ExSpecteration: The Silver Lining

Mike Dorf on the Dhidden technicality that salvages some good news from Specter’s defection:

Does Arlen Specter’s defection from R to D strengthen the President’s hand in Congress? Perhaps overall but not on judicial appointments because breaking (the equivalent of) a filibuster in the Senate Judiciary Committee requires the consent of at least one member of the minority. Before today, Specter was likely to be that one Republican. Now what?

Now, you expect the media to do to Lindsay Graham what they did to Chuck Hagel,and John McCain before him; make him their bestest lil’ buddy on the right, to try to entice him into a faustian bargain, selling his political soul for a little approving big-media spotlight.
Graham is suspect – he was on the Gang of 14 – but made of sterner partisan stuff than the hamster Specter.

Upshot: Specter may have paved the road to hell on every front but the Supreme Court.

To paraphrase the sage: “Conspiracy-wacko Liberal FREAK OUT in 3 … 2 … 1 … “

38 thoughts on “ExSpecteration: The Silver Lining

  1. I just wanted to say,

    I love Arlen Specter..

    Does that constitute a Freak Out Mitch?

    You chased him out, he had little re-election prospect, much like you foolishly chased out Jeffords as memory serves. You got what you deserved, and I’d rather be on this highway to hell than continue the 8 years of your preferred autocratic, kill dissenters utopia. The only freak out is on your side of the isle, my friend. We’re having too much fun. Wee :).

  2. Penigma,

    I’m not freaking out; I’m happy that you now have Specter and Jeffords on your team, good riddance. Now do you really think the Dems are going to run Specter in the primary and not one of their very own? My prediction is Specter will be gone in 2010, one way or another. Again good riddance.

  3. Hell, the Dems ain’t even managed to purge Grand Kleagle Byrd from there side of the aisle.

  4. Now do you really think the Dems are going to run Specter in the primary and not one of their very own? My prediction is Specter will be gone in 2010, one way or another.

    Exactly. He’ll get a primary challenge from Sestak, Rendell or maybe the mayor of Philly (the felicitously named Michael Nutter) and lose the Democratic primary, instead of losing the Republican primary to Toomey. All he’s now gained is a permanent reputation as an unprincipled bastard who would sell out his party to save his own skin. Maybe Harry Reid will leave him a Jackson on the nightstand, though, just for old times sake.

  5. I heard that the republicans are rerunning old robo-calls of Bush endorsing Specter to try to wreck his new career as a democrat. Interesting technique, and probably very effective.

    The democrats seem to have offered Specter a lot, more than they seem to have gotten in turn. Specter doesn’t seem to be promising them all that much cooperation. It will be interesting to see if Specter can win a general election or not, what kind of following he has in his own state.

    He’s old, but then so are a number of other people in the legislative and judicial branches. The real politicking is in who is coming up behind Specter. It will be interesting to see if Specter is correct in his statement that over 200,000 voters left the republican ‘tent’ in 2008. That should be more of a concern for the PA republicans than what Specter does.

  6. Expect a one-day conversion to the GOP from a Dem member of the Judiciary committee.

  7. Peev,
    You freak out with almost every post.

    Of course, that doesn’t seem too often on your blog, but it seems like an hourly occurance on other people’s blogs.

  8. The democrats seem to have offered Specter a lot, more than they seem to have gotten in turn.
    Interesting. Does one need permission to be a Democrat? Did Specter apply to Harry Reid in advance? If this permission is not granted and one claims to be Democrat, will they be denounced as a fake Democrat?

  9. “Does one need permission to be a Democrat?”

    Only a propensity for sodomy.

  10. It’s a little soon to be speculating on a Judicial commitee filibuster. The seat isn’t open yet, PBO hasn’t even picked a Karl Marx clone yet and Grahamnesty has never shown any sign of a spine.

  11. Dog gone, did you hear of “Operation Chaos”? Many Republicans voted in the Democratic primary just to keep it running longer.

    Also this time the Dems won’t have PBO on the ticket, so no coat tails for Sen. SPECTRE.

  12. Scott,

    I beleive the Dems will run Specter, no question. Also, Jeffords retired – too bad, he was one of the better people in the Senate on education.

  13. Scott,

    I’ve never sodomized anything or anyone, but thank you for showing me that complaints from the likes of Badda are, to put it frankly, coming from the ‘completely freaked out crowd.’ BTW Scott, there’s reasonably ample evidence (Rev. Haggerty, Sen Craig, Rep Foley) that Republicans are the true closet sodomizers.

    Badda – hardly, but as I said, you’ve never had anything useful to say since you reverted to form – you’re too gutless to debate anything, so all you do is insult. Oh, wait, that was my third comment w/o freaking out.. oh noo, whatever am I to doooo….. my thought is you need to get yourself fitted for a new tie – perhaps one of those paper rings they use to cover toilet seats?

    Kerm – Kill Dissenters the comment was hyperbole – no kidding?!? – Look, the fact that we waterboarded people, some of whom died due to heart failure. We have very little proof against most of those we waterboarded – in fact, their ONLY crime may have been DISSENT against an Afghani warlord (get it?) – and given the hyperbole Mitch used about liberal freak out, I felt it was fair game to use a little myself. It’s funny how you can see non-right hyperbole, but are completely blind to anything you or those with similar views may say. Grow a sense of humor or at least the ability to understand satire. Jeezus

    So let’s see, in meaningful reply we got:

    One person accuses me of sodomy
    One can’t grasp satire
    The last hasn’t been able to say something meaningful in three years

    Wow.

  14. One person accuses me of sodomy
    Anyone else notice that peev didn’t deny being a sodomist?

  15. Mr. Drivel said: “Exactly. He’ll get a primary challenge from Sestak, Rendell or maybe the mayor of Philly (the felicitously named Michael Nutter) and lose the Democratic primary, instead of losing the Republican primary to Toomey.”

    He Penig, there definitely is something at work here. Some of the kooks are, characteristically, freaking out. The rest are still in the denial stage.

    Pennsylvania is a blue state – that’s why Spector changed his spots, you idjits. You really think a hard-right wackjob like Toomey beats a sitting senator, or, if you’re right, the Democrat who unseats the Senator in a primary challenge? Good luck with that! Meanwhile could you tell your boy Coleman to stop whining to the courts already? Cause Franken makes 60.

  16. Peev opined It’s funny how you can see non-right hyperbole, but are completely blind to anything you or those with similar views may say. Grow a sense of humor or at least the ability to understand satire. Jeezus

    Which is comical in light of the volumes of hyperbole I have gleefully poured into the realm of blogging. As to his request for me to “grow a sense of humor”, well that has to be one of the most ironic statements in recent memory.

    As I can usually say in one sentence what Peev takes five or six loooong paragraphs to toture (pun intended), I think I’ll take the accusation of lack of satire grasping to be simple projection.

    Just to prove my comedic ability, I shall borrow from angryclown’s unique style.
    Mitch, btw, would it be okay with you if I changed my handle to Mephistofelates?

    Thanks – Mephi

    Can’t grasp satire? Pfft.

  17. Kermit says:
    “Does one need permission to be a Democrat? Did Specter apply to Harry Reid in advance? If this permission is not granted and one claims to be Democrat, will they be denounced as a fake Democrat?”

    I don’t quite follow your line here, Kermit; please elaborate. As far as I know anyone can claim to be a democrat or republican who chooses to do so. That would seem to be a different situation than enlisting financial and organizational support to run for an office, which is what I understand to be occurring here, not simple party identification. Both political organizations make decisions about these allocations all the time. I can’t think of an instance where either party has requested someone not claim an identification, but perhaps someone here has a better handle on that.

    jpmn says:
    “Dog gone, did you hear of “Operation Chaos”? Many Republicans voted in the Democratic primary just to keep it running longer.”

    I’ve heard of that Jpmn, but had a question about it. I have only voted in this state. My understanding was that you are supposed to belong to the party in which you are voting. Were these undesignated democrats? Intentionally interfering with another party seems rather unethical.

    I am designated on my voter registration as an independent, so when I attended the local Republican caucus on behalf of an organization seeking bi-partisan support for new legislation, I identified myself as an independent, and did not vote on any of the platform or other agenda items. I didn’t feel it would be ethical to do so. In appreciation for being allowed to make my little presentation to the caucus, absent anyone else willing to do the job, I did act as the caucus secretary, keeping the minutes for the meeting, and presenting an accurate, carefully word processed copy to the caucus representatives for their use afterwords.

  18. “I can’t think of an instance where either party has requested someone not claim an identification, but perhaps someone here has a better handle on that.”
    The GOP was not thrilled about David Duke running as a republican.
    Different states have different rules about voting in primaries. In my state you request a D or R or ‘other’ ballot.

  19. I don’t quite follow your line here, Kermit; please elaborate.

    It was a response to your statement
    The democrats seem to have offered Specter a lot, more than they seem to have gotten in turn.
    Which implies a quid pro quo. I simply wondered if the Donkey Party has some kind of initiation. Did Arlen have to send a check to Planned Parenthood? Kiss Obama’s ring? Issue super secret appologies for the wonderful circumstances of his birth?

    Can I claim to be a Democrat and thoroughly condemn Obama, socislism, abortion, Janeane Garafalo, public transportation, the global warming fraud, welfare, unions, and wealth redistribution?

    The Democrat party is so thoroughly wedded to purity tests it’s (as John F Kerry once said) stunning. Simply stunning.

  20. Kermit says:
    “Which implies a quid pro quo. I simply wondered if the Donkey Party has some kind of initiation.”

    There is clearly a sort of quid pro quo here. As part of welcoming Specter to joining (more or less) the Democratic party, Obama has offered in his own words, to endorse him – which is what Bush did before Obama, and I assume that individuals of influence did going back to his earliest days as a politician.

    Can you claim to be a Democrat and thoroughly condemn Obama, socialism, abortion, etc.? You could. There doesn’t seem to have been a particularly deep running unity in the Democratic party at any time. Such unity hasn’t seemed to bring great joy to the Republicans either when they claimed to have it. Is there some kind of equivalent initiation in the Republican party when a candidate runs for office with their endorsement that suggests this idea to you? I wasn’t aware of any – by either party.

    I expect Specter to make the best case he can to his constituency that he represents THEM, no one else. How well he does in his next election run depends more on that than on the support of either party outside the state of PA.

  21. Terry says:
    “The GOP was not thrilled about David Duke running as a republican.”

    Yes, I remember that. But I don’t recall that the GOP were able to stop him describing himself as a republican. Am I remembering incorrectly?

  22. I took a few minutes to look up David Duke. In his early political career, he identified himself as a democrat, but did not succeed in gaining elected office. He ran as a republican for the Louisiana House, and won over a candidate endorsed by the GOP, back in the late 1980s. He subsequently has run for a variety of offices, including president, but was repudiated by the GOP. I’m not clear if that means they were able to stop him from being listed as a republican on ballots, or if they simply just spoke out against him in counter campaigning.

  23. Kerm,

    Quite simply, I poked fun at Mitch for making the highway to hell comment with my own hyperbole – considering your propensity for expounding, I think it irony to have you lecture me on brevity or lack thereof, don’t you. I’m still not sure you get it – your response implies you don’t

    It is funny when you create your own irony.

    As for your understanding the Mephistopheles reference – again – it has to do with prefering a freedom based hell, to an authoritarian utopia. That seems to have passed you by, maybe not, but maybe you can show how your original question didn’t imply a lack of grasp of the satire AND rather than trying to cover it with insult after the fact, you can explain why you even asked the question. It was humor, my little green friend, really, in the same veign as a comment about where highways lead – and certainly far more tame and civil than suggesting any reply was a ‘liberal freak out’ – a comment which basically says ANY reply to ANY comment isn’t to be brooked because it MUST constitute a freak out – i.e. dissent isn’t tolerated, but rather put in a box only to be mocked, get it. You can say you understood that, but it doesn’t make it so.

    Further, Kerm, as far as ‘purity’ test go, John Kerry MAY have said that, but Kerry was both wrong, and the irony of having you say that given that the Republicans are FAR less tolerant – a fact Mitch has pridefully embraced about chasing the ‘Override 6’ out of the party – frankly is laughable.

    Let’s see – in today’s Republican Party you MUST be:
    1. Anti-Abortion
    2. Anti-Tax
    3. Anti-immigration
    4. Anti-welfare
    5. Pro-gun
    6. Pro-big military
    7. Anti-any regulation (that’s change only slightly recently)

    Conversely – MANY Democrats are anti-abortion, many are pretty conservative fiscally and on tax policy, etc.. in fact, one of the ways in which Repubs mock Dems is that Dems can’t get their membership to vote in lock-step the way the Repubs could (and did) especially under Tom (the Hammer) Delay.

    It is very very funny to hear you talking about how Dems require strict adherence. It points out you are either ignorant of reality about the Democratic Party, or don’t give a damn enough to speak the truth – at least relative truth – in contrast to Republicans. Specter left the Republican Party because he no longer was in alignment with where the party MOVED, not he moved.

  24. Sorry, that sentence on Kerry should have said he was both wrong, and showed his own foolishness for not following it up with, but as a contrast to Republicans, we’re the epitome’ of politial tolerance.

  25. Kermit says:
    “Which implies a quid pro quo. I simply wondered if the Donkey Party has some kind of initiation. ”

    Obama has made no secret that he is willing to give Specter an endorsement if he wants it. Some kind of initiation? I have never heard of that from either party, not sure where you got the idea.

    Clearly Specter has to concern himself with what his constituency thinks, and less with anyone else’s opinion. As I’ve written before in the context of the Franken/Coleman campaign, I’m uncomfortable with the inrush of money and influence fom outside any state, such that it alters the valid expression of what the residents of that state want. EITHER party.

  26. Doggie ponders Is there some kind of equivalent initiation in the Republican party when a candidate runs for office with their endorsement that suggests this idea to you?
    Might I suggest you pose that question to Norm Coleman?

  27. Mitch, talk to Peev. He made my brain hurt with all of that freedom based hell/authoritarian utopia stuff. Really, he pegs my satire meter.

  28. Pennsylvania is a blue state – that’s why Spector changed his spots, you idjits. You really think a hard-right wackjob like Toomey beats a sitting senator, or, if you’re right, the Democrat who unseats the Senator in a primary challenge? Good luck with that! Meanwhile could you tell your boy Coleman to stop whining to the courts already? Cause Franken makes 60.

    AC, it’s obvious that Specter changed to save his skin. All I’m arguing is that it probably won’t save him. I don’t expect Toomey to win in the general, either. What I am saying is that in the end the Democrats in Pennsylvania would rather have one of their own hold the seat than a warmed-over octogenarian. There’s no advantage to keeping Specter in the seat for them beyond this Congress. And you are right, Franken does make 60. And it also means you get what you want — complete ownership of two branches of the federal government for your party. Enjoy the poisoned chalice!

  29. As for your understanding the Mephistopheles reference – again – it has to do with prefering a freedom based hell, to an authoritarian utopia.

    In Inferno Satan is fixed waist deep in the frozen lake of Cocytus at the center of hell. He slowly, constantly, beats huge wings — symbolic of his urge to escape to a higher realm — but each beat merely blasts more icy air over the lake and freezes it harder.
    God’s spirit is that which moves but is itself unmoved. Satan’s spirit (his wings) are constantly in motion but move nothing, and his attempt to free himself only imprison him further.
    You choose an odd metaphor for freedom, peev. Paradise Lost is only an epic poem. Inferno gets the theology right.

  30. Ah, Terry, Mephisto, your literary references are a pleasant diversion here.

    The reference to Mephisopheles made me think not so much of the Inferno, but of Goethe’s Faust, Penigma / Mephisto in the role of Devil’s advocate, presenting the alternative viewpoint, even arguing against damnation.

  31. Ever notice, Dog Gone, that in the ‘Prologue in Heaven’ at the beginning of Faust, the angel Raphael’s speech can be sung to the tune of ‘ode to joy’ — and the theme is the same as “Ode to Joy”? I can’t be the first person to notice this.
    Say, if we are going to have high-falutin’ literary discussions we should see if Angry Clown would like to join in.

  32. Dog Gone On operation Chaos Open primaries allow for members of different parties to select the candidates on a parties ticket.

    It’s happened before, and will happen again that members of one party or another end up making the decision of who the opposition candidate is.

    Especially when one party isn’t giving the voters a choice on the top of the ticket. Case in point Michigan Democratic Primary 2008. Mich moved up it’s primary, DNC didn’t like it, decided not to seat the Mich delagates, and only Hillary ran. Daily Kos and others campaigned to have lefty’s vote for Romney.

    Unethical, probably, legal, yes, should we be thinking about changing our system to allow only members of a certain party vote in that parties primaries? We should at least give it a good look.

    P.S. when Republicans found out that David Duke was a member of the Klan/White Power/Nazi he was run out of the party. When Democrats found out Robert Byrd was a member of the Klan he was reelected and reelected and reelected…..

  33. “Republicans are the true closet sodomizers”

    Peev, why don’t you run along and post about sodomy on your Penisblog.

    What people do in their own bed rooms really isn’t any of my business.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.