Arlen Specter to switch parties

[Rex Kickass]

If nothing else, it's interesting to see what issues each party uses to draw the line. For the Democrats rank and file, it was the Iraq war. For the Republicans, it seems to have been the stimulus package.

 

It's also interesting to note, tactically speaking, that one reason there hasn't been any talk of a primary challenge to Bayh, or Nelson, etc., is that the Dems currently aren't in the business of putting up primary challenges that turn safe seats in to unsafe seats. The GOP has been doing exactly that.

 

Actually, hell yeah there will be a primary challenge for Bayh.

 

But Bayh won't get blown out of the water, because the Democrats have had a good long history about disagreeing on anything and everything. Sometimes, not having the best consensus in a party can be an asset.

 

Because if you don't agree 100% with the party line, there's still a place for you in the Democratic party.

[HuskyCaucasian]

MSNBC has a nice write-up on those who have switched partied while still an elected official.

[NorthSideSox72]

Major? That was like a case of the sniffles.

I think its also funny to label it a "democratic" recession, just as it would be funny to call this one a "Republican" recession. In both cases, sure, the party in power's policies may have contributed. But to blame this recession/depression on the GOP, or that 2001- recession on the Dems, is giving those parties way too much credit for their effect.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

I remember when Nighthorse-Campbell flipped to the GOP. As I recall, his biggest reasoning was the GOP's standing by personal freedoms and less government interference in local affairs. The modern GOP may do well to re-embrace those things.

 

[Balta1701]

 

Classic. (Uses word "Hell" if you're at work.)

[HuskyCaucasian]

wait the people who went to the tea parties arent reps or dems, they were "concerned Americans"? LMAO! Tell that to the Tea Parties primary sponsor... Fox News!

[CanOfCorn]

Why don't we just strip the letters after the names and run on those? The party lines are too blurred for it to matter anymore, so how about running on...dare I say...*gasp*...issues.

 

In the grand scheme of things...nothing really changes.

[Balta1701]

Looks like the White House involvement in Arlen Specter’s decision to switch parties was much deeper than we thought: A White House aide confirms to me that Joe Biden had a total of six in-person meetings and at least eight phone calls with Specter since the stimulus package passed early this year.

 

Keep in mind that Specter supported the stimulus package, while almost all the GOP opposed it. So this, clearly, was the starting point for the White House’s extensive wooing of Specter.

 

It had already been reported that Biden was involved in Specter’s switch, but the specific number of conversations illustrates much more White House involvement than was first evident. The White House aide declined to characterize the conversations.

Link

[KipWellsFan]

Dick Cheney.

 

You must have read this op-ed today.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/opinion/...uthat.html?_r=1

[bmags]

Why don't we just strip the letters after the names and run on those? The party lines are too blurred for it to matter anymore, so how about running on...dare I say...*gasp*...issues.

 

In the grand scheme of things...nothing really changes.

 

People are running on issues, but consensus in our republic requires some organization

[Texsox]

I think that if politicians decide to switch parties while they are stil lin office that they should be required to resign and run again under thier new party. After all, most people voted for that person based on their party, and if they are now switchign parties, they just disenfranchised everyone who had voted for them. Guess he doesnt have enough balls to try and run as an independent, eh?

 

But when someone resigns, party affiliation is not considered when the Governor appoints a replacement.

[CanOfCorn]

People are running on issues, but consensus in our republic requires some organization

 

People are running on issues mandated by their parties...most of the time.

[EvilMonkey]

But when someone resigns, party affiliation is not considered when the Governor appoints a replacement.

I'm sure you meant that in green, right Tex? Except when the resigning person is African-American, and then they consider party affiliation AND race.

[Balta1701]

But when someone resigns, party affiliation is not considered when the Governor appoints a replacement.

Actually, this varies state to state. In some states, the governor is required by law to appoint someone of the same party. In other cases (see: Judd Gregg) the governor will pledge that he will appoint someone of the same party even though he's not legally required to do so.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Someone gets it...

[Balta1701]

Someone gets it...

Fox News's new Fox Nation website this morning:

[CanOfCorn]

Fox News's new Fox Nation website this morning:

 

Fair and balanced.

[NorthSideSox72]

 

Classic. (Uses word "Hell" if you're at work.)

So bizarre. The GOP just keeps parroting "freedom", when they have been about the opposite of freedom for some time now.

 

[HuskyCaucasian]

Fox News's new Fox Nation website this morning:

Fox Nation's Purpose Statement:

The Fox Nation was created for people who believe in the United States of America and its ideals, as expressed in the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Emancipation Proclamation.

 

It is a community that believes in the American Dream: Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. One that believes being an American is an honor, as well as a great responsibility—and a wonderful adventure.

 

This is a place for people who believe we live in a great country, a welcoming refuge for legal immigrants who want to contribute their talent and abilities to make our way of life even greater. We believe we should enjoy the company and support of each other, delighting in the creativity, ingenuity, and work ethic of one and all, while observing the basic rules of civility and mutual respect and, most importantly, strengthening our diverse society by striving for unity.

 

The Fox Nation is for those committed to the core principles of tolerance, open debate, civil discourse--and fair and balanced coverage of the news. It is for those opposed to intolerance, excessive government control of our lives, and attempts to monopolize opinion or suppress freedom of thought, expression, and worship.

 

We invite all Americans who share these values to join us here at Fox Nation.

 

It strikes me as if they are trying to have it both ways. Continue to lie to themselves by saying they are a "fair" news organization, but launch a far right website and say it's not REALLY the new organization.

 

This line makes me laugh:

"The Fox Nation is for those committed to the core principles of tolerance, open debate, civil discourse--and fair and balanced coverage of the news."

 

Yet on the front page:

 

Edited May 1, 2009 by Athomeboy_2000

[Heads22]

Interesting thoughts from Tom Harkin:

 

Harkin: Specter's move no lock for Democrats

THOMAS BEAUMONT • [email protected] • APRIL 30, 2009

 

Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin said today that the Senate's shrinking Republican minority is bad for the nation's political balance.

 

But Harkin, a five-term Democrat, also said the growing Democratic edge in the Senate does not signal a bulletproof party agenda.

 

"Specter leaving the Republican Party, I think, indicates the Republicans' tent is getting smaller and smaller and smaller all the time," Harkin said in a conference call with reporters. "I don't think that's good for our society. I really don't."

 

 

 

However, Harkin also said that the Democrats' 60-vote majority, which could block Republican filibusters, does not mean that the Democrats' agenda is assured.

 

Harkin pointed to Specter's vote Wednesday against President Obama's budget, which cleared the Senate.

 

"Republicans are much more disciplined when they are in charge. Democrats aren't," Harkin said. "Having 60 is no magic around here. We're still I think going to have to reach out to moderate Republicans to move our program forward."

 

Harkin also said he would refuse to give up his seniority and committee chairmanships in light of Sen. Arlen Specter's defection from the Republican to Democratic ranks in the Senate.

 

Harkin was adamant that Specter, who was elected to the Senate four years before Harkin, would not skip ahead of him in seniority.

 

Specter will assume the least-senior role among Democrats through the next election. Should he be elected to the Senate as a Democrat, as he plans to run next year, the party's senators would determine his seniority.

 

Harkin, who is on the Senate Democratic caucus' steering and policy committee, would have added influence in shaping Specter's role within the party.

 

Ultimately, Harkin said he would not give up his chairmanship of a key appropriations subcommittee, on which Specter also serves. Harkin has been chairman or ranking member of the subcommittee with authority over health and education spending for 20 years.

 

"I see no scenario under which I am giving up my appropriations subcommittee

chairmanship," Harkin said. "I have no intention of giving it up whatsoever. So that's sort of settled

[Heads22]

Interesting thoughts from Tom Harkin:

 

Harkin: Specter's move no lock for Democrats

THOMAS BEAUMONT • [email protected] • APRIL 30, 2009

 

Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin said today that the Senate's shrinking Republican minority is bad for the nation's political balance.

 

But Harkin, a five-term Democrat, also said the growing Democratic edge in the Senate does not signal a bulletproof party agenda.

 

"Specter leaving the Republican Party, I think, indicates the Republicans' tent is getting smaller and smaller and smaller all the time," Harkin said in a conference call with reporters. "I don't think that's good for our society. I really don't."

 

 

 

However, Harkin also said that the Democrats' 60-vote majority, which could block Republican filibusters, does not mean that the Democrats' agenda is assured.

 

Harkin pointed to Specter's vote Wednesday against President Obama's budget, which cleared the Senate.

 

"Republicans are much more disciplined when they are in charge. Democrats aren't," Harkin said. "Having 60 is no magic around here. We're still I think going to have to reach out to moderate Republicans to move our program forward."

 

Harkin also said he would refuse to give up his seniority and committee chairmanships in light of Sen. Arlen Specter's defection from the Republican to Democratic ranks in the Senate.

 

Harkin was adamant that Specter, who was elected to the Senate four years before Harkin, would not skip ahead of him in seniority.

 

Specter will assume the least-senior role among Democrats through the next election. Should he be elected to the Senate as a Democrat, as he plans to run next year, the party's senators would determine his seniority.

 

Harkin, who is on the Senate Democratic caucus' steering and policy committee, would have added influence in shaping Specter's role within the party.

 

Ultimately, Harkin said he would not give up his chairmanship of a key appropriations subcommittee, on which Specter also serves. Harkin has been chairman or ranking member of the subcommittee with authority over health and education spending for 20 years.

 

"I see no scenario under which I am giving up my appropriations subcommittee

chairmanship," Harkin said. "I have no intention of giving it up whatsoever. So that's sort of settled

[BearSox]

Fox Nation's Purpose Statement:

 

 

It strikes me as if they are trying to have it both ways. Continue to lie to themselves by saying they are a "fair" news organization, but launch a far right website and say it's not REALLY the new organization.

 

This line makes me laugh:

"The Fox Nation is for those committed to the core principles of tolerance, open debate, civil discourse--and fair and balanced coverage of the news."

 

Yet on the front page:

Say what you will about Fox, but at least they aren't nearly half as bad as MSNBC.

Edited May 1, 2009 by BearSox

[lostfan]

Say what you will about Fox, but at least they aren't nearly half as bad as MSNBC.

lol whatever. It's the same. Eye of the delusional beholder.

[BearSox]

lol whatever. It's the same. Eye of the delusional beholder.

 

Give me a break. MSNBC is extremely hateful and will continually attack anyone who disagrees with them and refuse to insult Obama. There's a reason why they are in the s***ter.

 

How many "news" channels will let people like Janeane Garofalo come on and call hundreds of thousands of people racists and stupid rednecks, without being challanged?

 

It's not even close, and if you are trying to make them the same, you're the delusional one.

[KipWellsFan]

<!--quoteo(post=1882199:date=May 1, 2009 -> 12:18 AM:name=BearSox)-->

<!--quotec-->Give me a break. MSNBC is extremely hateful and will continually attack anyone who disagrees with them and refuse to insult Obama. There's a reason why they are in the s***ter.

 

How many "news" channels will let people like Janeane Garofalo come on and call hundreds of thousands of people racists and stupid rednecks, without being challanged?

 

It's not even close, and if you are trying to make them the same, you're the delusional one.

 

Garafalo lol! What a sell-out for being on a Fox tv show. And Fox for having her on. Not to mention that her character is endlessly annoying.

 

Personally I think MSNBC is a little more intelligent than Fox. Hard to say a channel that has Glen Beck, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reilly on everynight is better but either way, not much original news coming from either place. But I wouldn't say MSNBC is in the s***ter I think their ratings are actually on the upswing. Which is bad news for everyone looking for centrist media.

 

Edited May 1, 2009 by KipWellsFan