Wednesday, April 29, 2009

The Spectre of Specter

I usually don't do this, but I really want to direct you all to one of the other blogs I contribute to. There is a great ongoing debate on Arlen Specter going on over at - and I am course am contributing. Normally, I would cross-post rather than link - but in this case there is an ongoing, multi-player dialogue, and there really is no way to get a feel for it with out keeping up with all of the players.


  1. Tell you how insignificant this really was: This was news????????????????? I mean Benedict Arlen was one of the Three Stimulus Stooges,
    not to mention that his attacks on Toomey (who hadn't even officially declared yet) were something out of the Axelrod/Carville playbook, so he might as well make it official.

    Wasn't Specter the rodent who started the whole faux NSA outrage (among other things) in the first place? This was after Bush actually supported Specter (stupid move at the time, even dumber in retrospect) in his re-election mind you. Good riddance.

    I can't help but draw comparisons between the GOP and the 2008 Seattle Mariners, currently in first place in the AL West (which won't last but that's a different story). The GOP would be best-served to purge those responsible for their weak standing just as the Mariners did. Unfortunately that's not going to happen anytime soon, because it's all about winning elections, damn principles.

    Regardless, no loss here. I snuck a peek (yes I had to brave the water) at K's blog, he's not even that thrilled with it, although being a true-blue liberal he did manage to work it in in Obamesque/TO "I WON" style.

  2. When does Snow and the other RINO Senator come up for election? It will be up to the Courts (Coleman/Fanken) if the Dems get thier Fillibuster proof 60 votes.

  3. Well, Caribou Susie just won re-election, and Snowe-job isn't up until 2012, so we got a while.

    These "conservatives" who are bemoaning the fact that Specter and the RINO gang could have saved us are under the impression he actually WAS doing so.

    You know what? LET them have their supermajority (esp if all we got as our last line of defense are weaklings). That way, they truly own this mess. It won't last because, like the Detroit Lions with a 20-point fourth quarter lead, they have no clue what to do with it. Doesn't reflect well on the GOP by a longshot that we need Dems to implode again (and they will do it), but unfortunately, it is what it is.

  4. "I snuck a peek (yes I had to brave the water) at K's blog, he's not even that thrilled with it, although being a true-blue liberal he did manage to work it in in Obamesque/TO "I WON" style."

    And I thought that was pretty good entry! It was mostly about art and music. Anyway, my natural inclination is to be suspicious of turncoats. I figure that if they'll do it once, they'll do it again.

    Here's a summary of individual senate voting records as rated by liberal interest groups. Specter's ratings range from 36% (ACLU) to 100% (NARAL); in between, his ratings range from 41% (Service Employees International Union) to 73% (NAACP).

    By these lights, Specter can argue persuasively that he is a moderate. Out of the entire Senate, these ratings suggest that there were a dozen moderates in the 2007-08 body, six on each side. Coleman and Smith were running for their lives, though, and moderated their records to no avail. So call it ten, as both of them will be replaced by liberals anyway. With Specter's defection, the number of Republican moderates is down to three: Collins, Snowe, and Lugar.

    In the end, it comes down to how one qualifies the ratings. Conservatives no doubt view Specter's 100% rating from NARAL as suspiciously as liberals look at his 41% rating from SEIU.

  5. For some reason, my link to the voting summary didn't take. Here it is: