Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Specter Joins Dems, Puts Party on the Spot
For almost a generation, the Democrats in Congress have been able to pretend to be the party of ordinary working people, the party of progressives, and the inheritor of the mantel of Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal, all the while doing little of substance and catering primarily to the interests of Wall Street and the nation's corporate interests.
The Democrats managed this sleight of hand for so long by claiming that while they had the best of intentions, really, in the form of their inability to pass legislation, even when they were in the majority in both houses of Congress, that could avoid being filibustered to death by a Republican minority.
That situation has continued to this day, with the party currently having 58 seats in the Senate.
It appears likely that Al Franken has won his tight race defeating former Sen. Norm Coleman in Minnesota, with the contest all over but the shouting. (A 3-judge state panel already found Franken to be ahead by 312 votes, with no outstanding issues in the count, and public opinion in the state widely favors Coleman finally conceding.)
And now comes the changeling Arlen Specter, the onetime Democratic district attorney of Philadelphia, who switched to a Republican to run for the US Senate and has held that state's senior senator position now for 29 years. But facing likely defeat from the right in a Republican primary for his party's nomination by a conservative challenger who almost knocked him off last time around, Specter has finally faced reality: In a state that has been moving steadily into the Democratic column for years, his future is with the Democrats.
With Specter switching his party affiliation to Democrat, the Democrats will finally have a filibuster-proof 60-seat majority in the Senate, and an already solid majority in the House.
There will, at that point, be no more excuse for Democrats to duck progressive, liberal, pro-worker, pro-ordinary person issues, using their old-standby excuse of needing to compromise and win over Republican votes. There won't even be any need to cater to party turncoat Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) to get things done. For that matter, there won't be any justification for President Obama to seek "bi-partisanship" for his programs.
So the way I see it, it's time for progressives, for the union movement, for the peace movement, for the environmentalist movement, the single-payer health care reform movement, indeed for all progressive elements in the US, to pour on the pressure to get Congress and President Obama to pass real, progressive legislation in this Congress.
`We don't need no effin "bipartisanship" anymore. The Republicans can just be steamrollered--and should be, since that's exactly why there are so many Democrats in Congress and why we have a Democratic president.
Now granted, not all Democrats are progressive, but getting Democrats on board for issues like overriding a filibuster attempt is different from getting Democrats to vote for a particular bill. The party leaders have plenty of leverage in the form of control over the moving forward of members' bills, of committee assignments, office assignments, etc., to get members of the caucus to line up on procedural votes like terminating a filibuster, if they want to use them.
And of course, that's where the pressure comes in. No longer can Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) claim that they are hamstrung by the need to win over Republican members to their side. If they don't use their caucus power to control their own members, they will stand exposed as fake liberals, and fake advocates of ordinary Americans. They will stand exposed as agents of the corporatocracy.
Maybe that's what they want, but I don't think the party will survive that kind of exposure.
So let's get moving. We can start with renewed pressure for single-payer healthcare reform, passage of the Employee Free Choice Act and a real end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. These are litmus test issues for progressives and will let us know if the Democrats are going to keep being the other corporate party, or are going to be a real liberal alternative.
The Employee Free Choice Act will be an interesting one to watch in Specter's case. Specter, who has long enjoyed union backing in Pennsylvania, a few weeks ago said that after earlier backing the measure he was now not going to support it. But that was when he was facing a bitter Republican primary. Now he has to earn his spurs as a prodigal Democrat, returned to the fold. Unions in Pennsylvania are going to put heavy pressure on him to back the measure if he wants to avoid a primary now in the Democratic Party for nomination as its candidate for Senate next year.
- Posted in
52 Comments so far
Show AllSpecter lost me with the magic bullet. How ironic that he's now joining the party of JFK, whose murder conspiracy he aided after the fact.
Self-aggrandizement is Specter's road game, and nothing he says should be taken at face value. Jon Stewart distilled his motivation perfectly last night: "I really like my job."
Very true. And that makes him different from the rest of the Senate how?
The point is not whether Specter is a good guy, a sincere person, a real Democrat, a liberal or anything. It's that he is now in a Democratic caucus that, once Franken is also on board, simply no longer has an excuse (nor does Obama) for sell-out legislation.
Democrats here in PA should not give Specter a free ride to election as a Democratic Senator in 2010, either. There should be a primary, with someone well to the left of Specter running against him.
Specter should have to prove his bonafides by reversing himself (again) and backing the Employee Free Choice Act, and by supporting single-payer health reform, among other things.
Visit Dave Lindorff's website at www.thiscantbehappening.net
Specter is nothing but a political opportunist. Either primary him or replace him with a progressive independent. He's not to be trusted.
Oh, and by the way, now the Democrats will be unable to invent silly excuses about the GOP filibustering them. They got their 60 so now either they get down to it and take their chances or sent packing. NO MORE EXCUSES !
They probably are betting that he won't serve out the full six years if elected. Then Rendell becomes king-maker.
There is a lot of chatter about the shrinking Republican party and its increasingly irrelevant clulessness, but if the Democrats have the presidency, both houses- now with that majority number, what happens if they can't achieve anything? They will claim that the blue dogs will tie their hands, but they can whip them in line if they so choose...no funds for the district, no election funds, no committees.
"They will stand exposed as agents of the corporatocracy.
Maybe that's what they want, but I don't think the party will survive that kind of exposure"
One party gains favor after the other one proves a failure and they switch back and forth--a continual vote against- preserves the status quo and insures lack of disruption while maintaining the illusion of change. But the forces at play will eventually run everything down regardless of party identity.
Despite Obama's timid moves and continuation of Bush policies--with just a Clintonian change in the language, people are still limited to celebrating the fact that he is not Bush. That buys Obama more time to tread water.
According to the latest polling data, Specter was headed for a crushing defeat in the Republican primary and is simply trying to hang on to his job by switching parties. I hope he loses the Democrat primary also.
We have too many career politicians who feel entitled to a seat in Congress and whose first priority is get re-elected.
Specter was always an unreliable Republican and the Dems are going to find him an unreliable Democrat.
Specter's switch was due in part that his fellow GOPers did not think that he was "conservative"(extremist) enough. The other part, with sure defeat in the primary by Toomer, Specter did what was best for Specter.
FINALLY ! Mr. Lindoff gets it straight and is finally ready to come clean and say NO MORE EXCUSES ! NO MORE EXCUSES ! For once, a very well thought article reflecting reality. I still think Specter needs to be primaried as he's still not one to trust. Then again, what about Bob Casey?
Finally? What do you read?
At any rate, thanks for the comment. I agree, someone well to the left of Specter should challenge him for the Democratic nomination. He shouldn't get a free ride, he shouldn't be allowed to run on the same positions he has been espousing and voting for as a Republican "moderate" and he should have to pass some key litmus tests, such as backing single payer health reform, and the Employee Free Choice Act.
Visit Dave Lindorff's website at www.thiscantbehappening.net
Yeah, who needs Republicans (to blame) when you can use "Democrats" to make the bills toothless. Maybe more Republicans will see the writing on the wall and jump ship-it is a win-win for the Republicans and the Democrats won't have to worry about actually being held accountable.
-Maybe more Republicans will see the writing on the wall and jump ship-it is a win-win for the Republicans and the Democrats won't have to worry about actually being held accountable.
I was thinking about something similar. Why don't all the Republicans join the Democrats, then they, with the conservative Democrats, will have the majority?
All this means is the Democrats moving more to the RIGHT and marginalizing any true progressives under her banner.
This same thing happened in Canada when the Progressive Conservatives merged with Reform. The progressives in the Conservative party were marginalized and the party shifted to the right overall.
Meanwhile the old Liberal party moved even further to the right in order to gather up the Moderates that were once Progressive Conservatives.
This demonstrates that the real distinctions between the parties are minimal.
Thank you, thank you, thank you. Those were some of my sentiments exactly. I don't view this as anything to get excited about. Specter did this for POLITICAL purposes only. He was afraid he was going to lose his job next election and this was his best play to try and keep it.
I don't expect this to change ANYTHING about the way the Democrats act. The Democrats are the party of EXCUSES no matter if they're the minority party or the majority party. The Democrats will always find a way to 'f*$^ up a wet dream' - pardon my crudeness but it certainly makes the point. The Democrats also always find a way to serve their corporate masters, not much different than the Republicans on this one. In many ways, the Republicans serve their constituency much better than the Democrats. During Clinton, when Republican citizens were crying for impeachment the Republican party in Congress was extremely happy to oblige them. However, when the Democrats won the majority and vast numbers of both Democrat and Independent citizens were crying for impeachment, Nancy Pants couldn't utter the words 'impeachment is off the table' fast enough. Don't expect anything from them and you won't be disappointed.
'Don't get fooled again' - Pete Townsend
GwNorth: Unfortunately, I think you are right. Many Democrats voted for Bush's invasion of Iraq, which is a major contributor to the economic downfall of our country; I am not holding my breath for single payer (I'm losing it) more green jobs, or massive unionization. On another website, one author wrote, "we have one political party with two right wings." I sure hope that he is wrong, but he might not be.
Certainly don't hold your breath for single payer, Obama has already taken that off the table. The Dems will give us MANDATORY HEALTH INSURANCE as opposed to universal health care. There's no $$$ in health care but there's big $$$ in health insurance.
'Don't get fooled again' - Pete Townsend
"MANDATORY HEALTH INSURANCE" ? Isn't that what they do in MA ? If that's the case, no wonder my conservative parents will never stop calling MA "Taxachussetts". Why would even the most liberal pols in that state stoop to such an idea?
Mandatory Health Insurance is exactly what we have in MA.
As to Taxachussetts, that's a misnomer. If you look it up, MA ranks 41 or 42 in total tax burden. I know, I couldn't believe it either.
'Don't get fooled again' - Pete Townsend
I'll try not to call MA that name but if one's paying more taxes only to see them go to the Big Insurance companies, I can see why some people might call it that. My parents, despite their strong conservatism, surprisingly have a softheart for single payer healthcare and seriously wished that their small town and the surrounding ones in southwest MO could have single payer in play. They used to oppose it but my mother and then my father had second thoughts after watching my cousin nearly losing his life to an illness helplessly and unemployed because he had no insurance of his own.
My guess is since they couldn't get their hands on our SS they will be hustling big time to open the floodgates of "mandatory" coverage. It will be the next bubble.
Interesting about your folks--funny what personal experience can do. With Gays living more openly, many families now realize how important their rights as fellow citizens are and state by state, Gays are winning their rights. Perhaps that is the route single payer could succeed--state by state.
I wonder if he regrets giving us Thomas and Alito?
" . . . they will stand exposed as fake liberals, and fake advocates of ordinary Americans. They will stand exposed as agents of the corporatocracy.
Maybe that's what they want, but I don't think the party will survive that kind of exposure."
They think it can.
And now comes the Changeling Lindroff, a hundred days later, acknowledging that the Dem party is not the champion of working class America after all... What makes you think that Spectre would stay true to the Dems after switching parties twice? What makes you think Lieberman will vote with the dems after switching to independent when losing the primaries, and then campaigning for McCain...? So Mr. Lindroff, once the Dems have that filibuster proof majority in house, senate, and the white house, and they still dont pass legislation for more humane domestic and foreign policies, what will you do then...? Support third party candidates...? Support instant run off voting? Or claim that we need to elect even more democrats to office to counter the Blue Dog voting bloc...?
Mid term elections are just around the corner...
When it comes to 3rd parties, Mr. Lindroff insists that they're a waste of votes. He'll preach mass movements but never acknowledge the mere fact that supporting 3rd parties is a mass movement in itself. Usually his articles reek of DPA (Democrat Party Apologists) and make me laugh so hard until I almost wet myself. He can be such a trip all too often. :)
Sometimes when you get a little drunk at a party you can move from the living room to the patio and actually think you're at a different party.
Specter has been infected with the "Donkey" flue,
which is known to change elephants (R) into a$$es (D).
( Thanks to Stephen Colbert )
Namaste
"The Republicans can just be steamrollered--and should be, since that's exactly why there are so many Democrats in Congress and why we have a Democratic president."
Dave is reading like a true far-lefter until this quote which needs a little tweaking: "The Republicans can just be steamrollered--and should be, since that's exactly what they did to the people, and the planet, during their six year party monopoly over the executive and the congress"
Steamroll them. Not because we far-lefters hold fiery contempt for them, and seek fiery venegeance. Some of us do, but we're able to control that, easily, because we know right from wrong. No, the crucial reason that the Repuks need to be steamrolled is a law of nature that applies to the unique genetic line that evolved to have a conscience, but defies it systematically. Lke the great majority of the animal kingdom, the Repuks are purely focused on serving themselves at the expense of all others, so the only thing they understand is the steamroller.
The rest of the animal kingdom gets a pass, becuse it doesn't have a conscience, or are non-participants in our society, out of our jurisdiction. But the Repuks have a conscience, have pledged the oath, have a responsibility, and yet they have chucked all of that, and laid seige to our government, and the rule of law, causing massive damage. This based on a freaky evil ethic of "might makes right", "rule by the sword". There is only one way to teach them a lesson, which they themselves will be the first to acknowledge: Steamroll them. And we on the far left say steamroll them very good, so our fledgling socialist movement can gain a toehold.
Oregoncharles
Don't be so sure Specter will make a difference. The two-party strategists have got the voters where they want them and will manage to retain the advantage over We The People, no matter what. How do I know this? Years and years of listening and watching progressive voters, anti-war voters, being jerked around, shoved into the sheeple pen over and over again. the Democrats NEVER become more progressive but just the opposite, they have moved to the right.
It's like watching the movie Groundhog Day. Or Mars Attack. Aliens: "Fear not, we come in peace!" (after three or four brutal attacks) People: "Gee, I think they really mean it this time. Let's invite them in." Boom boom, zap zap! (wrong again.) But no learned lesson. They just follow Dems around, wherever they take them, as if they had no choice in the matter.
BAIL FROM THIS SOLD OUT PARTY before it's too late. Start supporting people with a conscience. Ralph Nader's candidacy brought 10,000 people to Portland, Oregon in 2000. It was a jam-packed to capacity auditorium, bristling with energy and conviction. ... and then Gore "lost." Nader was blamed, maligned, marginalized, turned into a pariah. Many on the left were the worst. It was quite ugly. Obama won't get that kind of treatment. Why? Because 80% of people have been found - by reputable, repeated psychological studies - to be obsequious to power. Nader has no power and so is easy kickin'. Political parties have strategist who know this and work with it. Obama! Will he give us a little crumb today? oh look, a little-bitty crumb for us .....
Wars in the Middle East will not end. In fact, many progressives are IN FAVOR of the AfPak wars! Can you believe it? Farewell Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney, and all those who thought 2000 would be a seminal year for progressives, for decency. We were far ahead of our time. And anyway, there are only 20% of us who can think outside the pen.
Specter will make a difference, he will help shift the Democrats even more to the right.
And yes, I was getting flipped off for 4 years for my Nader 2000 bumper sticker (which I refused to take off my car). Even here on CD I was getting reamed for "contributing" to the Bush win - even 8 years later. Logic had nothing to do with it. The fact that Bush got 10x the votes from Democrats as Nader meant nothing to them. I think these people just needed a scapegoat.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
"And yes, I was getting flipped off for 4 years for my Nader 2000 bumper sticker (which I refused to take off my car). Even here on CD I was getting reamed for "contributing" to the Bush win - even 8 years later."
Interesting. I know CD has some die-hards who do that but it's usually not as bad. I tell you blaming Nader for contributing to Bush win has been thoroughly disproven but those folks will never hesitate to keep blaming Nader. HuffingtonPost and Dailykos are the worst places to be at. Alternet is divided but Truthdig and even CD at least for now isn't so bad. I did hear rumours that CD banned people around election day for not supporting Obama. If they did, I think they finally eased up on it.
"And yes, I was getting flipped off for 4 years for my Nader 2000 bumper sticker (which I refused to take off my car). Even here on CD I was getting reamed for "contributing" to the Bush win - even 8 years later. Logic had nothing to do with it. The fact that Bush got 10x the votes from Democrats as Nader meant nothing to them. I think these people just needed a scapegoat."
Personally, I blame Al Gore for blowing it for Nader. If it wasn't for Gore, Nader would have won. Gore, on the other hand, didn't stand a chance in hell.
'Don't get fooled again' - Pete Townsend
I would also say that regardless of Specter switching, the Democrats would have done the same with or without Specter. Now that they are about to have a filibuster proof Senate, some of them might even desperately do what they can to bring back Norm Coleman though that would most likely fail. If the 1960s were any clue, the Democrats will be free to openly divide amongst themselves and will often find themselves unexpectedly begging for Republican votes even on policies that are pro-liberal similar to the way LBJ had to beg the Republicans from the Northeast to counteract the Dixiecrats from the South. However, I think that it will likely get worse. Just this year alone, Obama and the Democrats were able to put a positive spin on their "stimulus" plan which was no different from Dubya's tax cuts for the wealthy/corporate elite package. If this is any clue, the current Democratic Party has developed just as powerful a faux populist strategy to defend the corporate elite much like the Republicans using faux cultural "populism" to keep the public distracted from the corporate goons being defended by the same phoney culture "populists".
You're funny, powerfully_true. And most of those Blue Dog Democrats are former Republicans. I can well believe the the Senate Election Committee will protect Specter from any progressive Democrat in the primary. They are brutal at stamping out progressive challenges from the left.
I've been a third party voter for many decades, although I made a decision to support a Democrat this time around, and taken a lot of shit for it. It may be that it just doesn't matter who I vote for - Nader, Obama, Joe Blow, nothing is going to change unless the public wakes up.
As far as third party mass movements or large popular support for Single Payer, that's a crock. Third parties get less than 5% of the vote and that hasn't changed over all these decades. The vast majority of the public has swallowed the corporate lies about Single Payer and is clueless about how it works. They do support the idea of unions, but are terrified of trying to start one - with good reason, and haven't heard of the EFCA, not a word. That's who we're working with. Not to mention that they are overworked, stressed out and scared of their own shadows. All they want to do after work is crawl into their hole and block out the world. The corporations have them where they want them. Great.
I'm only one person. Everyone I tell about single Payer or EFCA and send to CommonDreams, I urge to pass it on. I mostly talk to young people. They are enthusiastic and grateful to find out how to get informed. It's easy for me to chat with strangers and I do. But it horrifies me that I have to do this in progressive Eugene. What chance do we have if one of the most liberal cities in the country is so ignorant?
And Dave, I always appreciate your articles.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
"What chance do we have if one of the most liberal cities in the country is so ignorant? "
Excellent question. The truth is that even in the most conservative rural counties and I've been to them, it is actually possible to convince more voters to think liberally. Right now, opposition to single payer comes from both very conservative areas and even amongst the liberals but for totally different reasons. The conservatives are just plain opposed and have been trained and brainwashed into accepting nurturing ideas other than ones that help their enemies such as the monied elites. The other side is under the wrong assumption that delivering single payer means losing the "center" when in fact more independents and moderates are strongly in favor of the idea. The fear of losing needs to be overcome and I think that getting more people informed will eventually lessen that fear in the long run.
I've found a few of even the most conservative folks opening their hearts and minds to the idea of single payer healthcare and even EFCA. It's just that one has to be more thorough about it. Let's say you're in rural OR and that area is heavily Republican. Don't mention a candidate's name. First, see their take on the issues and do it in a non-political tone. Once you figure out who stands and where, then introduce them to a candidate who shares those views but do not give out the name yet. There will be some riff-raff such as trying not to prevent them from getting into social issues but don't fall into that temptation. Case in point. I go to rural TX and visit a distant relative. Uncle Bob has no support for gun control or abortion and will not stop railing against it no matter how irritating he gets. However, he is strongly in favor of saving small family farms, wants healthcare reform for all, and is disgusted with the wars for oil and can be convinced into trying out solar and wind energy. Motivate him on those issues and before I know it he sounds far less rightwingish. That's how one builds progressive and liberal support. Don't worry about the social issues. They'll be resolved eventually.
Now getting back to even the most liberal cities, you and I will find ourselves most likely to do the same thing. Like St Louis, I'm afraid Eugene cannot be taken for granted. The long term problem is that it is always assumed and confirmed that big cities vote blue while rural areas vote red with suburban as swing. This is a dangerous assumption which must stop. The Democrats are making a grave mistake of writing off the rural lands and relying too much on the urban cities and then pandering this way and that in the suburbs. Another dangerous assumption is the fear of suddenly losing if they deliver. There needs to be a mechanism for the rank and file to overcome their insecure feeling of losing if they don't capitulate.
Excellent analysis. You know, I've been watching these major liberal sites trashing red states like crazy and as an OK Liberal, I'm sick of it. There's a lot more working class liberalism out in rural America than most city people realize. The assumption that "if you can't win in even a liberal city then you can't win in a rural town" is completely off base. The only reason Eugene and St Louis are liberal is there's always a social issues litmus test for Democrats. It's really social-only liberalism in the urban areas. All the time there are silly questions about support for abortion and affirmative action. Abortion I could care less about as it's a topic that has no place in politics although I personally don't believe government has the right to decide whether or not the woman can have an abortion. Affirmative action can safely be retired since Obama made it on his own and didn't need affirmative action. The same with most minorities and women. I don't support racism whatsoever but affirmative action is outdated and deserves to be abolished as we'll still maintain equality regardless of race and gender. There is a lot of support for single payer healthcare but the voters are trained to look at it in a negative manner out here in rural OK. I'll bet that the number of people in Eugene, OR and St Louis, MO who are against single payer are greater than the populations of rural OR and rural MO respectively. Single payer healthcare would put a rest to issues such as abortion and affirmative action because everyone would have equal access to basic healthcare. No more gender or race discriminations either. Thank you for showing your compassion and understanding of the rural population. We're not as stupid as some people make us out to be.
Ah yes. Social issues that do not concern you, since you are neither a woman or a minority, you don't care about, and blithely dismiss.
Specter will not support even a back door single payer option and has already said he thinks that employee free choice is to disruptive to business. The only option is to run against him in the primary--run against the Democratic machine. When you see its warts and smell its bad breath--it shouldn't be too hard to look good by comparison.
"getting Democrats on board for issues like overriding a filibuster attempt is different from getting Democrats to vote for a particular bill"
This is a perfect illustration why the Demok party has to undergo a major purge if it is ever to serve the public interest. In its current makeup, it has no conviction to filibuster. It has no conviction to do anything, except hold down the fort for the Repuks while they recover from battle in the military hospital. We don't need any of these chimps. Weaken both parties and let them collapse down into one. We on the far left are building the people's party, and it will probably be dominant if we keep this stupid two-party system.
The people's party charter will consist of four items:
1- champion the truth
2- serve the public interests
3- do no harm (except to organized evil)
4- suppress organized evil, i.e.
the elite masters of current Demoks/Repuks
Sound like a plan?
"they will stand exposed as fake liberals, and fake advocates of ordinary Americans. They will stand exposed as agents of the corporatocracy. Maybe that's what they want, but I don't think the party will survive that kind of exposure"
The Demoks already stand exposed as such. And now the people are coming to realize it doesn't fly. Both parties are now politically bankrupt and unlikely to survive in their present makeup. Victims of hubris. If the chimps want to keep the current structure they will have to start setting policy from the good side of human nature, ASAP.
Well said, rtdrudy...
Specter is a Trojan Horse.
Forget the democrats. Trust only Nader and whoever he backs.
Yup, you bet. Except Nader will never, ever be POTUS. He has no idea of how to run a campaign, and could never govern. Obama, however, can do both very well.
Real change in done in incremental steps, and after the 1st hundred days, Obama has showed his ability to get things moving in a different direction. There is always the necessity for vigilance, but please find someone besides Nader to champion. He is just so not 2009.
When all is said and done, Nader will have accomplished more profound change and instituted policy than Obama can ever hope to accomplish with his Clintonian approach which will only serve to lose ground. It was not Obama's courage--as they are spouting, but the ACLU freedom of information case that forced Obama to release the torture memos. And you have Nader to thank for the freedom of information act.
I'm not sure how I feel about this, being from Philadelphia, and at this point in my life, not trusting anyone's political or power grabbing motivations or otherwise.
However, a good litmus test might be my mother, a raging Republican who has no clue (like most raging Republicans). She has been caterwauling against Specter for some time and that must be a good thing.
Another good thing is that once more I'm totally impressed with Dave Lindorff's assessment of the situation. Thanks, Dave.
The controllers of the Democratic Party do not want too much change in governance that what was offered by the Republican Party, which they also control.
Gee sneaker,is that why it's so hard to tell Democrats from Republicans?
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
Arlen Specter: Poster boy for every conceivable reason for term limits while standing for exactly everything that is wrong with US politics. Here we basically have a broken down politician who after years of collecting paychecks for dismantling our constitution law by law, looked in a mirror one day and saw a tired used-up lock-step republican who had beat cancer, is now one day older than dirt and has no plans to take his senile mind and retire it for any remaining above ground years, after which he thought through what is left of his mind and said, “damn the retirement, let me see what kind of shenanigans I can get caught up in across the aisle before super majority democrats self implode from attention deficit disorder and I can collapse as always intended on the senate floor”.
Having been 'represented' by Arlen Specter my entire adult life, I finally see him for who he is.
His entire career has been motivated by winning elections, nothing more than that.
Retire already would you?
Write a book explaing that one bullet theory again, explain the Anita Hill fiasco...explain voting for wars, bailouts, suspension of habeus corpus and other stateman like endevours.
Better yet, go on the speech circuit because your most annoying compulsion is listening to yourself talk.
Your news announcement yesterday made me sick.
How many pensions are you entitled to already????
Retire, resign !!!
Oh wait what a sweetheart deal you must have made with those other clowns, Biden and Rendell, and Obama. Jockeying for Sentate Appropriations committee chair are you?
RETIRE !
Dave,
What a well written piece! It is exactly what it looks like-an opportunity to test the Democrats to see if they are anything other than shills for the corporate bastards and Israel. My guess is that they will fail miserably.
From listening to the Democrats over the past eight years, one could get the impression that the Constitution sets different vote thresholds for Democratic and Republican Senate majorities.
When the Republicans had more than 50 Senators, the Democrats would say "Don't blame us. We're totally helpless, because the Republicans have a majority." This was even said when many of them were voting for the Bush agenda.
When the Democrats had more than 50 Senators, they would say "Don't blame us. We're totally helpless, because we don't have a filibuster-proof majority."
VAGreen, so what's going to be their next excuse?
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
This is exactly why I proudly voted 3rd party these last 8 years. If the 1960s are any indication, what we are about to see are a similar brand of Dixiecrats except that the Blue Dog gang will be their equivilant without the race card doing everything they can to make backdoor deals with the Republicans. The rest of the party, embarrased as they will be, will try to invent an excuse and even blame the Republicans but it will most likely backfire because this time, no excuses. If the Democrats cannot be courageous, then we might as well be stuck with Republicans and get our country the hell over with it. I strongly recommend all the braveheart progressives/liberals in the Democratic Party to either work on primarying the traitors or form a progressive independent party and help the local and state pols out.