"We Didn't Have to Lose Arlen Specter"

[Believer1997]

Uh .... how old was Strom Thurmond, Robert Byrd????

[georgesbluegirl]

I don't think Spector's decision to change parties was the result of soul searching, lack of inclusiveness or any of that bilge that's being pumped out of his office....I believe, much like the proverbial rat, he believes he's jumping off a sinking ship. It's all about staying in office. Unfortunately, for him, I don't think he'll be relected no matter what he does.

I mean, he's being pretty frank that his immediate reason is the primary situation. However, two things -- one, Biden's been working on Specter literally for years; apparently they've had the conversation about his possible switch; two, what does Snowe have to gain by saying something like this unless she wants to make a legitimate point from her corner? She's not beholden to him in terms of PR; she's a GOP moderate watching the ideological diversity within her party shrink day by day, and she sees Specter's defection -- and part of that IS his inability to win a GOP primary in PA -- as a real problem.

Olympia Snowe has nothing to gain by making these observations. I don't fault Spector for switching parties either; he's akin to the subway passenger who suddenly realizes, at seven a.m., that he's on the express to the north side of the city and he works on the south side. I do NOT want to hear the press conference angst from him concerning his decision though. Just GO already. He's nearly 80; how much longer can he eat from the public trough anyway?

First rule of politics -- nobody does anything unless they have something to gain.

[MorningGlory]

Uh .... how old was Strom Thurmond, Robert Byrd????

Here's the bio on Robert Byrd, in the Senate for 50 years! Note that this bio doesn't mention the fact that he once belonged to the KKK! (Which should disqualify ANYONE from holding federal office.)

http

://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodi...?index=B001210

Excerpt from the bio of the late Strom Thurmond.....(Congress.gov)

John "Strom" Thurmond (1902-2002) turned 100 years old on December 5, 2002 while still in office, thus becoming the oldest person ever to serve in the U.S. Senate. He died in Edgefield, S.C. on June 26th, 2003; interred at Willowbrook Cemetery in Edgefield.

It doesn't say if he was still in office when he passed away ...... he served in Congress for over 60 years.

[Matthitjah]

I'll tell ya what! Snow and Collins can go with Spector, Good Riddance!

[Believer1997]

Uh .... how old was Strom Thurmond, Robert Byrd????

Here's the bio on Robert Byrd, in the Senate for 50 years! Note that this bio doesn't mention the fact that he once belonged to the KKK! (Which should disqualify ANYONE from holding federal office.)

http

://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodi...?index=B001210

Excerpt from the bio of the late Strom Thurmond.....(Congress.gov)

John "Strom" Thurmond (1902-2002) turned 100 years old on December 5, 2002 while still in office, thus becoming the oldest person ever to serve in the U.S. Senate. He died in Edgefield, S.C. on June 26th, 2003; interred at Willowbrook Cemetery in Edgefield.

It doesn't say if he was still in office when he passed away ...... he served in Congress for over 60 years.

Quite a few of our elder statesmen served in the KKK .... sadly. My point is they should have been gone years ago....

[MorningGlory]

Uh .... how old was Strom Thurmond, Robert Byrd????

Here's the bio on Robert Byrd, in the Senate for 50 years! Note that this bio doesn't mention the fact that he once belonged to the KKK! (Which should disqualify ANYONE from holding federal office.)

http

://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodi...?index=B001210

Excerpt from the bio of the late Strom Thurmond.....(Congress.gov)

John "Strom" Thurmond (1902-2002) turned 100 years old on December 5, 2002 while still in office, thus becoming the oldest person ever to serve in the U.S. Senate. He died in Edgefield, S.C. on June 26th, 2003; interred at Willowbrook Cemetery in Edgefield.

It doesn't say if he was still in office when he passed away ...... he served in Congress for over 60 years.

Quite a few of our elder statesmen served in the KKK .... sadly. My point is they should have been gone years ago....

[georgedrw81]

Politicians have allways one thing in mind - to be in office as long as possible

[Axxman]

So we have a traitor standing up for a fellow traitor. Who cares what she has to say...she's just another Dem in waiting.

Her line about diversity at the end....

Why is it that repubs always have to have diversity? The dems don't have to have diversity. The dems are perfect, they never have to change anything...but the repubs are always painted as the one's who need to change. The democrats can call us terrorists for going to church, believing in the Constitution, and having a gun...but we need to be more diverse??? What a joke!

[Guest Butero]

I don't think Spector's decision to change parties was the result of soul searching, lack of inclusiveness or any of that bilge that's being pumped out of his office....I believe, much like the proverbial rat, he believes he's jumping off a sinking ship. It's all about staying in office. Unfortunately, for him, I don't think he'll be relected no matter what he does.

I mean, he's being pretty frank that his immediate reason is the primary situation. However, two things -- one, Biden's been working on Specter literally for years; apparently they've had the conversation about his possible switch; two, what does Snowe have to gain by saying something like this unless she wants to make a legitimate point from her corner? She's not beholden to him in terms of PR; she's a GOP moderate watching the ideological diversity within her party shrink day by day, and she sees Specter's defection -- and part of that IS his inability to win a GOP primary in PA -- as a real problem.

This situation is no differen't than what happened to Lieberman in Conneticuit. The Democratic Party had moved so far to the extreme left wing, they abandoned Lieberman who was slightly to the right of a socialist and went with someone else in the primary. The political landscape was somewhat differen't where he is, so it made more sense for him to become an Independent than to switch parties, so that is what he did. The only other difference is that Lieberman tried his luck in the primary first before making a move. If someone wants to make the point about the GOP going hard right, I can just as easily make the same point about how the Democrats have gotten so hard left, there is no room for a moderate in their party.

What is Snowe's concern? She is similar to Spectre, and since she has many things in common with him, she is sorry he is leaving her political party. I can tell you this. There are more moderates in the Republican Party than there are in the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is made up of extreme liberals and even Socialists, especially in the Senate, and it is nearly impossible for a moderate to be elected in their party. The closest thing to a moderate you will find is someone like Mary Landreu, and she is pretty liberal. The Republicans are far more open to diverse opinions than the Democrats are. That is why this kind of argument from the left is so laughable to me. Liberal Democrats tell Republicans how they need to move to the center, yet they stay to the hard left.

[Guest Butero]

I don't think Spector's decision to change parties was the result of soul searching, lack of inclusiveness or any of that bilge that's being pumped out of his office....I believe, much like the proverbial rat, he believes he's jumping off a sinking ship. It's all about staying in office. Unfortunately, for him, I don't think he'll be relected no matter what he does.

I mean, he's being pretty frank that his immediate reason is the primary situation. However, two things -- one, Biden's been working on Specter literally for years; apparently they've had the conversation about his possible switch; two, what does Snowe have to gain by saying something like this unless she wants to make a legitimate point from her corner? She's not beholden to him in terms of PR; she's a GOP moderate watching the ideological diversity within her party shrink day by day, and she sees Specter's defection -- and part of that IS his inability to win a GOP primary in PA -- as a real problem.

Olympia Snowe has nothing to gain by making these observations. I don't fault Spector for switching parties either; he's akin to the subway passenger who suddenly realizes, at seven a.m., that he's on the express to the north side of the city and he works on the south side. I do NOT want to hear the press conference angst from him concerning his decision though. Just GO already. He's nearly 80; how much longer can he eat from the public trough anyway?

First rule of politics -- nobody does anything unless they have something to gain.

She does have something to gain in keeping people like Spectre in the party. While Snowe, Collins and Spectre are all liberal, they are all slightly to the right of the most conservative Democrats. They also like being free to take positions that rock the boat. They can get away with that in the Republican Party, but not in the Democratic Party. Just look at Lieberman. Spectre would have prefered to remain a Republican because it makes him look important. When he voted liberal, it was an attention grabber, but if he votes liberal among liberals, he is just one of the herd. If he votes conservative among the liberals, he will find himself in the same place of Lieberman, so he will be forced to tow the liberal party line, or else.

Olympia Snowe likes to be able to be independent. She likes to vote liberal most of the time, but in some cases, she likes the freedom to vote conservative. As a Republican in Maine, she can pretty much do that. I don't even think she will find herself in trouble. She is loosing a like minded individual, and is mourning the loss. He is a long time colleague of hers. This is not that hard to understand. But like most liberal Democrats, you are not looking at this objectively. You don't see your own party as the left-wing extremists they are, so you don't see the high level of intollerance to opposing views they hold.

You called this a "terrific editorial." You know what would make an even better one? An editorial with the title, "The Democrats Didn't Have To Lose Joseph Lieberman." In the body of the article, we could talk about the high level of intollerance by the hard left that has taken over the party of J.F.K.