1. Why are you celebrating Specter’s defection while championing Norm Coleman, who was ranked just as moderate as Specter in the National Journal’s 2007 rankings?
2. Are you aware that the ladies from Maine got more cut from the stimulus bill than any of the efforts of the likes of Jim DeMint?
3. Which party does Arlen Specter belong in? Is he a DINO now? You praise Ben Nelson as being a reasonable Democrat. Is Arlen Specter a reasonable Democrat?
4. Do you agree with Jim DeMint when he says that he’d rather have a party of 30 senators who all think like him than a majority party with people like Arlen Specter in it? How, then, do you intend to pass conservative legislation?
5. Tom Coburn once told me that he would not have welcomed Joe Lieberman into the party if he had wanted to switch. Do you agree?
April 29th, 2009 at 11:00 am
Do you consider a three-legged conservative a “hardliner?”
April 29th, 2009 at 11:02 am
No. I consider a hardliner someone who “likes to go RINO-hunting” and is celebrating the Specter defection.
April 29th, 2009 at 11:09 am
Alex, maybe you should edit for clarity.
The ladies from Maine got more cut OUT of the stimulus bill. Upon initial reading, it could give the idea that they put more pork in it (“got more of a cut”). Just a thought. Maybe I’m crazy for accidentally reading it that way.
April 29th, 2009 at 11:13 am
Okay – I guess I count as a halfway-hardliner (I usually hate RINO-hunting but am celebrating the Specter defection). So…
1. Specter’s career record is far worse than Coleman’s but that’s not the issue. Specter had an attitude problem, he wanted conservatism purged from the GOP, and he was obsessed with tearing down the party froom the inside. That’s why I happily tolerate Coleman (not to mention Snowe and Collins), but wanted Specter gone at all costs.
2. Yes, but the entire concept of the stimulus was so deeply flawed that cutting it meant nothing.
3. I don’t think Specter will be comfortable anywhere – he’s an unreasonable person, so I don’t see why he will be any more reasonable as a Democrat. Specter stands for nothing except his personal advancement and his hatred of conservatives – we might get his vote on occasion, but that doesn’t make him reasonable.
4. Heck no! (and I’m a DeMint fan!)
5. Not sure – depends on what attitude Lieberman would take. Uder most circumstances I would welcome Joe – but not if he joined the party under the assumption that we would swing to the left to make him happy.
April 29th, 2009 at 11:20 am
I admit to finding the ‘good riddance, you closet lefty/don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out….how could you betray us like this, Benedict Arlen’ schizophrenia somewhat amusing.
The following enigmatic e-mail I got from Michael Steele yesterday certainly provided for some late-night laughter.
April 29th, 2009 at 11:25 am
1. Why are you celebrating Specter’s defection while championing Norm Coleman, who was ranked just as moderate as Specter in the National Journal’s 2007 rankings? Well, is Mr. Coleman my favorite senator? No, but I for one like him a little better than Mr. Specter despite the rankings, but the bottom line is that Mr. Specter left the party, Mr. Coleman did not. Further, there is no alternative to Mr. Coleman. Apparently, there are several for Mr. Specter.
2. Are you aware that the ladies from Maine got more cut from the stimulus bill than any of the efforts of the likes of Jim DeMint? I am not in love with the ladies from Maine, but again, first there does not appear to be an alternative up there and apart from a poor voting record, they did not leave the party. We are not RINO hunters, Mr. Specter chose to leave.
Which party does Arlen Specter belong in? Is he a DINO now? You praise Ben Nelson as being a reasonable Democrat. Is Arlen Specter a reasonable Democrat?
I cannot speak for everybody, but I would rather have a Republican is Nebraska than Mr. Nelson, but again, I for one think that Mr. Nelson is no worse than Mr. Specter.
4. Do you agree with Jim DeMint when he says that he’d rather have a party of 30 senators who all think like him than a majority party with people like Arlen Specter in it? How, then, do you intend to pass conservative legislation?
No, I do not agree entirely, but if we are going to be in the minority, there is no point having a bunch of liberals in the party. If Mr. Specture were at least a little more moderate as opposed to a liberal, that would be another story, but he is barely even a FiCon. Lately, he has behaved more like a FiLib.
5. Tom Coburn once told me that he would not have welcomed Joe Lieberman into the party if he had wanted to switch. Do you agree?
Look, Mr. Lieberman is a nice guy and a great American. Shhhhh, I probably would have even voted for him in 2006 as an Independent if I lived in CT, but the guy is a liberal. Look, you SoLibs are welcome in our party as long as you are basically FiCons. If you want to be a FiLib as well as a SoLib, get out!
April 29th, 2009 at 11:27 am
Alex,
Let’s say I support the policies of Gingrich & the like from 1994-2000, including:
-DOMA
-Balanced Budget
-compromise with the white house but stiill being productive
-cuts to medicare funding
(I know you disagree about DOMA, bear with me.)
If I were to count Senators like Specter in the 50-60ish we need to undo what damage Obama has and will do to the above–he won’t vote with us. We need 50 fiscal conservatives to restore conservative budgets. We do not need what we have had for the last 8 years–McCain brokering left-wing compromises that did not help us, Bush increasing spending and opening the borders, etc.
And as for what was cut from the spending bill–If Snowe had held her ground longer, we could have gotten a better bill.
April 29th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Aron, check your e-mail.
April 29th, 2009 at 11:33 am
Mr. Bush tried to play ball with the FiLibs and he lost. To cry over Mr. Specter is like banging one’s head against the wall.
April 29th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Alex,
will you respond to #7?
April 29th, 2009 at 11:43 am
As one who voted for a Conservative (capital C in New York) Senate candidate over a Republican and who has historically supported conservative primary candidates (Laffey-RI, Toomey-PA), I suppose I can say a few words -
1. I’m not celebrating the defection of Specter. I’m thoroughly annoyed, it wreaks of political opportunism and shows a lack of support to the basic principles that the party stands for. Why support Coleman and not Specter? I don’t know – I have no reason to support either. All I do know is that when you can do better, I’d rather do better. If I have the opportunity to vote for a better Senate candidate in a primary, I will. IN the case of Toomey v. Specter (which won’t happen again), I’d have voted Toomey. If Coleman had a realistic, conservative opponent – I’d vote for them. That’s the bottom line for me. Would I still vote for Coleman in a general election? Absolutely over Norm Coleman, but if a third party alternative I ended up liking better existed, I’d consider a vote for them. I’ve done so in the past.
2. I’m glad the “ladies from Maine” got quite a bit cut from the stimulus package. That doesn’t make it a good bill and it doesn’t make it worth voting in favor of it.
3. My problem with Arlen Specter is that he is unreasonable and cares more for political advancement than any ideology. I’d rather have someone principled than one who just wants to be in office at all costs. It’s also his hypocritical stance on party defections that bothers me.
4. No.
5. It all depends. Will Joe Lieberman vote with us on important issues? If he joined the GOP, would he have voted against the stimulus package? Would he moderate or shift right on fiscal issues or at least be willing to vote with the GOP on the important fiscal issues? He’s with the GOP on security issues, that’s for sure. It’s all about whether or not he’d walk the party line when we’d really need him.
April 29th, 2009 at 11:49 am
10 – Did Specter not vote for the Reagan-era budgets?
April 29th, 2009 at 11:51 am
It’s an obfuscating specious argument to say “Are you aware that the ladies from Maine got more cut from the stimulus bill than any of the efforts of the likes of Jim DeMint?”
Who cares what they cut before they VOTED FOR the bill? Did DeMint vote against the bill? If he did then he fought for 100% cut in the pork.
As to Specter leaving, he was a cancer that couldn’t be tolerated. I am not asking for socons in blue states, I just want ficons. And let me say that I won’t put up with filibs in my red state anymore either. If the GOP nominates for president a filib like Huntsman, Crist, or Huckabee then I will not vote for the nominee.
Also, a lot of us have been voting for longer than you have been alive Alex. We can take this defection with more equanimity than you are taking it because we have seen the political pendulum swing back and forth several times in our lives. Republicans are very unpopular right now and they deserve that disdain because of Bush and company running a big government and a big deficit. The GOP must become the party of limited government again, so while it may be a little painful to have defections now, it is in the long term a good, healthy thing for the party.
April 29th, 2009 at 11:58 am
“I am not asking for socons in blue states, I just want ficons.” Bingo! The RINOs don’t get it.
April 29th, 2009 at 11:58 am
This is sad.
Yesterday, Specter and his pollster admitted they could not win as a Republican in 2010. Specter had angered too many Republican and Indy voters and Democratic voters had grown and are motivated.
I might be the only person who wanted Specter out because he had little chance in 2010 to defeat the Democrat. Maybe Toomney or Ridge has little chance as well, but a minority parties best hope in a mid-term election is for new, outsider blood.
April 29th, 2009 at 11:59 am
Who cares what they cut before they VOTED FOR the bill? Did DeMint vote against the bill? If he did then he fought for 100% cut in the pork.
Because the stimulus passing was a foregone conclusion. I’m more satisfied with what Collins and Snowe did — get lots of money cut out of it — than what DeMint did: whine. Perhaps you’re not aware of this, but the Democrats control the Senate with a fairly commanding majority.
Also, a lot of us have been voting for longer than you have been alive Alex. We can take this defection with more equanimity than you are taking it because we have seen the political pendulum swing back and forth several times in our lives. Republicans are very unpopular right now and they deserve that disdain because of Bush and company running a big government and a big deficit. The GOP must become the party of limited government again, so while it may be a little painful to have defections now, it is in the long term a good, healthy thing for the party.
It’s only a good, healthy thing for the party if we can persuade. Right now, we’re not persuading. We’re purging. And we’re in no position to.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
“…a minority parties best hope in a mid-term election is for new, outsider blood.”
Yes, great point.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Yesterday, Specter and his pollster admitted they could not win as a Republican in 2010
Um, what they admitted was that he could not win as a Republican because he couldn’t get nominated as a Republican.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
“…a minority parties best hope in a mid-term election is for new, outsider blood.” Yes, great point.
Preposterous. Incumbents always start out with a huge advantage.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
“It’s only a good, healthy thing for the party if we can persuade.”
This is a very valid point Alex, and I agree with you that we must persuade. My argument is that we can’t persuade as long as we are a party of corrupt, big government, hypocritical, life long politicians. To persuade we must cut out the cancer and then we can have credibility in an argument for limited government.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
#18,
that is now how it was spun by some of the news networks.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
20 – C’mon, now. Specter had one term left in him. He’s old and feeble. Couldn’t we have waited one more term, given that he was the only way that we were going to win there, anyway? Should we have really wasted our resources on taking out a senator with one term left, when we’re at 41 (now 40) seats? Couldn’t those resources have been better spent attacking liberal Democrats? Specter is not corrupt or malicious. He’s just a moderate.
21 – No, you just misunderstood.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
The very best pundits and bloggers are also excellent analysts and students of history. Although it is early, polls have be showing us that long-serving politicians are at risk of defeat in 2010. Although i agree with your premise that incumbents usually have an advantage, in 2010 it appears (in some cases), it is a liability. Dodd, Corzine, Specter, to name a few.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Sorry, but this post is idiocy. The idea that the Maine sisters got anything “cut” out of the stimulus bill is ludicrous. I guarantee you Obama’s team had a number, on a piece of paper, before the stimulus debate began, that represented how low they expected to have to go to “peel” off a few moderates. And I guarantee you that number was lower than the eventual bill’s price-tag. This stuff is all a game. Obama and Democrats come up with a purposely high number, knowing that by doing so they allow moderate Republicans like Snowe and Collins to “negotiate”, and claim that they’ve “saved” the taxpayers money, due to their oh-so-responsible stewardship of the nation’s finances. Collins, Snowe, and Specter could have gone on siesta, and allowed the Democrats to put out press releases, and propose amendments, in their name, for all the good they did.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
24 – Maybe. Might, on the other hand, be irrelevant. What if Collins and Snowe had acted like DeMint? We would have had even more spent.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Alex,
If Snowe and Collins had acted like Demint Democrats either would not have passed anything- deeply unlikely, given that Obama framed it as the central initiative of his first 100 days- or Democrats would have been forced to come down beyond their comfort thresh-hold (which, again, was considerably lower than the final number). Their were no other options. The votes simply weren’t there to pass the stimulus with Snowe, Collins, and Specter. We can argue about the political ramifications of the former- whether handing Obama a big defeat in his first legislative initiative would have outweighed the consequences of “owning” a deteriorating economy. But, it’s far from clear we would have come out behind, even in that scenario. In the other scenario, where Democrats stop playing games, bring Republicans to the negotiating table, and cut out another 75-150 billion in spending, we CLEARLY come out ahead.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
without Snowe, Collins, and Specter*
April 29th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Snowe and Collins have been voting based on their beliefs, Specter was voting to get re-elected.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
28 – Are you insane? If Specter wanted to vote to get re-elected, he would have voted with the GOP 60-65% of the time in order to assuage the GOP’s fears about him. There is no evidence that Specter was not voting based upon his beliefs.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
26 – The votes weren’t there? You mean that you think we should have filibustered instead?
April 29th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
Alex,
Well, obviously. We would have filibustered, had the original bill come up for a vote. It’s practically the only organizational tool we had at the time.
April 29th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
31 – What do you think that would have made us look like?
April 29th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
it’s a question of character. i despise specter but would gladly support ridge.
April 29th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
made us look? you are falling into the same superficial nonsense the left falls into. lots of presidents look good by doing something, anything, that resembles activism. lbj, carter looked good at the start too, with the GOP in a even smaller minorities. obama will unfold the same way.
SANFORD/THUNE 2012
April 29th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Last night at The Pink Flamingo, I have a post about the possibility that DeMint may be responsible for pushing Specter off the elephant. His comment about 30 “pure” conservative Senators shows just how pathetic he is, and what a loser his version of conservative is. Too bad he doesn’t have half the wisdom and courage of his SC counterpart, but De Mint, like Mark Sanford, is more about posting and preening for cameras and sound bites than actual constructive REPUBLICAN party building.
If we do not put a curb on this conservative witch hunt and their demands for 100% purity, the GOP is DOA. Ronald Reagan was never like this. Reagan was a party builder who had the wisdom and decency to know how to work with people in order to get things done. If we follow DeMint, let’s just paint Obama posters on all the buildings and start goose-stepping toward communism. That’s what conservatives like DeMint are doing for the GOP.
I want a GOP majority who votes together 80% of the time, just like Reagan did.
SJR
The Pink Flamingo
April 29th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Alex,
It would have made us look like a party that opposed a bill that, at worst, the public was evenly divided on. And it would have either given Obama a massive legislative defeat, or it would have brought the Republicans genuinely into the drafting room.
April 29th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
It’s not so much that Specter changes, but his normal primary constituency
of liberal Republicans decided whether they should join the Democrats and
were answered Yes We Can! When most of these decided that one can be
a pro-life Democrat because the Republicans weren’t actually proposing
measures the change the status of the fetus, they felt OK with changing, no
matter what their Bishop said. You dance with the girl that brought ya, and
his girl became a Democrat.
April 29th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
24 and 26. The sad fact of the matter is that one of the things that got
cut from the bill was Pandemic Flu preparedness. Oops.
April 29th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Republicans need to hold on to moderates, even extreme ones like Specter. If you look at congressional records objectively you can see why. Democratic Sens. Nelson, Bayh and Lieberman have been given a lot of praise for their somewhat conservative stands over the years; and I would venture to guess the Republicans would be glad to have any of them switch parties and join the Republican ranks. In fact in 2008 many did lobby Lieberman to cross over. Ironically, Specter himself was quoted as being all for the Lieberman switch.
“I would like to see him vote with Republicans in September,” Specter said. “He’s practically there. That would have the consequence of giving us a Republican Senate.”
Now, if Republicans are so eager to celebrate centrist Democrats who agree with them some of the time, why are they so unwilling to hold onto centrist Republicans who agree with them most of the time? According to The Political Guide, since 1990, Arlen Specter has voted with the majority of his party 72.9% of the time and missed only 2.8% of the votes. In all likelihood PA is going to elect a Democrat in 2010 and the Republican party will miss out on those potential votes.
Believe me, I am no big fan of Specter and others like him who often cross the aisle and vote for things like the recent stimulus bill. However, I’d rather have them then lose a seat to the other side.
April 29th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
38 – I believe it was additional funding for pandemic flu preparedness. The MSM is going to spin this story so the Republicans looked like they killed ALL preparedness for any and every pandemic flu that might come to light.
April 29th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
I couldn’t agree more SteveB. This is a purging of the moderate thinker in the Republican Party. Although Bush is a neocon and strong on defense and low taxes, the party faithfuls blame him and McCain. You can already see it on this site from the socons…we would’ve won if we ran a real conservative or if Bush was only a real fiscal conservative. I personally believe there is enough room in our party for almost every ideology except leftism…if only the socons felt the same way.
April 29th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
[...] We’ve had a lively dialogue on the frontpage over this issue, and I know it’s probably wearing thin. But I feel compelled to respond to Alex’s first post of the day. [...]
April 29th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
[...] We’ve had a lively dialogue on the frontpage over this issue, and I know it’s probably wearing thin. But I feel compelled to respond to Alex’s first post of the day. [...]
April 29th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
[...] We’ve had a lively dialogue on the frontpage over this issue, and I know it’s probably wearing thin. But I feel compelled to respond to Alex’s first post of the day. [...]