Arlen Specter: Giant "D"

So my half day today was met with the news that Arlen Specter has become a Democrat, not that he wasn't already there anyways, but now its official.  The news to me isn't so much that he switched, senators switch all the time in the face of electoral upheval (Sens. Nighthorse Campbell and Shelby come to mind), but the sheer audacity of personal ambition.  But can you be surprised?

A couple things to note.  First off, there is nobody to blame for this other than maybe Pat Toomey, and not even in a bad way.  Politico has a story of Sens. Snowe and Graham blasting conservatives, saying we are making the party small with Graham saying "I don't want to be a member of Club for Growth," and Snowe saying “I happened to win with 74 percent of the vote in a blue-collar state, but no one asked me, 'How did you do it?'  I hope the moderates in the party don't fall for this, because that would be the real problem.  Let me remind these so-called moderates that its been the official position of the Republican Party to back all incumbents.  Senator Specter himself was supported in 2004 by both George W. Bush and Rick Santorum.  The GOP has always stood behind Sen. Collins and Snowe in Maine because we know its the best we can possible get.  Senator Snowe, however, needs to understand that the way she runs as a Republican in Maine is different from how Republicans elsewhere need to run.  Seems as if she doesn't have much of a sense of big tentism.    But the trap is what is important.  Democrats are going to use this to set moderates against conservatives, and the moderates always fall for it.  The Republican Party has done everything it can for senators like Specter, Chafee, the Maine Girls, Grahame, et al.  Everything.  John Cornyn was putting everything he had behind Specter.  For Snowe and Graham to plow conservatives like this is ridiculous.

This has nothing to do with parties, anyways.  This has everything to do with Arlen Specter not wanting to be held accountable to his votes and his views.  Specter is not a moderate, he's a Democrat.  It speaks to a larger problem with our system regarding United States senators where they feel entitled to their seat, feel entitled to their position, and that their votes and their decisions should be questioned by voters at home.   The reason why I don't really have a problem with Specter's switch on intellectual grounds is because he knew he was out of touch with Republicans in Pennsylvania.  And not just conservatives, because polls had him getting waxed by Pat Toomey in the entire GOP Primary.

Moderates will crow because Democrats always make them crow, but this isn't about party labels.  This is about one man's desperate attempt at political survival, at not being held accountable for his votes and his views.  What I want to know is do the Democrats have any self-respect left, are they going to just roll-over to this selfish man who cares about as much for your party as he does mine.  

But I guess the Democrats will roll over to keep their majority, just like we did over and over for clowns like Chafee, Specter, or whoever.  So all we can do is rally behind Pat Toomey, or whoever comes out of that primary, and make sure this selfish senator's ploy to avoid his record and his votes.  

Comments

[VA Blogger]

Pat Toomey is part of the problem. This is a man who has devoted much more time and energy to tearing down Republicans than Democrats. We'd be much better off with someone like Jim Gerlach, who's considering a bid for statewide office already.

[200 Grande]

I thought Spector had strong feelings about the Republican Party and direction it should be taking.

Especially in the Northeast, Republicans should be running on positions that make us indistinguishable from Democrats, but for the "R" after our name. That's the way to win and govern, right? Look at all the prosperity which that kind of governance has brought to the Northeast. How can Republicans ever hope to get a piece of that action?

How dare Pat Toomey break Party unity and chase away the great statist visionary that is Arlen Spector?

Whatever will we do?

[Chris]

VA Blogger, thats fine. If Gerlach runs, we have a primary, and then we support the nominee. Toomey is not the problem, because there is nothing wrong with someone giving our party a choice in nominating candidates. We should not give incumbents carte blanche just because they are incumbents. What Specter did was, in effect, run as a Republican and get elected as a Republican and take Republican money, but then vote against what many in his party stood for and then run away from defending that record.

Its shameful. Pat Toomey has nothing to do with that. Pat Toomey didn't make Arlen Specter vote for the horrid porkulous bill.

[Moving Right]

Chris has pretty much hit the nail on the head.

Spector is not and never was a conscientious moderate. Rather, he is and always has been a self-interested political opportunist.

He is neither a conservative, nor a modederate, nor a liberal. Spector is whatever Spector believes he needs to be to hold onto what he has always cared about: power.

It's not about ideology. It's not about abortion. Or guns. Or the stimulus. Or anything else.

This is about Arlen Spector looking out for Arlen Spector and bending to whatever he perceives to be the latest political wind. Honesty, principle, and everything else have never meant all that much to him.

And what is by far the most interesting aspect to all of this is how anyone reads (or read) anything else into Spector's actions. It honestly pains me to see the belated wailing and moaning from a moderate blog like VA Blogger's TooConservative. Those of us on the right saw who and what Spector was a very long time ago.

I'll more than grant that the conservative wing of the party has had to endure our own frauds and shameless opportunists. And I will more than grant that it's easy to identify shameless opportunists among those you already don't agree with than among those you admire. It's rough admitting that you've been had, been played for a fool.

And as Chris has noted, losing Spector is not a loss. Spector will continue to behave as Spector always has: He moistens his finger and sticks it into the wind. If public opinion is on our side, Spector can be cowed - if only issue by issue. This is no different than when he pretended to be a Republican.

And in the Republican Party itself, Spector's self-purge helps us in our continuing effort to clean house.

Our problem is not with moderates, nor conservatives. We ultimatley need men and women of principle and dedication of a variety of ideological stripes who at least agree with the broad set of principles which define our party.

The Republican Party's problem is with men like Spector: political opportunists and frauds who ruined the brand by refusing to stand on ANY principle, blurring the distinctions between parties, and causing voters to legitimately ask "why bother to vote Republican at all?"

By putting Spector in the Democratic Party where he belongs, we are free to unite those Republicans who can - as a party - offer a CONTRAST to what the Democrats are doing to our country.

The Democrats voted FOR the porkulus. We opposed it.

The Democrats are in FAVOR of Obama's agenda. We are against it.

Without those like Spector, even though we will continue to disagree on a multitude of issues, we will at least have definition and clarity as a party on what we DO agree on and what seperates us from the Democrats.

To be sure, there will be a short term price. Spector has a critical vote. But if there is anything we can rely on Spector for, it's that he will betray his own the moment he is given the chance.

Now the Democrats get to find out what Spector is really like.

[Dan]

"vote against what many in his party stood for"

I believe he was elected by all the people of Pennsylvania not just a portion of one political party. And his job is to represent all the people of Pennsylvania not just a portion of one party.

Don't get me wrong. I take a dim view of people who, after being elected, switch parties. But all this ideological purity crap is a bit ridiculous. A guy has a decades long conservative voting record but if he doesn't adopt the most far right position on every single issue you act like he is Eugene V. Debs or something.

When I was a kid we had a random street lunatic in the neighborhood who used to drag all his belongings around in a shopping bag while screaming about socialism. If that guy was still around he could easily occupy a leadership position in the Republican Party.

The Grand Old Party has become pathetic. It is truly sad.

On a positive note. The Caps have tied the game at 1-1.

Go Caps!

[Dan]

"horrid porkulous bill" ?

I have just one question. Where were all these born again fiscal conservatives during the Bush administration?

To hear y'all talk about George W. Bush now is kinda like Peter denying Christ. To listen to Republicans talk about Bush now you would think they were always horrified by his actions. Funny thing is those same guys were fully supporting him while he was in office. They were casting the votes for doubling the national debt and hiding the cost of the wars. And you wonder why you have a major credibility problem with the voters?

You expect them to believe what you say you are instead of what they so recently have seen you do?

What was it Abe Lincoln said? Oh, yeah.

"You can't fool all the people all the time"

[Dan]

Moving Right,

Keep cleaning house. Purify the party. Have a good witch hunt.

You'll save lots of money at convention time.

You'll be able to hold it in a phone booth.

Go Caps!

[200 Grande]

Dan's question:

"Where were all these born again fiscal conservatives during the Bush administration?"

Answer: Telling the principled fiscal conservatives to hold their convention in a phone booth, just like they're doing now!

[Chris]

you can't even compare Bush's spending to Obama's. He's spent more in a 100 days than all other presidents combined.

[Dan]

Chris,

That's not quite accurate is it? But then you know that. You're a bright guy.

That's another reason the Republicans have a credibility problem. Their recent habit of playing fast and loose with facts.

The current playbook involves cherry picking passages out of reputable articles and research papers and totally misrepresenting them to support their political viewpoints. They have been doing it with disturbing regularity lately. Old Newt Gingrich was playing that game in spades the other day. And he is supposed to be your idea guy!

The problem in the age of the internet is that folks can easily reference the original document and immediately call bullshit on them. Thus their credibility tanks even faster.

Can you imagine William F. Buckley or Barry Goldwater making stuff up or misrepresenting the work of others in order to make a case? Of course not. They were honest men and commanded respect.

If you are interested in your party's future you should lead the charge in calling bullshit on these guys. And refrain from making comments like your 8:24 comment which is demonstrably untrue. There are many folks who are legitimately uneasy with the budget. But making stuff up ain't the way to promote an opposition viewpoint.

CAPS WIN!

[Steven Osborne]

Arlen Specter said today that the GOP was too far to the right, and yet just last year we nominated the most moderate candidate since '76. Last year also saw the defeat of several Northeastern GOPers running with Specter-like positions.

The majority of independents in this country are conservative-leaning folks. The "mainstream" media continues to push this nonesense about most independents being like a Specter or a Snowe. They do this, however, as the very liberal cities from which they write and broadcast lose population as people move to more conservative states (except for CNN which is based in Atlanta, but you get the point).

As far as Specter's leaving, my response is don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[novamiddleman]

Everyone should actually read Specters remarks.

For all the conservatives out there. I continue to ask the question. If you win the primary but lose the general is that a victory for conservatives. I know its a ridiculous question but I have to ask.

The democrats actually get it. You see the reasons they have control of the country now is that they have allowed conservative leaning democrats to run and win in purple to purple-red areas.

Now Conservative Republicans on the other hand enjoy tearing down Republicans in purple to purple-blue areas.

In case you haven't noticed there is a problem the number of Republicans is shrinking. Show me a conservative who can actually win in a purple state. McDonnell gets it he is tacking as fast as he can to the middle. Its time the rest of you wake up.