The GOP

Arlen Specter has been one of the more admired in Washington for his fairness and common sense. I hope his party change will be a wake-up call to the GOP to drop the negative approach to issues and again become a positive party that all the people can relate to. The country needs a strong two-party system to protect us from the uni-party ruling we've seen over the past twenty five years, from both republicans and democrats.

Specter is better off where he now is. His chances of winning in the primary have improved considerably; he hadn't a chance as a RINO. He will feel right at home with the likes of Frank, Frankin, Kennedy and Dodd [sounds like a failed law firm].

Downside of the move is there won't be anyone left on the other side of the aisle to blame when everything goes bad. I do believe the left is starting to get an inkling of that.

Now if RINO McAmnesty would only switch. [HE sure faded into the woodwork quickly, didn't he? As will Specter.]

Your latest is very self-explanatory Clay. Not much need for further comment, but what the heck, somebody has to try and keep Rolando grounded. Senator Spector, to my knowledge, has always been a man of integrity and fairness, even when "The Gipper" made it hard to do so. I have no doubt he will continue this path whether the voters, as well as his former or future party affiliations, accept his decision or not. A great man is not defined by his 'party' but by his actions. Keep up the good work Senator. Thank you for your time and attention, Woody

The GOP is better off without him. I am suprised it took him this long to switch. He has always been more liberal than conservative. I personally think he made the switch because he was losing in the polls and knew if he didnt switch he would not be reelected as a republican so he is going to try out the democrat side.

This is sooo funny, just like the GOP. They are just a laugh a minute.

Rolando- The GOP cannot survive if it only plays to its hardline base. The last election proved that. The Republican party is quickly becoming a regional party of philosophical and religious zealots.

If you want to purify the party to only those who think exactly like you and Rush Limbaugh, that's great... Great for the Democrats. It will be disastrous for the GOP, however.

Snooksie and Rolando-

So, let me get this straight- the Republican Party would be better off with FEWER MEMBERS? You do realize how insane this sounds.

You may call Specter, McCain and anyone else who doesn't goosestep to El Rushbo's beat a 'RINO' (as if YOU are the one who determines who is and isn't a Republican), but the GOP continues to alienate its moderate supporters, it will be a disaster. Republicans will go from being a political movement to a mere cult.

Woody, Ahem!

Thank you for your very quotable line... ..."A great man is not defined by his 'party' but by his actions."

I hesitate to bring it up but could you change that to,

"A great person is not defined by his 'Party' but by his actions!"

Snooksie,

I believe that the good senator announced that himself.

You didn't think of it.

Clara, he may have announced it. I just find that it is weak to jump from side to side when you know you are not going to win. What happen to being true to your party. The GOP needs a leader and it dont have that right now and he was not it. The GOP will make its comeback. The bad ones just have to be weeded out and Arlon was one of them.

No matter what his reason for leaving...he knew he could not win staying with the GOP. Denial has gotten them where they are today and continues to shrink them. This was a big defeat to the GOP whether they want to admit it or not. Others will follow.

Snooksie-

What ever happened to being true to your COUNTRY! Specter did what he believed to be right by supporting the stimulus bill and whet did it get him- the scorn of his party leaders and a pledge from the hardline purists to defeat him in Pennsylvania's Republican primary.

Gee, I can't imagine why he'd want to leave a party like that.

Specter switched parties, not out of a sense of self-service, but rather a sense of national service. He has many issues that are very important to him, and goals that he wants to work toward. It might be hard for you to understand, but he's obviously a man who put serving his country before serving his party.

Snooksie,

Is it too weak to get out of a furiously burning building, even if others are sitting around trying to win a big pot?

Specter did what he did to retain his seat. Plain and simple. No other reason, much less being true to his country.

The Republican Party will either sustain or not. One thing's for sure -- the Democrats won't be able to blame THEM for what is happening. And THAT rankles.

Serious question -- Does anyone know - or have an idea - what happens when a country goes bankrupt? Does China just move in and take over or what? Do the Mexicans? The oil-baron Arabs? The UN? Been a lot of buzz on this on the Internet but no one really seems to know.

A carpetbagger is a carpetbagger, is a carpetbagger.........

Toonfan, comparing Sector jumping to a new party is much different than sitting in a burning building. The fact is is he is more democrat than he is republician. He is only one republician out of 3 that voted for the stimulus, which has not even stimulated the economy. All of it was not bad but there is a lot that could have been taken out. He only switched because he knew that he had no chance of being the republician nominee. Rolando, your last comment is spot on and I couldnt not have said it better myself.

What the Democrats are looking for post-Specter is a moderate political party that thinks their way and votes Democrat. A sort of Democrat Lite.

They hope the Republicans adopt a whole new philosophy foreign to them and move into that little niche the Dems have created. All just to stay alive. I call BS.

Democrats are feeling the pinch of no religion to speak of, no morals or ethics to amount to anything, a Constitution as fixed as a bucket of water, judges who legislate from the bench, no respect for life or liberty, no freedom to be left alone, no guns at all except government-owned or those of the leaders and their cronies, rotten health care for all and the best care for the few, total redistribution of wealth -- other people's wealth, and on and on...all things anathema to Republicans.

And you want -- even hope and expect -- us to fill that void for you. Thank you but no thank you. To paraphrase Nathan Hale, "I would die first." Fill your own dammed [sic] void.

Thanks, Snooksie. It is appreciated...durn few of them words floatin' around here. This is definitely a leftish crowd... :]

Go back to 2001 when Senator Jim Jeffers switched from Republlcan to Independent and caucused with the Democrats. That move cost Arlen Specter the chairmanship of a committee. He (Specter) then tried to push through a rule forbidding changing parties mid-term. Guess it's a situational thing eh?

Whatever he may have had in the past, he's lost it.

bob37421...I have been looking for that story to mention on here. I am glad you found it.

When the tides change, things loosely tethered to shore frequently float to sea.

This is not an unusual occurance.

Throughout the history of the Democrat and Republican party, far more people have switched from Democrat to Republican.

The official Rebuplican Line on Specter is that stated by rolando.

I'm sure there is some truth to it.

Of course, as many on the far right say: he's was a republican in name only. If so, then you can't really debate that the switch was for the reasons other than he explained... that the republican party has drifted from him.

So either he's a RINO, or an opportunist, or both.

No matter what you believe, he probably belongs in the Democratic party.

As a Democrat, in a party more in-line with his beliefs, he may have the opportunity to continue to play a larger role.

Agreed right down the line, moonpie.

More laughs, Zack Wamp Rebublican Governer, now that is really funny. When Wamp relises that he cannot get elected governer, he will retain his 3rd district house seat, citing unfinished items he wishes to complete. Elections equal are job security.

Snooksie and rolando-

My deepest condolences on the death of the Republican Party. Although I was not personally affected by it's sudden and self-destructive passing, I know that the two of you morn its loss. Please know that my thoughts are with you both in what surely must be a difficult time of grief and adjustment.

The Repulicians will come back. You just wait and see.

Toonfan, haha....you should become a comedian!!

Most, if not all, of those who drift from the Democrat Party to the Republican are the disillusioned. Our young are, almost without exception, idealists...which is a good thing. They want to change the world and change it now. They are full of pee and vinegar, energy, and so on.

Somewhere around their late-twenties to mid-thirties, something happens to switch them over. Marriage, kiddies, home, job, just plain security becomes their main concern. They learn the hard way the world doesn't really want changed to something THEY want. They lose their awe of government and see the clay feet that were there all along but they were blind to. Reality hits home; they are old enough to realize exactly what the US offers and they wonder why they wanted to change it.

Many of them either do not grow up and mature into thinking adults, they become deeply enmeshed and involved with the Party itself or they simply miss their sea change. These are the ones who make up the bulk of today's Democrat Party.

BTW, today's Dem. Party is a far cry from the one of forty years ago...in those days, they really WERE for the blue-collar working stiff -- except the blacks, of course, but that is a whole different story. The Republicans really WERE for business [both big and small], taxpaying white-collar workers and smaller government -- and they supported blacks, but that is part of the other story. Republicans support the nuclear family, both then and now; the Democrats, of course, favor fatherless, single-parent, poverty stricken families which are kept deeply dependent on the government for support.

The on-topic tie-in: Guess which of the two party platforms Specter generally supported and why he was called a RINO. Further, guess why the Republican party is better off without his [to us] warped, immoral views.

We didn't change...Specter did any or all of it -- personally, I think he hasn't changed at all...he has always held those views.

toofan, that is the BEST response to the rebups loss, hopefully for good. I hope to see an idenpendent party rise while we have an intellectual in the White House, the darks days of big dummy Bush are gone. Lets face it Bush was not exactly a person of deep thought.

I too, aae1049, hope Specter's party change is "for good". [Yeah, I know.]

Hey, without the Republican primaries, where are the Dem Bozos going to vote?

And if you call that buffoon in the White House -- the one that can't speak except when the words are written in front of him -- is an "intellectual", that says a lot about your standards.

Absolutely unbelievable who you folks pick for your hero models -- first Dear Leader, then two RINOs, McCain and Specter.

As I stated a few weeks ago when I joined this, my first Blog, I was neither a Republican, Democrat, Independent,Middle of the Roader or a believer in a whole lot of other isms or ocracies.

But the one thing I do like is truth, however hard it is to swallow sometimes.

I'm sorry but I'm easily turned off if I've been caught in someone's web,or someone tries to manipulate me only for their own good, although they will say,"It's for your own good." Hah! I'd like to think I'm capable of determining and learning what is good for me, and politics ain't.

Of course I've told some lies. I stopped doing it because I've been caught. I'm definitely not good at it.

Over a period of around 65 years of adulthood and dottage, I've been exposed to all sorts of people's self-deception and need to "convert" others to their way of thinking. Unfortunatly, their conversion attempts haven't been for my benefit, and often sick-minded...from salesmen to a "Moonies" if anyone remembers them.

Parnoid? Perhaps but aren't we all, to some degree.

Thank you for reading this rant. I don't often feel the urge or need, and living the life I do, you all are part of my now limited contact with the world.

By the way, anyone, what's a "RINO"

RINO,is term used to reference favor to the Dems,

or Rolando In No Opposition

The GOP was down for the count during the Clinton administration and came back. McCain't be President should join the Democrats too. He was the worst Republican candidate in the history of the United States.

Clara, RINO = Republican In Name Only

Republican In Name Only, Clara.

Good last post, BTW...for what my opinion is worth.

Liberals always seem to know what is best for us...just ask them.

He was also the first Republican presidential candidate anointed by the liberal press to the exclusion of practically all the rest, Oz. And the first essentially nominated by the Independents and Democrats voting in the Republican Primaries.

Hopefully the RNP will take care of the last problem...the first is solving itself with the unregretted failure of the MSM rags.

We may have lost a RINO or two, but the left has lost their newsprint mouthpieces just as they have lost their radio voices. Both due to lack of interest in their product.

BTW, Oz, did you note that Dear Leader again snubbed FoxNews at his last press conference? He was a little upset that Fox told him they weren't going to carry his prime-time pre-arranged gabfest.

The man is capable of pettiness to the nth degree...comes with being an intellectual, I guess.

Pat Toomey was leading in the Republican primary polls 51% to 30% over Specter. Specter's switch has much less to do with principles than it does political survival and, I would assume, political promises from the Democratic Party. From a state that had the "wisdom" to deliver Fast Eddie Rendell to the governor's seat, I would guess it would have the "wisdom" to return Specter to a well-worn (or worn out) senator's seat. At 79 years of age, I have to ask, "Why?"

dss-

I think Arlen Specter switched parties for both reasons- politics and principle. Certainly, the move will help to prolong his political career, but I think he also did it for principle- the principle of public service. We'll see in 18 months whether the voters of Pennsylvania prefer his principles or those of Pat Toomey and a Republican Party that would turn on someone for a lack of dogmatic orthodoxy.

What does it say about a political party that would turn on a US senator with 28 years seniority because he had the audacity to buck the party line on ONE VOTE! I think it's the sign of a party that is so insecure with its own philosophy, and so nervous about its eroding public support, that it no longer has room for dissent among its ranks.

The surest sign of party with a weak argument, is one that forbids those ideas to be challenged.

Rolando-

Concerning the White House press conference: The President didn't call on anyone from FOX News because he was only taking questions from journalists.

Oz-

The Republicans were down for the count during the Clinton administration? What are you talking about? They were in control of both houses of Congress for six of Clinton's eight years.

Good dig, OllieH.

The real reason, of course, was FOX refused to accept the pre-determined question given to them by Dear Leader in advance and allowed to "ask" him. [Dear Leader is incapable of speaking or even answering questions without advance notice and a chalk board...every time he has, he screwed up.]

Real journalists refuse to kowtow to him or "kiss his ring". So who are the "journalists" now?

This just in from drudgereport.com"

"Obama losing viewers: Latest primetime telecast down 29%..."

Seems Specter isn't the only one losing supporters.....

Given the VP's latest & greatest quotes can we not say this cartoon goes for both parties? (I'm open for debate on whats his greatest qoute)

All these teleprompter accusations regarding Obama and his real ability to think and talk sound exactly like what people were saying about Ronald Reagan.

Sure, all of these guys have scripts and speechwriters. Reagan had some of the best.

But this didn't mean the man was any less. The same is true for Obama.

These kinds of attacks say more about the attackers than they do the president.

In trying to make Obama look small, the far right proponents makes themselves look petty.

They would do far better to stick to principles.

I know this happens on both sides of the aisle, and in almost all cases the attackers are denegrating themselves.

wareagleash.....You are so correct. I have come to expect these kinds of things from Joe Biden seeing as he did it all durning the election. Some of them are quite funny. They had them on foxnews.com a few days ago.

wareagleash --- this has to be one of my favorite Joe Biden stories so far, copied and pasted from Foxnews.com :

*** In a Sept. 22, 2008, CBS interview, Biden misspoke when he said Franklin D. Roosevelt was president when the stock market crashed in 1929.

"When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, 'Look, here's what happened," he said. Herbert Hoover -- not Roosevelt -- was president in 1929, and television had not yet been invented in 1929.***

Tiffo, thats a good one that I had forgotten about.

Man, rolando, you have an odd way of seeing things.

You stated: Obama losing viewers: Latest primetime telecast down 29%... Seems Specter isn't the only one losing supporters.....Seems Specter isn't the only one losing supporters.....

You might want to qualify that as Specter loing RIGHT WING supporters. As for the Democrats, well, the numbers in Pennsylvania have never looked better!

Rolando, you also stated, "FOX refused to accept the pre-determined question given to them by Dear Leader in advance and allowed to "ask" him."

FOX News aside, what proof do you have that the White House pre-determines questions? I have not seen one word reported about such a practice. It sounds like pure BS to me!

Before you answer: DO NOT give me either Drudge or FOX as your source for this information.

No OllieH, drudgereport.com cited a report that Obama was losing viewers. Please, get it right. And supporters/viewers are just that, losing or gaining. And they are both losing.

You wouldn't see "one word" about the questions anyway, OllieH. Huffpost doesn't report negative stuff about Dear Leader. Nor did the almost-dead NYT, LAT, or ChiTrib.

The report came from the WH Press Corp itself, of course. And quietly hushed up. Haven't you noticed the reshuffling of seats going on? You think that is standard fare? Don't know much about Press Corp protocol, do you?

Conspiracy Theory, again? Again, perhaps; but the odds are still greatly stacked in my favor.

I didn't get it wrong, rolando. I never said you cited Drudge for the press conference lie. You just seem to regurgitate the druge report so often, I thought I'd spare you the trouble.

But gosh, by the answer above, it doesn't look like you have any source for that story after all. I guess it was hushed up right after you heard it.

Well, moonpie, in their desperate clamor to boost Dear Leader, the Left has compared him to everyone from Moses through Jesus Christ and Mohammad to Lincoln and FDR and everyone in-between -- so why not Reagan? Truth is, he is comparable to none of them except perhaps FDR -- they both deeply compounded a severe depression in our economy.

Your comparison of him to Reagan is particularly onerous...there is simply no basis for comparison. Reagan was a capitalist to the core who extolled the individual over the state [a true Republican]. Dear Leader is a socialist to the core who extols the state over the individual [a true Democrat]. Exact opposites make poor favorable comparisons.

His further comparison to other than Mohammad is specious, at best.

Come on, rolando... Give us a source for your claim. I'll do better than OllieH. I'll let you use FOX News or Drudge as a source. Surely you can find some validation for your story. If it's been reported, EVER, you should be able to find it on the internet.

Unless you just made it up.

As I said, OllieH, it was never really reported in those journals you read.

The drudgereport.com cite was for the Dear Leader loss of viewers...as you already know...and had nothing to do with the pre-arranged questions. Think "compound answer"...like this one. Several [semi-related] subjects in one retort.

Rolando- are you Muslim-baiting. What's up with the Mohammad remark?

It's always sad to see such desperation.

Stop it, rolando. I followed all of your posts, and didn't confuse any of them. Of course, if you can't support the lies you spread, I shouldn't be surprized by your attempts at misdirection.

Leave him alone, OllieH. You've obviously caught him in a lie.

We'll let this one go, rolando.

The Drudge Report is not really a source, toonfan. It is a central clearing house for news and information of interest. I use it for that purpose...and to refer thoughtful folks to other good information.

So YOU find it, toonfan. It is there...you only need to do a bit of analysis and add two and two. Or not. [HINT: It occurred shortly after Dear Leader's complete gaffe during a WH press conference -- the last un-orchestrated one he gave, you can guess why...the man didn't change, the process did. Conspiracy Theory, again?]

It's not up to me to prove it, rolando. I don't believe it.

Don't pass the buck. If you can't substantiate a claim, don't make it.

That's easy, OllieH.

Get it together and try to follow... Equal time, right? Fairness Doctrine, right? Moses, Jesus, and.....wait for it......MOHAMMAD! Wow!

The Muslim jihad [see http://www.danielpipes.org/990/what-is-jihad] against a Judeo-Christian nation [yes, we still are] needs exposure. It has nothing to do with "-baiting".

No need to drop anything. Just do the thoughtful research, toonfan.

Ah. You chose "Or not." Thought you would. Easier that way.

Fact remains, they are orchestrated down to the bone. You might try "Ripley's"...

rolando, how many times have you asked us to supply a link to back up our arguments? We're simply asking you to do the same. I have to assume that if this story was actually true, you would have done that by now.

This is silly. I'm done with your spurious story. It's time to put up, or shut up.

Wow, rolando. You stated, "Get it together and try to follow".

Do you really have to insult my intelligence when you reply? I haven't questioned your intelligence, only the veracity of your comments.

You are right, OllieH. It was out of line. My apologies. I didn't think the connection was that difficult to see; thought you were being obstinate and responded in kind.

Normally, toonfan, I DO supply cites when appropriate but not always, as I said. No one here does. This time I figured I would force a little research, thought and consideration of the facts available out of you...or not. It worked...you chose the easy, liberal way out by attacking the messenger and ignoring the message. You guys do that a LOT -- with some notable exceptions, of course. Congrats on following your inclinations.

Let me know if you ever figure it out.

Since I don't really care about the orchestrated press conferences (because when things are obvious, you don't need a source like a liberal), I'm going to change the direction of this real quick...

Toonfan, Oh, I missed you :) Anyways, do you know why the republicans came into power the last 6 years of Clinton's administration? I'm glad you brought up the last Republican comeback. It was a situation similar to this, which the dems see coming--which is why some of them are even starting to vote AGAINST what Obama wants. Americans realized what was going on with the dems and didn't like it. The Republican Party came up with the contract for America or to Americans (not POSITIVE on the name) SIX WEEKS before the elections and what happened? The Republicans gained control... cameback if you will. They were just as unliked before that contract as they are now by the fair weather libs and swing voters. Six weeks, wow! With as far left as the libs are getting now, I'm kind of excited to see how big this comeback in 2010 will be!

You guys need to meet after school behind the swing set and work out your differences!

Republicans were down for the count after Nixon and Watergate. Jimmy Carter brought them back to life after one term.

you can argue for and/or hope that the republican party is dead. but i promise you that it is far from it ...picture it like this. a hunter lost in the woods with buzzards flying over head just hoping for him to fall over dead so they may pick apart the parts. but i can say this, that hunter will not lay his gun down and die nor will the republican party. we are shedding dead weight which is sad it took such a situation to happen. once that is over we will struggle and we will live through the next four years and once we are out of the woods, we will be going back home to the whitehouse to set right and correct the wrongs that will happen during this presidents term

Now guys, what this situation needs is a little less "tertosteron" and more estrogen, end it now, diplomacy. Try this first.

What a bunch of control freaks!

These are the kinds of conservative folks who will bring us back: Read Andrew C. McCarthy's self-published e-mail to AG Eric Holder wherein he declined an invitation. You won't find it on huffpost or the MSM: http://nrinstitute.org/mustread.php