| Author | Message | ||
     Ft_bstrd |
Republican Sen. Arlen Specter has decided to switch parties and become a Democrat, stunning his GOP colleagues in the Senate while pushing Democrats and President Barack Obama one step closer to unfettered power in Washington. Specter will be the 59th Democratic senator, and if Al Franken eventually pulls out his Senate race in Minnesota, Democrats will have a filibuster-resistant 60-vote majority in the Senate, something the party could only have dreamed of at this time last year. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/21798.ht ml One RINO down. Now when Obama votes for the assult weapons ban and conservative democrats bail on Specter, we can spend our money backing a REAL conservative candidate and not someone who will wh0re himself out to the DNC. 2010 can't get here soon enough. (Message edited by ft_bstrd on April 28, 2009) | ||
| Toona |
As a registered republican Pennsylvania resident, I can't be happier that he's "jumped ship". Now if he'll just go down with the BHO ship, it would be even better... TOOMEY '10! | ||
| Badlionsfan |
See ya Douche canoe!  | ||
| Hexangler |
I liked this one: Republican strategist John Feehery said Republican leaders in the Senate did all they could to hang on to Specter. More broadly, however, he said: "What it says about the party is they have to make a determination on whether they want to be in the majority or whether they want to be intellectually pure." There's plenty more room on the blue boat fellers. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Seems to worked so well for Jeffords. Specter will be the little gimp in the corner. Unless he was promised something for his vote on the "Suckubus Bill". Wh0re.  | ||
| Old_man |
Maybe they should run Rickie Santorum against him in the election. Now there is a REAL right winger. | ||
| Old_man |
There is no room for moderates in the Republican party. | ||
| Xl1200r |
Yeah, only liberals are allowed in anymore. All the socialists go to the Dems, and the conservatives are left out to dry. | ||
| Buellinachinashop |
Is he related to Phil? | ||
| Wolfridgerider |
Is he related to Phil? Now way, Phil likes his guns. | ||
| Badlionsfan |
Ba-Ziiing!! | ||
| Spatten1 |
I liked Specter. Fiscal conservative, social liberal Tells everybody that wants him to tow the party line to F-themselves. I'd like a congress full of people like Specter that would refuse to play the game and do what they promised and they believe in. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Except that Specter could have gone independent rather than Democrat. If his beef was with the Republicans, he could have simply gone independent. Worked for Joe Lieberman. Specter was promised something for his support of the "suckubus bill" and this move was part two of that arrangement. Do you really think Reid won't expect Specter to "tow the party line"? This is what happens with people with NO core values. | ||
| Barker |
long time rino, glad that he made it official. for his sake, maybe he will have a better chance in primaries (Message edited by barker on April 28, 2009) | ||
| Spatten1 |
This is what happens with people with NO core values. Nah, the people with no core values tow the party line. People with core values dissent in the face of animosity. This is exactly what has brought the ire of Repubilcans so many times. That is what core values are. Specter does whatever he thinks is right, with some political BS, but less than most. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.politicspa.com/Specter%20Switches.htm Specter's comment. There is a serious germ of truth in Kennedy's comment on Parties. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
I don't believe that fiscal conservatism, strict constructionist Constitutional interpretation, smaller government, and greater personal freedom are values in which I seek dissent. Specter abandoned ALL of these values when he voted in the "suckubus bill" as well as much of his voting record. THAT causes "ire" for me. | ||
| Alchemy |
Specter is a significant loss for the Republican party. He can't run as an independent in the same way as Joe L. was able to due to the PA election law. Specter pretty much had to switch parties. As far a Specter is concerned his own party trashed him when he made a difficult vote. He has seriously pissed me off in the past but he has my respect for voting his conscience and taking his licks Two things: A Republican party that wants to be relevant must find a welcoming place for social moderates. This Specter thing should not be taken to mean too much. He is getting old and wants to finish his career working on some major legislation. I don't think a wave of party changes is in the works based on this one event. I bet this is his last campaign but he is serious about being there next term. | ||
| Spatten1 |
A Republican party that wants to be relevant must find a welcoming place for social moderates. Yep. Specter made his bones and has been hated by Republicans by voting with Dems on abortion over and over again, if memory serves correct. Hell, the guy is joining the Dems and will continue to fight card check. That's someone with core values. I find most republican politicians (not voters) every bit as clownish and idiotic as democrat politicians, and just as devoid of any values at all. At various times I've respected McCain and Specter for the same reasons. They crossed the party when they believed it was the right thing to do. Republicans that do not welcome social moderates will become more and more irrelevant as more independants and libertarians are turned off by their knee-jerk dogmatism. BTW, I am a registered republican, and I voted McCain. I'm not some Air America kool-aid drinking nut. And...Shawn Hannity makes me want to f-ing puke. | ||
| Hexangler |
New Delta name (Animal House reference intended): Specter the Defector! | ||
| Cudajohn |
Spatten1, I WAS a republican with moderate views on social issues. For instance, why am I going to be an a-hole and try and tell a young girl who is her own adult person that she shouldn't have an abortion because I don't want her to have one (the Right Wing way). I also do not believe in being my "brothers" keeper and keeping him in a cycle of dispair that is welfare, I do not believe in foreign aid unless there is a dire ned for it, I do believe that there is no company that is too big to fail (like the Libs). Therefore I am a Libertarian. Republican's AND Democrats belong to the same mindset that they need to control the people, they just go about it in to different ways, with the Dem's way costing the tax payer ALOT more. Get it right folks, open your eyes, there is a third party out there who believes in personal freedom's, smaller government, AND fiscal conservatism. www.lp.org | ||
| Spatten1 |
Therefore I am a Libertarian. Hey man, I'm with you. I'm almost on-board with the Libertarian Party. The only thing that's kept me out of it is that legalizing ALL drugs has been the focal point for so long in that party. I'm fine with pot, acid, etc., but if the addictive stuff gets really cheap because possession is legal, I think way too many kids will get hooked on coke and heroin. It would have been very bad for me and my buddies if that stuff had been cheap and easily accessible in the '80's when we were kids. Other than that, I love the Libertarian ethos. | ||
| Sayitaintso |
Spatten, well said and I agree 110%. Except I gave up on the Repubs when they became lapdogs of the Christian Coalition. I went indy but just as easily could have gone libertarian and probably will switch before the next election. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
I believe you are mistaking MINOR issues with MAJOR issues. I don't like abortion. I am NOT in favor of making abortion illegal. I do not dislike Specter because of his stance on abortion. As a CONSERVATIVE, I simply dislike public funding of abortion. I did not refuse to vote for McCain for HIS position on abortion. I wouldn't have refused to vote for Romney for HIS position on abortion. In spite of the media description of what THEY feel are the central pivotal positions of "conservatives", the vast majority of conservative voters are not going to cut off their nose to spite their face. Conservative voters will do what all voters do, weigh the candidates and vote for the one that MOST fills their bill of wants and needs. What was unforgivable was Specter's "core value" of voting for the single largest destructive legislation piece that has been passed. Ever. It will alter our national landscape in negative ways I can't even imagine or describe. He was right to leave the CONSERVATIVE party. CONSERVATIVE is not SOCIAL conservative. It is Constitutional conservative. Specter has NEVER been a social conservative. He proved, with the last round of votes, that he is also not a constitutional conservative. Neither was McCain. On both counts. Given that, McCain STILL received more votes than Clinton or Bush. Given the RADICAL changes BHO, Reid, and Pelosi have brought us, I believe the "tent" will be bigger in 2010 and 2012. Please GOD where is Barry Goldwater when we need him? | ||
| Cudajohn |
Spatten1, is that it? 1 issue is stopping you? I would never see myself as being only one issue away from being 100% Rep OR Dem. I don't even see my self as being 100% inline with the Libertarian stance on the issues but it seems like they are lightyears ahead of the others as far as being representative of what this country was founded upon. The beauty of it is you can still support a party and not see eye to eye. You would never get that with Repubs or Liberals (moderate Dems like Blue Dogs? probably). F'em if they are Blue or Red though. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The libertarian party is a fools errand. It's like the kid at the video store with all the fish tackle in his face and plates in his ear lobes trying to be "independent and unique". Looking just like all the other people trying to be "independent and unique". Libertarians and Republicans are together on about 80% of the issues. But instead of focusing on the 80% of the issues they want and fighting within the Republican party to make them come true, they concentrate on the 20% and take their ball and go home. Or put fish tackle in their face as the case may be. Remember these "independent and unique" folks are the ones to give us Clinton. Twice.  | ||
| Blake |
Why try to save the life of an unborn baby, the singularly most innocent and helpless of all humanity? Better to view such innocent and helpless lives like some kind of infection, an absess to be ripped apart and tossed into the garbage? But don't even think about causing a known terrorist any discomfort. The values of a people chart their destiny. | ||
| Cudajohn |
As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others. We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized. Consequently, we defend each person's right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power. We, the members of the Libertarian Party, challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and defend the rights of the individual. We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose. Even within the United States, political parties other than our own grant to government the right to regulate the lives of individuals and seize the fruits of their labor without their consent. Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices. Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. Why has abortion crept into the political debate and into this thread? I'm sorry for bringing it up here. I feel the issue should be taken up by those directly involved in the affair such as a man and wife or girlfriend. It should ultimately be up to them and not us. Fats, that is a typical response from someone who is happy with the current "two party" system that has ruined the American politics and consequently the country. Please tell me you don't support a two party government or a one party system (your party). You do know they are essentially wanting to take us in the same direction? Dem.s just happened to fool more people this election cycle and it happens to be more dangerous. Anyway, I'm off the political discussion here. I don't come here for politics, just got wrapped up in this thread. I respect all of your opinions either way. | ||
| Blake |
"I feel the issue should be taken up by those directly involved in the affair such as a man and wife or girlfriend." Right, be sure to exclude the baby. Why grant any rights to the most innocent and helpless. Better to treat them like a tumor to be excised? I don't get it. It's like people have been brainwashed to completely discount the life of an unborn baby. Insanity. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others. We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized. Consequently, we defend each person's right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power. We, the members of the Libertarian Party, challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and defend the rights of the individual. We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose. Even within the United States, political parties other than our own grant to government the right to regulate the lives of individuals and seize the fruits of their labor without their consent. Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices. Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. Why has abortion crept into the political debate and into this thread? I'm sorry for bringing it up here. I feel the issue should be taken up by those directly involved in the affair such as a man and wife or girlfriend. It should ultimately be up to them and not us. Fats, that is a typical response from someone who is happy with the current "two party" system that has ruined the American politics and consequently the country. Please tell me you don't support a two party government or a one party system (your party). You do know they are essentially wanting to take us in the same direction? Dem.s just happened to fool more people this election cycle and it happens to be more dangerous. Anyway, I'm off the political discussion here. I don't come here for politics, just got wrapped up in this thread. I respect all of your opinions either way. Thank you for outlining the 80% of what Libertarians AND Republicans believe in common. REAL conservatives seek to preserve the form of government created by the founding fathers. Federalism, state's rights, minimal government. A two party system works the best. Period. By virtue of a third party, the electorate vote is diluted. The Libertarian party lacks the ability to secure most or all of the "non-Democrat" vote. Consequently, the Libertarian party sucks votes away from the party holding the most ideals in common, the Republican party, and guarantees that the Democratic party will win. The Ron Paul voters were a prime example. How many RP supporters decided to take their ball and go home because THEIR candidate didn't win? In their staunch support of RP, these rabid supporters who elected NOT to participate cut their nose off to spite their face and guaranteed that BHO won. Which candidate was closer to being able to fulfill at least some if not most of the Libertarian goals? I'm pretty sure that BHO will provide ZERO of these goals. Now if you REALLY want to provide a real three party option, work within the Republican party to secure a constitutional amendment that alters the electoral process. Create a provision that the top two candidates in a "super primary" have a run off. Ron Paul received a small percentage of the vote not because he was a third party but because he was an unattractive candidate. Promote an electable candidate and the Libertarian party might actually win. The 2008 election was a great opportunity to provide a real conservative candidate. McCain wasn't it. |
