Greenwald: What Specter's switch says about him, the Democrats and our political spectrum

[Fumesucker]

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/28/specter/

(2) Democrats will understandably celebrate today’s announcement, but beyond the questions of raw political power, it is mystifying why they would want to build their majority by embracing politicians who reject most of their ostensible views.

Reports today suggest that Democratic officials promised Specter that the party establishment would support him, rather than a real Democrat, in a primary. If true, few events more vividly illustrate the complete lack of core beliefs of Democratic leaders, as well as the rapidly diminishing differences between the parties. Why would Democrats want a full-blooded Republican representing them in the blue state of Pennsylvania? Specter is highly likely to reprise the Joe Lieberman role for Democrats: a “Democrat” who leads the way in criticizing and blocking Democratic initiatives, forcing the party still further towards Republican policies.

(3) Arlen Specter is one of the worst, most soul-less, most belief-free individuals in politics. The moment most vividly illustrating what Specter is: prior to the vote on the Military Commissions Act of 2006, he went to the floor of the Senate and said what the bill "seeks to do is set back basic rights by some 900 years" and is "patently unconstitutional on its face." He then proceeded to vote YES on the bill's passage.

Much more at link:

[ThirdWorldJohn]

1. Fence walker, Liar, Oppurtunist Politician Just like most of the Rest N/T

[babylonsister]

2. A voice of sanity. We need our memories jogged. nt

[pnwmom]

3. Why? Because a party of purists is going to remain a permanent minority. n/t

[Romulox]

5. If the Democrats and Republicans merged, the combined party could rule forever!

[villager]

8. You mean, supporting economic elites...!?

oh wait...

[readmoreoften]

22. That'd be SO AWESOME! We'd never lose! Think of all we'd be able to get accomplished.

We could bust unions and lament the death of the union!
We could deny LGBT people rights and complain that our hands our tied!
We could bailout corporations with taxpayer money and the taxpayers will think we're doing them a favor!
We could be a dissenting voice against interminable war and then admit that we have no choice but to support it!

Hey....wait a minute.... maybe that's what....? No.....

[RufusTFirefly]

25. +1

[Romulox]

26. Hey--at least it wouldn't be a party of "purists"! nt

[DireStrike]

34. Lol those damn purists, always wanting to keep the shit out of the sandwich

How can you eat a sandwich without that rich, fertile brown spread?

[Winterblues]

41. Isn't that what they are doing?

I see how that appears to be the case almost every day now..

[bahrbearian]

4. Just what we need , a bitter old man.

[villager]

6. And it's not the first time Specter's switched parties:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5551954

[T Wolf]

7. Amen. I only hope that after the excitement wears off, real Democrats see Spectre for

the shit he is and limit the damage he will cause on our side of the aisle.

Send him into retirement next year and elect a real Democrat - I have not seen one in the Senate from PA since Heinz croaked and Wofford was appointed to fill his spot.

We now face the reality of having two DINOs representing a great Blue state in the Senate. We could do so much better.

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. IOW, he put party loyalty above principle.

But now he's in OUR party. We could use a little of that kind of loyalty.

doesn't mean we have to trust him.

[progressoid]

20. Or that he will put himself above party. n/t

[Mass]

10. Thanks. I have to agree. Why did we leave Specter lose this primary and run a real dem

against Toomey.

[Occam Bandage]

12. Because a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. nt

[Thrill]

13. He knows a Democrat will have a tough time against him in a primary

Which is why he didn't switch to Independent and just caucus with the Dems

[Occam Bandage]

11. I think we should all follow Michael Steele's lead and kick all the impure out of the party. nt

[Truth2Tell]

14. Michael Steele is kicking people out of the Democratic Party? nt

[Occam Bandage]

15. He's kicking folks out of the Republican. And look at how well they're doing!

Why, there are a few metrics left by which they are not a complete political joke. But don't worry, his small-tentism will ensure the GOP doesn't have a chance of being a national influence within a year or two.

[Fumesucker]

17. Yes, that's brilliant

All we have to do is get all the Republicans to put a "D" in front of their names and WE WIN!

Yay!!!!!

[Occam Bandage]

21. Yep. Keep trying to get the dems to follow the RNC right down the obscurity hole.

Fortunately, your branch of the party is tiny and ineffectual. Otherwise, McCain would be President, and we'd have maybe 20 Senators and 150 Representatives.

[Fumesucker]

27. Perhaps you missed this paragraph in my OP?

The moment most vividly illustrating what Specter is: prior to the vote on the Military Commissions Act of 2006, he went to the floor of the Senate and said what the bill "seeks to do is set back basic rights by some 900 years" and is "patently unconstitutional on its face." He then proceeded to vote YES on the bill's passage.

I say he'll fit right in your Democratic party..

But not in mine.

[Occam Bandage]

35. That's fine. My Democratic party passes progressive legislation that helps all Americans.

Yours sits on its ass, bitches that it wasn't progressive as they'd like to see, and generally accomplishes nothing of any substantive value.

[Fumesucker]

42. The Military Commissions Act is progressive?

Who knew? :shrug:

[Truth2Tell]

18. Maybe we should follow the suggestion upthread

and merge the two Parties? Endless rule!!!!

Purist. I'm a proud purist. I "purely" support politicians who share my values and my political objectives. And I don't support politicians who hold values I abhor and who work against my political objectives. Seems like pure common sense to me.

[Fumesucker]

16. What difference does it make what party is in power?

If there is essentially no difference in the parties?

Specter's switch sure makes it look like there is no real difference from up here in the cheap seats.

[Occam Bandage]

19. It wouldn't. Good thing there are stark differences.

Unless you think the last few months are the same as the eight years before them, in which case you're a sad, sheltered little extremist.

[Fumesucker]

23. Things are going to hell just a bit more slowly..

That's the biggest difference I see so far.

Of course the Overton Window has been pushed so far to the right in the last thirty years that Dick Nixon would look like a "sad, sheltered little extremist" these days.

Wage and price controls?

The EPA?

[Romulox]

28. Except as to Arlen Specter, you mean. He's the same man today as he was yesterday.

[Occam Bandage]

32. That's true. He's still a wormy, weenie opportunist out to save his own skin.

Now the party re-election money's dependent on him voting with the left instead of on him voting with the right. So, y'know, his spineless, pathetic, careerist nature is a good thing.

[blindpig]

31. or else

you're a hapless partisan who doesn't really care about having a party that represents the masses as long as you can claim a win. All of the so-called accomplishments don't hold a candle to the core issues such as war & imperialism, the finance fiasco & health care, which indicate no change at all.

[Occam Bandage]

33. Obama's got a 70% approval. I think he's doing a fine job of "representing the masses." nt

[blindpig]

37. Um

Bush had big numbers post 9-11. Manipulation of public opinion is a fine art these days, know them by their works.

[sufrommich]

40. Well, either that, or "the masses" aren't who you

think they are.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. Well, he can join the Blue Dogs and DLC on the right side of the bed.

[leftofthedial]

29. sounds to me like he'll fit right in with most of the "democrats" in the Senate...

[Individualist]

30. I don't consider it mystifying at all

There's ample circumstantial evidence to show that DLC is controlling the party now.

[cascadiance]

36. The more of this kind of switch happens, it will mean the primary will be THE election in 2010!

And the nomination process needs to have a lot of good alternative candidates that we fund through organizations like PDA and moveon.org instead of handing over blood money to the DCCC, etc.

[alarimer]

38. Maybe a real Democrat will run against him in the primary.

I will be sending money to whomever it is.

The last thing Democrats need is another DINO.

[butterfly77]

39. Now Evan Bayh's little group has grown,...

since now they will have another bluedog..

[philly_bob]

43. Happy Specter constituent makes two predictions.

1) Specter's voting record improves.

2) Some damning Monica-style scandal emerges about Specter, from long ago. This is what Republicans have held over his head.

Meanwhile, I'm totally confused about what I'll do in the Democratic primary. I'd like to see a Credible Democratic Opponent (CDO), to keep pressure on Specter from the left. Whether I vote for such a CDO depends on Specter's voting performance. One thing for sure: I won't decide based on the Republicans' release of scandal.

[lumberjack_jeff]

44. Get his vote on health care, then kick him to the curb.

Recruit someone better to run against him in the primary.