democratic roots. You are just one step in the purge of liberals from the Republican party" --- Posted by antisocialist @ 11:46am

    NEWS ITEM: BARACK ROMPS ON CLOSETED MARXIST McCAIN, DECLARED WINNER BY MIDNIGHT OF VOTE.

    ANTISOCIAL REACTS: "Na Na Na Na, Na Na Na Na, Hey, Hey..goodbye.

    Ah the smell of fresh air, when a smell leaves the room--thanks...for going back to your liberal Democratic roots. You are just one step in the purge of liberals from the Republican party" --- Posted by antisocialist @ 11:46am

    NEWS ITEM: 5-TERM GOP SENATOR DEFECTS AN ALREADY GREVIOUSLY WEAKENED PARTY, GIVES DEMS 60 SEATS WHEN IT WAS THE MINORITY IN THE UPPER CHAMBER A MERE 5 YEARS AGO.

    ANTISOCIAL REACTS: "Na Na Na Na, Na Na Na Na, Hey, Hey..goodbye.

    Ah the smell of fresh air, when a smell leaves the room--thanks Spector for going back to your liberal Democratic roots. You are just one step in the purge of liberals from the Republican party" --- Posted by antisocialist @ 11:46am

    Aaaa, the aroma of purity.

    It has the fragrance and bouquet of some truly stonking flatulence authored by Saint Sarah and Ayatollah Todd.

    Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 04/29/2009 @ 06:46am

64. I love the fact that people like "barry25" and "antisocialist" are always whining these days.

    It makes me feel so good to see people of their mentality so upset and so distraught. It means we, the majority, are winning. And rubbing their faces in it.

    Ha ha.

    Keep on whining, little boys. Keep on insisting that "Obama will fail" and we'll "regret this", etc. It's fun to see you so mad.

    No matter how much you troll here, and spew your hatred and ignorance, it only confirms that your power is now gone and you've been reduced to name-calling and temper tantrums.

    And it's only the beginning. I suggest you get used to it. The changes being made by our president, Barack Hussein Obama, are going to be permanent ones. And once the majority see how much better life is with a common-sense approach that balances capitalism and socialism, you'll be screaming in the wilderness until you come along and grow up.

    Also, notice how much people like "barry25" and "antisocialist" spend trolling here. I think they need to do something productive, like get jobs or start a business instead of hanging out on liberal blogs, whining and pouting.

    Posted by snesich at 04/29/2009 @ 1:18pm

65. Arlen Specter gained everlasting fame as the Assistant Counsel to the Warren Commission who shamelessly, brazenly intimidated & bullied & insulted witnesses.

    Arlen Specter gained infamy at the same time by inventing -- out of whole cloth -- the Single Bullet Theory in the murder of President Kennedy.

    There's plenty of detailed evidence to support both of my statements above.

    Further, I recollect vividly how harshly Sen. Specter treated Anita Hill in the autumn 1991 hearings of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. Hearings which I stated at the time would NOT be held on such a crude topic *IF* the people involved were white. Turns out that loads of black people were recognizing that fact & mentioning it at the same time! We might be a little slow to recognize this fact today BECAUSE the Clinton Impeachment story was full of similar crudity which was permitted even about a U.S. President AFTER the Clarence Thomas hearings.

    Yes, there are lots of other illustrations about how unprincipled & self-important Arlen Specter has been for over half century in his political career.

    I recall that Sen. Specter LOOKED miserable on TV when he was shown by the news cameraman, panning the mass of Delegates, at the 1984 Republican National Convention. THAT was when the Moral Majority, et al, who were outside the Convention, eagerly supporting Reagan in 1980, had made it inside the Convention and extremely visibly, loudly so. One could not help but notice that Sen. Specter, though a native of Wichita, KS, was fundamentally different from AND uncomfortable with the Fundamentalists taking over his Party's National Convention.

    By the way, before he went into politics, wasn't Arlen Specter in U.S. Air Force Intelligence? Before or after law school, during the Cold War.

    Posted by UShistoryEnthusiast at 04/29/2009 @ 8:42pm