Specter crossing the aisle - good bad or indifferent?




 
--
Specter crossing the aisle - good bad or indifferent?
 
May 1st, 2009  
Partisan
 
 

Topic: Specter crossing the aisle - good bad or indifferent?


Specter crossing the aisle - good bad or indifferent?
So a 76 year old man has decided to change parties, presumably not enough Viagra in the last one!

But seriously is this good, bad or nothing? He's already said that he will continue to vote his mind - as long as it holds!

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/...tch/index.html

Arlen has already acknowledged he wouldn't have got the republican vote next year. So has he changed sides for ideology or just because he can't tear himself away from the trough in DC - my money is on the latter, where's yours?
May 1st, 2009  
03USMC
 
 
He's changing because the demographics in his district are changing. He never was wedded to the Republican Party line of thought anyway.
May 1st, 2009  
5.56X45mm
 
 
Arlen Specter is a Class "A" Politician.

He was a democrat in his youth and he went Republican when he started his career because that is what the majority of the voters where in his constituency. He made the switch because he isn't a true Republican.

He's a R.I.N.O. - Republican In Name Only

He is a moderate leftist on many core Republican issues. And he himself said that he does not follow the current view of the party. Which is Reaganite in thought and belief. So he jumped ship to save his job. He was fearful of losing the 2010 elections during the primaries because his Republican constituency favors challenger Pat Toomey. Which he said he will run against Arlen Specter in the primaries.

Over 70% of the Republican constituency was against the Stimulus Bill and Arlen Specter was in favor of it. He's also for amnesty for illegal aliens and once again the Republican constituency was against it.

So in the end... Arlen Specter is a professional politician. He'll tell people what ever they want to hear and do what ever he wants to do to keep his job. Hence why he jumped ship. Because he knew he'd lose his job in the 2010 primaries.

I say good bye.... but my fear is that with him on the side of the Democrats and Al Franken more then likely winning Minnesota. That means the Democrats will have a 60 seat majority in the Senate.... which is filibuster proof. So the socialists will push and approve what ever sweeping commie pinko bill they want.
--
Specter crossing the aisle - good bad or indifferent?
May 1st, 2009  
bropous
 

Benedict Arlen jumped ship because polling numbers already showed him losing to Toomey in the Republican primaries by 21%, even at this advanced stage. He is the type who treasures his Senate seat over principle, another Republican in Name Only who drove us nuts by his continual "reaching across the aisle" when it was important.

However, the true insult here is that it delivers a 60-seat filibuster-proof majority to the Far Left Socialist Democrat Party. Now they can shove their anti-capitalist socialism right down our throats without so much as a roadbump.

Frankly, I don't like the change of parties in mid-term, whether it benefits my side or harms it. To me, it is a bait-and-switch and unfair to the voters on BOTH sides of the political divide. I try to be fair about elections especially, because they are the cornerstone of the Republic, and switching parties just means that the person switching sees themselves and their own careers as the most important factor, as opposed to the primacy of the will of the voters and the energy and money spent by the ones who supported them in the primaries and the general election.

Specter saw the handwriting on the wall, though, that the Conservative grass roots movement is retaking the Republican Party, and the RiNOs are not going to get too many more "it's my party, so I better support the guy" votes in 2010, and further, in 2012. We held our noses and voted for POLITICAL turncoat John McCain (his military service notwithstanding), the most liberal of Republican Senators, in the last election and we are not going to accept his version of Republicanism anymore.

It's back to small government, responsible spending, and demanding that REAL people represent us in Washington, instead of the perfumed, privileged pultroonish elites who get foisted upon us. Yes, there is a civil war brewing in the GOP, and the end result will be a party of conservative principles that will stand for constitutional rule and not for the "go along to get along" logrolling garbage that caused so many of us to sit out elections (not me) or vote for people who shared very few of our values because the choice on the other side was so much of an affront to our core beliefs (me all the way).

Sarah Palin for me, Benedict Arlen, no mroe of thee!
May 1st, 2009  
tomtom22
 
 
He is my kind of guy. He votes his conscience on the issues and party politics be damned. He's also a realist, as 03 said, his state's demographics are changing and he's changing with it.
May 2nd, 2009  
Partisan
 
 
Whether he is to the left or the right, the fact that I find truly scary is that he is 76 years old!! I'm not saying that he should be in a retirement home, but this has got to be a short term gesture on his part, just so he can keep the money flowing into his bank account.
May 2nd, 2009  
major liability
 
 
Totally indifferent. He might as well have been an independent from the start.
May 2nd, 2009  
A Can of Man
 
 
Yeah but he also realizes that an independent is not likely to get elected.

He's a guy who thinks both sides are bull sh*t and knows it means nothing to him unless he's got a place in the driving seat.
May 2nd, 2009  
The Other Guy
 
 
From a Democratic standpoint I'm happy, because, hey, it's another vote. From a purely political standpoint it really supports the GOP's "reach across the aisle" policy from 2005-09 when they held the oval office but not congress. Nothing is going to be accomplished with the current "stonewall everything" policy; the change in votes allows SOMETHING to be accomplished without constant roadblocks.

bropous:
First off, the GOP preached reaching across the aisle to the Democrats for 4 years when Bush wanted to keep pushing his agenda. But the true insult is the whole socialist thing; first off the Democratic party are not a socialist party; the American Socialist Party is a socialist party. And the conservative ideals you are preaching died with Nixon. Reagan was the first of the neo-conservative line; which favored small government on big business but big military spending. It helped us outspend the Soviets but forced us into a recession in 2004 when funds dried up and allowed the banks to eat themselves until they exploded when regulations were removed at the turn of the century. Sarah Palin is the next in this line of succession. While I agree there will be a civil war in the Republican party it will cause it to split much like the Dixiecrats did in the 1960s and undermine the party for the next 30 years.

And comparing a congressman who changed parties to a Revolutionary war tratior has about as much clout as comparing Reagan to Stalin.
May 2nd, 2009  
A Can of Man
 
 
Benedict Arnold? That guy was a hero.
 


Similar Topics
Was the cold war are good thing or a bad thing?
Bad and Good News
what are good and bad reasons to go to war
Good words meaning bad things
June 30th deadline, good?,... or bad?