Page 2 of 3

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:52 pm
by bryang
tfrazier wrote:That's exactly why the Republicrats got my resignation from their party a year ago. I'm fed up with all the blurred lines, mixed morals, and values being tossed out the window for the sake of a sure win or "the lesser evil".

You can't tell most of them apart from the Democrats any more, and neither bunch is going to get my money besides what they forcibly take in taxes.

"Would that you were either cold or hot..." as the Good Book says.

:mad5
:iagree: Very well said, and my sentiments exactly. It would be nice if just ONE of them would say what they mean and mean what they say. I am feed up with all this double talk. :mad5

-geo

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 9:47 pm
by jack010203
TheArmedFarmer wrote:We were probably better off back before 1913, when Senators were chosen by our state legislatures. Back then, there's no way that people like Hillary Clinton would have been seated in the Senate. Maybe it's time to talk about the repeal of the 17th amendment to the Constitution.
i have always wondered why the 17th was passed, it seems that having the senators elected by our legislature would create more interest in state politics. I would probably help to reduce the number of radical senators, but it would probably lead to more corruption in the state governments. Anyway, anyone know why it was enacted?

And as far as Specter switching, well good riddins to bad rubbish, he switched a long time ago, its just official now, good luck to Pat Toomy in 2010

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:37 pm
by jimlongley
TheArmedFarmer wrote:We were probably better off back before 1913, when Senators were chosen by our state legislatures. Back then, there's no way that people like Hillary Clinton would have been seated in the Senate. Maybe it's time to talk about the repeal of the 17th amendment to the Constitution.
Hilly Clinton wouldn't be seated now if NY hadn't decided to sponsor what I call a Foreign Exchange Senator in the 60s. Bobby couldn't run in MA because Teddy was running there and that wouldn't look good, so NY accomodated him by passing the stupid residency rule, and he beat Ken Keating with NY City votes. NY state has never had two "native" Seantors since then, including the Illinois transplant Hilly Clinton, who, by the way, is just another Chicago politician.

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:42 pm
by The Annoyed Man
MoJo wrote:Sen. Arlen Specter announced today he's switching parties to enhance his chances of reelection.
Exactly as he did in 1965, when he switched from being a Democrat to being a Republican.

Well, Harry Reid is allowing Specter to keep his seniority. It will be as if he was a Democrat ever since 1980, when he was first elected Senator. He gets a juicy committee chair, and everything. What does this say? It says that he was bought and paid for by the Democrat party. It never was about his principles - 'cause he ain't got any.

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:07 pm
by tfrazier
The Annoyed Man wrote:...Exactly as he did in 1965, when he switched from being a Democrat to being a Republican.

Well, Harry Reid is allowing Specter to keep his seniority. It will be as if he was a Democrat ever since 1980, when he was first elected Senator. He gets a juicy committee chair, and everything. What does this say? It says that he was bought and paid for by the Democrat party. It never was about his principles - 'cause he ain't got any.
EXACTLY! The swine in Washington gravitate to the fullest trough, gorge themselves until it's empty, then move to the next. Meanwhile we just get empty pockets and influenza!

He voted with the Democrats on the 787 billion dollar 'stimulus' bill in preparation for this. Reid giving him his seniority, etc is purely political quid pro quo for that and all his other betrayals of conservatives over the decades. I suspect this has been planned and agreed to at least that far back.

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:42 pm
by Oldgringo
:iagree: There is no differnce between them. I agreed with Charley Reese's somewhat dated column before the 2008 election and nothing has happened since to change my mind. This may be truer today than it was when it was written almost 30 years ago.

From The Orlando Sentinel:

THE 545 PEOPLE
RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL
OF AMERICA'S WOES


BY CHARLEY REESE

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don't write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don't set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don't control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices - 545 human beings out of the 235 million - are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.

I excluded all but the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it.

No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislation's responsibility to determine how he votes.

A CONFIDENCE CONSPIRACY

Don't you see how the con game that is played on the people by the politicians? Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of Tip O'Neill, who stood up and criticized Ronald Reagan for creating deficits.

The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating appropriations and taxes.

O'neill is the speaker of the House. He is the leader of the majority party. He and his fellow Democrats, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetos it, they can pass it over his veto.

REPLACE SCOUNDRELS

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 235 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts - of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can't think of a single domestic problem, from an unfair tax code to defense overruns, that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.

When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in Lebanon, it's because they want them in Lebanon.

There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take it.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exist disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation" or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people and they alone are responsible. They and they alone have the power. They and they alone should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses - provided they have the gumption to manage their own employees.

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:27 am
by jimlongley
MoJo wrote:Sen. Arlen Specter announced today he's switching parties to enhance his chances of reelection. Pres. O has welcomed him with open arms. Hopefully his constituents will toss him out on his ear.
I have to wonder how much he is being paid to bump the Senate's count one more toward an anti-filibuster majority. Just a thought.

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:14 am
by txmatt
It should be remembered that with the frequency with which he voted with Deomocrats before, changing his party status is unlikely to change a filibuster proof vote- if he's going to vote for it now he probably would have before.

I can't really blame him, he was under constant attack from his own party. They made it pretty clear they didn't really want him, and he took the hint and left. Probably better for everyone. It made no sense for him to stay.

Go watch the youtube video of his question of Gonzales about habeas corpus. Sometimes we need people willing to stand up to those within their party.

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:39 am
by boomerang
The only difference is now a conservative can run against him at election time.

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:38 pm
by couzin
tfrazier wrote:...The swine in Washington gravitate to the fullest trough, gorge themselves until it's empty, then move to the next.
There ya go! :clapping:

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Wed Apr 29, 2009 5:48 pm
by Keith B
Image

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:29 pm
by texastaurusguy
Specter showed his true colors when he voted for the stimulus package with the other two turncoats. The writing was on the wall for him to not get past his primary, so looks like he quite openly jumped over to the dark side. I hope he gets trounced in 2010.

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:56 pm
by raccol
TheArmedFarmer wrote:
stroo wrote:He actually was a Democrat before he decided he could get elected to the Senate as a Republican during the Reagan era.
Then why did the Republican establishment, including GWB, campaign so strongly for him in the primary? There was a true and popular conservative running against him. What gives? I'm honestly flabbergasted. This just isn't adding up right for me.
because pols have a tendency to support incumbents regardless of their stance on issues.

I think a more appropriate title would be, "AS comes out of the closet". He's been a RINO forever so this just tells us what we've always known.

Like too many pols, they're more self-serving than public-serving. He switched because he saw the writing on the wall. Now let's hope he can win the D primary so he can get his clock cleaned.

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:34 pm
by nitrogen
The more I read about Specter, the less I think I like him.

He's a crook, like the rest of the 49 members of congress. He might think a bit independantly, but he's still a self-serving crook.

Re: Arlen Specter switches to Democrats.

Posted: Sun May 03, 2009 5:44 pm
by TruckingDeals
Not to nit pick, but, for the record:

100 crooks in the Senate + 435 crooks in the House of Reps = 535 crooks in Congress.

Then, don't forget about the Crook in Chief: Socialist America-Hater Obamer

And his trusty sidekick: Joe "I just can't seem to stop saying stupid things" Biden.

If you vote for your incumbent this election, YOU are the problem. I don't care who he is. :txflag: