Reid: 'Specter And I Have Had A Long Dialogue' About Party Switch
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has put out a statement on the news that Sen. Arlen Specter (formerly R- now D-PA) is switching parties.
I have known Senator Specter for more than a quarter-century. He has always been a man of honor and integrity, and a fine public servant.
Senator Specter and I have had a long dialogue about his place in an evolving Republican Party. We have not always agreed on every issue, but Senator Specter has shown a willingness to work in a bipartisan manner, put people over party, and do what is right for Pennsylvanians and all Americans.
I welcome Senator Specter and his moderate voice to our diverse caucus, and to continuing our open and honest debate about the best way to make life better for the American people.
You see an indication there--no big surprise--that this has been tossed around for some time now. But not everybody seemed to be as queued in as Harry Reid. More on that momentarily.
Advertisement




















Moderates like this move, because Specter is a centrist vote along with them, whereas the Dem who would have defeated Toomey in the general in 2010 would have been a stronger Dem vote.
April 28, 2009 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stronger, yes, but it still would have been a moderate. Most likely more liberal than Specter, but no more liberal than Bob Casey Jr.
That said, I like Casey (with the exception of the pro-life business)
April 28, 2009 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
really? you like the warrantless wiretapping? cus casey supported that.
do you like the no-strings-attached bailiut? cus casey supported that too.
or perhaps you oppose stem cell reseacrh, where casey was the deciding vote. he voted "no", by the way. embryos matter more to casey than people with parkinsons.
April 28, 2009 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
So did damn near all the other Dems in the senate, nitwit
April 28, 2009 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can Collins and Snowe be far behind?
Pat Toomey is a clown which is why is appeals to Santorum's followers.
As a Pennsylvanian, I am sorry that we may not have a more liberal senator on the ballot next year, but to have gone from Specter(R) and Santorum(R) to Casey(D) and Specter(D) in just two short years is progress!
PEACE
April 28, 2009 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
On Collins and Snowe, the question is going to be the status of the state Republican party and whether either senator would face a conservative challenge in the primary as Specter did.
Could either win reelection in the primary or the general election in Maine as a Democrat?
Can anyone tell us about those potential Republican challengers? Are any likely, and are they credible threats as Toomey was to Specter? Is the Maine Democratic party even viable? Wikipedia says that the Maine Republican Party was established on August 7, 1854. That's one hell of a long tradition. Could a state-wide election official there abandon that party and survive?
We look at it from a national perspective, but the state perspective will be the key.
April 28, 2009 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
is "queued in" standard usage?
we say "clued in" but i've never seen "queued in" used in that manner. a quick google search supports this assessment.
also: my guess is that this switch will have almost no legislative impact. first, specter will not regularly vote with the Dems on cloture votes.
second, the obama administration is too wimpy to supply the kind of legislation for which cloture votes matter.
on the other hand, this might help with judicial appointments and other senate advise-and-consent matters.
April 28, 2009 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suspect the misuse comes from either not knowing, or just not thinking about, the differences in the homophones.
Brian, in case you're wondering wtf people are grumbling about: 'queued' would be 'in line' while 'cued' is 'shown indicators of action'.
The next song your iTunes comes up with? That's queued. Following someone's lead? Taking a cue.
April 28, 2009 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
"an evolving Republican Party" is a nice euphemism...
Anyway, I can't yet decide exactly what I think about this -- but not sure if adding another moderate dem is "big." It depends on what he promised in his talk with the DNC. We'll see...
April 28, 2009 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Decomposing" would be more accurate. That's what fecal material ultimately does.
April 28, 2009 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
The mechanism is, I suspect, that the conservatives have used the issue of "Who is more conservative?" as an election tool for years, much as they used the cry "Who lost China?" for years during the Cold War. They've used the cry "Who is more conservative?" since Reagan, in fact. The result is that they have elected the strongest right-wing extremists possible because they think that is the route to electoral success. It certainly mobilizes the base, especially after they allied with the evangelical religious conservatives of the Christian Coalition.
Suddenly (from their point of view) the public has realized the disastrous consequences of letting the conservatives run government and turned their back on conservatives. All except the strongest conservatives, in fact, have backed away. So have many of the evangelical conservatives. But as the moderates flake off from the Republican brand, the remaining conservatives still think this is just a bad patch and that conservatism is still the route to electoral success. Since things are going bad for them with the public, they are retreating to their strongest point - be more conservative. So the most extreme conservatives are being concentrated in the party and they are becoming more desperate, much as soldiers fighting a losing battle will.
The result is that extremists are running the party now, not the politicians. Limbaugh never compromises, and always goes for the most extreme position. So do the other talk show hosts, as do the extreme writers like Coulter. The good politicians are recognizing that won't work, but the base won't keep them in office if they don't adhere to the most extreme conservatism.
What we are watching is the death throes of the conservative movement, and they won't go quietly. They can't. Conservatism is inherently an extremist quasi-religion.
I'm at last enjoying the show. I suspect I am feeling a lot the way my parents did in 1944 when both the Germans and the Japanese were in retreat on all fronts. Neither fascist nation gave up, either. Both, if anything, became more extreme. The Kamikaze pilots are only one example of the extreme measures they took. So was the German enlisting of teenagers from the Hitler youth to defend Berlin and the German homeland behind the Rhine. So was the desperate German offensive of the Battle of the Bulge.
I do expect conservative extremism to get even worse in the near future, though. That will last until the talk show conservatives are dethroned as the effective leaders of the conservative movement.
At least, that's my current best guess.
April 28, 2009 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Devolving comes to mind. Maybe revolting?
Big picture, my gut response is that Specter is a drag on the party. Unless things get real ugly over the next year and a half I expect that Dems will continue picking up seats (at least in the Senate) with Specter's (R) being a vulnerable one. Specter (D) seems less likely to attract a strong dem challenger. Also, there's now one more center-right democrat in the caucus demanding concessions and watering down bills.
Short term, I suspect that he might represent a slight boost as he attempts to appeal to a brand new base. Although his EFCA comments are not promising (did he make some deal with the devil to take the dem nomination and then lose to Toomey?). If he doesn't move to the left all quick like then I think Reid should walk him right back across the aisle. Maybe throw in Lieberman to sweeten the pot.
Seriously though, the Democratic party should really be looking to clean house. They currently have an enormous advantage with the electorate and are currently making big concessions to those in the party least aligned with their supporters. The leadership would be well served by taking a more progressive tact and making the moderate congresspeeps explain why they voted against the party in their upcoming primaries.
April 28, 2009 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is "queued in" standard usage?
"Cued in", perhaps?
April 28, 2009 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
CUED in, not QUEUED.
April 28, 2009 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just what we need, another blow with the wind Democratic Senator, aka Blow Hard, like Reid. Christ on a cross, how many DINO's are in the Senate now?
Other than rearranging Committee chairs and being able to survive a primary challenge, Spector is no more a Democrat than Dick Cheney. Well he certainly qualifies as a Democratic hypocrite anyway.
April 28, 2009 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, that puts him in the mainstream of the Senate Democratic caucus, doesn't it? ;)
April 28, 2009 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink