No loss to our side - Specter was never truly a republican
Posted By: me on 2009-05-01
In Reply to: Do You Like Apples? - Truthseeker
He didn't switch sides because he is "disenchanted" with the republican party. He never voted republican to begin with. He has always been a liberal. When I heard he switched parties at first I thought he switched to be a republican. He was always left, just not as far left as most. He couldn't go too left otherwise suspicion would have been raised a long time ago. So there is no loss to the republican side since he was never really a republican to begin with. He also switched for one main reason. It has nothing to do with liberal or conservative values. It has everything to do with the fact that he does not believe he will be voted for next year as a conservative. He's done this in the past. He used to be democrat, then when he thought he would not be voted for as a democrat he switched to republican. So, he may have switched now, but don't worry, down the road if the democrats don't get voted in he will switch again for the following election.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
- Do You Like Apples? - Truthseeker
- No loss to our side - Specter was never truly a republican - me
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Clinton is a thorn in the republican side...always has been. nm
x
And? On which side are you on? You are a staunch conservative, a republican?..sm
All of a sudden you cheer with the progressive Liberals?
Or is it because you are afraid of the 'hidden weapons of mass destruction?'
See my post regarding Specter, please.
This is not about Specter "changing his views" or rejecting Republican "extremist" views. He has always been a faux-Republican.
This about one thing, and one thing only - namely, about Arlen Specter doing whatever it takes to get Arlen Specter reelected.
Arlen Specter supported it...
Makes me proud to be from PA...not. He needs to be beaten in the next election.
Arlen Specter Switching Parties
Arlen Specter, who has always been the weirdest "Republican" senator, has decided to switch to the Democrats, saying "I now find my political philosophy more in line with the Democrats than the Republicans".
You're just discovering this, are you Arlen? The rest of the world has known this for years. You should read a newspaper now and then.
Forget about the fundamental ethical problem here - i.e., the betrayal of the voters' trust that any legislator commits when he runs under one party and then switches horses afterward. I say "forget about it" because this is only one of the multitude of deceptions that legislators like Specter engage in throughout their careers. One more ripple in this maelstrom of representational malfeasance is scarcely noticeable any more. Even a used car salesman is prohibited from pulling bait-and-switch tricks on the public, but then whoever said a Congressman should have as much integrity as a used car salesman?
And, this won't make much difference during the current term either, because Specter was a pretty reliable vote for Obama's socialist programs anyway. He was one of the three Republicans who broke ranks and cleared the way for the "emergency" (quick - before the voters read it!) funding package and like everyone else who voted for it he did so without reading most of it.
Where this could make a difference (unless Democrat voters in Pennsylvania find Specter's duplicity as disgusting as anyone with moral sense should) is that this boosts his chances of reelection. As things were shaping up, he was not going to get any support from Republicans or Democrats next time out. Now, he hopes the Democrats will vote for him - and he'll undoubtedly get a lot of money from Democratic party headquarters that he would never have had from the Republican side because they're sick of him..
Let's really get a clear understanding of what we're talking about here, which is a senator taking the moral low road for the sole purpose of preserving his own position. It is a raw, naked, and some might even say desperate effort to keep power within his clutches and get himself reelected at any cost, no matter what his actions do to further disgrace Congress - a body that has already lost most of the esteem that Americans once had for it.
Specter will be running for his 6th term and now becomes the best argument - the poster child, in fact - for term limits. Again I say (and would say this regardless of which way Specter was switching) - we MUST get control of the subversion of the political process by people who will do anything - including betraying their own voters - to accumulate and retain power for themselves, and the ONLY way to do this is to impose term limits.
Link to Specter's statement quoted above::
Sorry - it vanished into the ozone: http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2009/04/28/specter-had-disavowed-a-switch/
Link to Specter's statement quoted above::
Sorry - it vanished into the ozone: http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2009/04/28/specter-had-disavowed-a-switch/
On 3/17, Specter denied planning to switch. Here's the quote:
(Link provided below)
In a March 17th interview with The Hill, Specter said he absolutely would not switch parties:
"[Democrats] are trying very hard for the 60th vote. Got to give them credit for trying. But the answer is no.
I'm not going to discuss private talks I had with other people who may or may not be considered influential. But since those three people are in the public domain, I think it is appropriative to respond to those questions.
I am staying a Republican because I think I have an important role, a more important role, to play there. The United States very desperately needs a two-party system. That's the basis of politics in America. I'm afraid we are becoming a one-party system, with Republicans becoming just a regional party with so little representation of the northeast or in the middle atlantic. I think as a governmental matter, it is very important to have a check and balance. That's a very important principle in the operation of our government. It's in the Constitution on separation of powers."
Thanks for the civics lecture, Arlen. Apparently this is just another one of those "inconvenient truths" that got to be more than you could actually live with, eh buddy?
Very sorry for your loss but
bitterness never helps anything and always hurts the bearer.
I'll pray for your family though. I know the Christmas much be very difficult for you this year.
I am sorry for your loss as well. sm
However, yesterday Nazrallah released a video pretty much reinforcing what was said about terrorists and the left. It's a fact. I also honor your son-in-law's service and sacrifice.
I am sorry, very sorry for your loss....
but, what can I say?
Think of the people who had losses caused by the WWWI and WWII.
As far as job loss right now...(sn)
no, I don't hold Obama responsible for that. We have been in a recession for quite some time under Bush, and that is something that Obama inherited -- along with a deficit and a budget that didn't include the cost of 2 wars.
Since you know so many small business owners who are laying off as a "direct result" of regulations Obama is putting into play, please feel free to enlighten us as to the exact nature of those regulations. Please be specific.
I am sorry for your loss.
I don't post here much, but I will pray for you.
The Anti-Republican Republican Who is Really a Republican
The whole anti-Republican Republican ruse might have succeeded, were it not for the fact that McCain's rhetoric was at odds not merely with his own voting record - 90 percent with Bush - and his own Bush-on-steroids agenda.
Even as he was pledging to "change the way government does almost everything," the senator from Arizona announced his commitment to much, much more of the same.
He pledged to maintain endless occupations of distant lands that empty the U.S. Treasury of precious resources that might pay for infrastructue renewal, housing and job creations initiatives for hurting Americans.
He outlined trade and tax policies that would extend, rather than alter a failed economic status quo.
He reintroduced flawed proposals for health care, education and entitlement reforms that Americans have wisely rejected.
And he threatened to achieve "energy independence" by declaring:
"We will drill..."
"We'll drill..."
"More drilling..."
McCain's rhetoric was that of a liberated man declaring his independence from his party's failed president and corrupt Congresses.
But his platform was that of Republican candidate who, for all of his talk of reform, offers the crudest continuity to a country that is crying out for change.
http://www.truthout.org/article/the-anti-republican-republican-who-is-really-a-republican
Very sorry for your loss Carla.
Period.
No *buts* or *howevers* or other qualifiers.
Just very very sorry. Period. 
Yes, but a loss for America.
nm
For every auto job loss
that seven other people in this country are affected. Think about it: Bailing out the big 3 IS bailing out the American taxpayer.
Not really a loss, IMHO.
I believe the term for him and others like him are RINOs (Republicans in name only).
Now at least he won't have to lie about which party he belongs to.
Not really a loss, IMHO.
I believe the term for him and others like him are RINOs (Republicans in name only).
Now at least he won't have to lie about which party he belongs to.
For those of you who think that loss of gun ownership can't happen here...
http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?displayContent=177117&page=1&wh=wh
1929 crash saw a loss of
The high point for us was last year at 14,164 in October and an 89% loss is 1,558.
It is hard for me to see where shoring up the banks is helping anybody. We are already down almost 50% from this time last year.
With the largest jobs loss since 1945, your fix would
simply be to evict and starve the unemployed out of existence? Wow. Compassionate conservativism at its finest.
No big loss. That poster added nothing of substance and sounded like he/she is a
troll from the conservative board. 
I read plenty thanks! You can blame loss of life
nm
So sorry for your loss. You make great points. Lets
nm
Was not aware of Carla's loss, but your response was completely uncalled for
your response about dead soliders is not only wrong but completely, completely uncalled for.
Turning Obama's loss of his last living elder relative
Palin's handicapped child was being dragged out at all hours of the day and night to help gain that hockey mom family values gal political capital. No harm in pointing that out. Pregnant daughter used by the fringe camp as a convenient way to cry sexism foul and cop out on legitimate political debate on Roe vs Wade and birth control. Son and daughter are still among the living.
Obama's grandmother has been politicizd how? He credits her for instilling him with many of the values that drive him to seek office. She raised him during his moist formative years. She is DYING, for heaven's sake. Most human beings understand that grieving this kind of loss is off limits in terms of gaining political traction. This coming from the party that would shove their morality down our throats. I am so sure.
Labor Department's report of 533,000 job losses in November — the biggest job loss in 34 years
Getting worse every day.
Jet not sold on ebay, sold at a loss privately. nm
.
I was never on SP's side.... s/m
but I think that it was extremely tasteless of this Canadian comedian to post as
French President Sarkozy and interview her for 5 minutes and making fun of her.
Extremely tasteless.
After all she was the running mate of McCain.
I am a democrat.
I don't think that either side... sm
has much room to talk.
I have seen articles, opinions and links posted, apparently by Republicans, about the issues facing Obama, and the first replies are the childish Dems who come on and say "well, it's Bush's fault that he has this or that to deal with" or some other childish remark.
By the same token, I have seen what I believe to be Democrats posting nasty articles and opinions about Sarah Palin and how she is giving interviews, how she obviously doesn't have the sense to be a major political player or whether she gave the clothes back to the party before going back to Alaska.
I'm with BWT. I think the childishness and catiness that I have seen on this board for the last week or so need to end and let's get to discussing the issues at hand. We won't be able to solve a danged one of them, but we can have a civilized adult discussion and we might even learn a thing or two from each other.
Reach across the aisle, folks. 
We are on the same side
I wanted to post and did not want to respond to an Ann fan, so I posted under your reasonable statement.
no just one side
This problem is not just a dem/repub problem. It is a greedy CEO/Wallstreet problem as well. It is a mass amounts of people went out and bought things they couldnt afford and houses they didnt need and couldnt afford problem. Did the gov make them go out and do that? Who made all these people sign their names on these subprime short arm loans that collapsed? It is their fault too. It is also a welfare problem. You know, those people who would rather pop out kids for a job than work for real.
...and just you on the other side.
...but not LAST night.
Get a job.
No one took Eric's side. sm
But then, you know that. The rest I won't argue with you about. If you use science against God's Word, what more can I say.
The Other Side of Mel Gibson...sm
Disney Cancels Mel Gibson Holocaust Series
The ABC television network has pulled a miniseries about the Holocaust it was developing with Mel Gibson 's production company, the Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday, quoting an unidentified representative for the network.
Gibson was arrested on suspicion of drunk driving early on Friday and was reported to have launched into a tirade against Jews, asking the arresting officer if he was a Jew and blaming the Jews for starting all wars.
The actor, who holds strong conservative Catholic religious and political views and whose father is a Holocaust denier, apologized on Saturday.
The incident has raised questions about the future of projects Gibson and his Icon Productions company are working on, like the ABC television miniseries based on a memoir about a Dutch Jew during World War II, the newspaper said An ABC representative told the paper, without elaborating, it has been two years and the network still has not seen a script, so the project is being pulled.
A spokesperson for ABC, which is owned by Walt Disney Co. , could not be reached for comment.
Disney's movie studio arm still plans to release Gibson 's self-financed Mayan-language movie Apocalypto on Dec. 8, Hollywood's trade papers reported. The Web site Slate.com quoted Walt Disney Studios president Oren Aviv as saying he accepted Gibson 's apology.
Copyright Reuters 2006. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.
We're on the same side
I am trying to understand where all this animosity is coming from. Why does it bother you so much that the last democratic president and former first lady/candidate/senator are going to be at the convention? How would it look if they weren’t there? Hillary and Obama are basically on the same page when it comes to policy, so I am guessing this is a personality issue for you? During the primaries, her tactics and strategies left a lot to be desired, to be sure, which may have been a mitigating factor as to why Obama was ultimately able to come out on top but, let’s face it, not by much. It will be extremely important that the party get past its in-fighting and focus on the task at hand of winning the election in November.
Bill and Hillary Clinton are and will remain influential party leaders for a some time to come. It appears that it is her die-hard base supporters that are acting like children. They are the ones who prolonging the division and ill-will which you are expressing here. Both the Clintons have been selected by the Democratic National Convention Committee to speak in Denver for good reason. The DNC recognizes just how pivotal their roles will be in bringing the party back together. This group of HRC’s supporters who are planning to disrupt the convention and demand a roll-call are not very likely to succeed in this effort. This serves no useful purpose whatsoever and is in nobody’s best interests.
Hillary will eventually “crawl back into her hole,” as you so eloquently put it, and return to her position as a junior senator, but not until she has done her job of trying to encourage party unity. I suspect that she still has much to contribute in that capacity and in roles yet undefined in terms of advancing party policies. Try not to take what the newscasters say as gospel. They relish in scandal and controversy. Do not give them the satisfaction. It should come as no surprise that the Clintons are disappointed in the primary results, but that does not mean that they are supposed to fade on off into the sunset. It is not their time to pass...not just yet.
Bill Clinton, a racist? Where is this coming from? Fox News? He does not hide behind mansion walls in the ghetto. His foundation continues to advance the cause of civil and human rights, both here and abroad. It is unfair to write HRC off as a disgrace to women who needs to “just go away,” based on this one less than stellar chapter in her political career. She is much more than that, just as Bill Clinton is much than the "impeached president" you so casually dismiss. I am wondering if you hated him this much while he was in office, or did this arise out of the recent primary process?
In any case, if Obama is defeated, HRC will not be responsible. It will be this divisive in-fighting within the party members that will be the reason. We are between the primaries and the convention. The entire campaign still lies ahead of us. Just give it a little more time. You will see Hillary and Bill come around as party loyalists who will play perhaps the most key roles of all in party unification. This is not just their job. It is up to all democrats to come together this fall and keep their eyes on the prize. Perpetuating this kind of division does nothing to advance that cause. Is this hatred really worth harboring to the extent that, in the end, we will be facing 4 or 8 more years of a republican regime? Try to keep that in mind the next time you find yourself this riled up, and ask yourself what I ask you now….where is this really coming from? I think I know the answer, but I am more interested in hearing yours at the moment.
Disrespect is nothing new on your side...
and it is not just directed at me, and to suggest so is being dishonest at best. You tolerate no opinion other than your own, want to discuss only issues that you are pro and do not tolerate discussion of any other viewpoint, and for people who call themselves Democrats that is a very undemocratic attitude. You hate an entire group of people (all Republicans...well I should say anyone who is not Democrat) for no reason other than that. Two sides? That's rich! There have never been 2 sides.
As to domination of the board....there are about 6 or 8 of you guys to 1 of mine. lol. Talk about blinders.
All voters should consider this regardless of which side
It should be very troubling that the mainstream media has been in the tank for Obama since day one. Ask Hillary Clinton or anyone else who ran (again, R, D, or I).
With that in mind, who gave them the right to choose our next President?
Incidentally, the media (left-wing, of course) actually selected McCain, too. They were absolutely certain that he would be the weakest candidate. Mitt scared the holy hanna out of them. I personally hoped for a Rudy-Fred ticket, in no particular order.
It should be interesting as to how many honest people there are reading this stuff to see how they'll react. Based on what I've read since Palin's speech, she's certainly changed quite a few minds.
The thing that surprises me the most is that the bulk of people on this board is women, yet so many of them put party above the person. I personally don't vote by genitalia. I think it's foolish.
"Woe to the other side who does not
recognize it." What I saw was very scary, an individual who has not clue one about what is going on in this country or out of it. Very scared, indeed. Woe, indeed. You make this election sound like a football game. This is our country, our children's future that is at stake. And no, I didn't find her very knowledgeable in the least, just mouthing words and throwing something someone told her to say. We will see, but I pray to God these two do not get elected.
The other side of the story....
http://www.newsmax.com/smith/barack_obama_tony_rezko/2008/09/02/126890.html
Another side of the coin.....
I respect your beliefs and am very happy you found your niche in life and saved your marriage. Kudos to you! I myself do not question Obama's morals - and I can't say that I question McCain's either. But, Bush got into the white house based on deceptive strategies aimed at leading the populace to believe he was on the moral high ground. (I see the same strategy being used in McCain's campaign). In view of what has transpired over the last 8 years, my faith in the pubs moral high ground has been trampled beyond repair. I believe torture of other human beings to be reprehensible and not advocated by any religion, but it continues and McCain supported it - even though he himself was tortured as a POW. The sex scandals - Larry Craig (airport bathrooms - it was illegal - otherwise, I don't care who he has sex with), Mark Foley (Repub House Representative - Once known as a crusader against child abuse and exploitation, Foley resigned from Congress on September 29, 2006 after allegations surfaced that he had sent suggestive emails and sexually explicit instant messages to teenaged males who had formerly served and were at that time serving as Congressional pages) and now the scandal surrounding the Department of the Interior on charges of getting into bed with big oil (literally and figuratively) drug abuse, etc. I find the whole thing ridiculous to base your campaign on "personality" and moral high ground. I am not saying that Dems did not have their issues with sex scandals - as we all know.
I believe Jesus Christ was once a very highly evolved human being and no longer has to incarnate as a human as he has reached perfection. I believe Buddha was a very highly evolved human being who no longer has to incarnate for the same reason. I believe that Ghandi and Mother Theresa were highly evolved. I believe that energy never disappears, it only changes form. I believe in life after death. I believe that love is the most important thing in life. Humans are not perfect. I do not believe that sex is sin. Dolphins have sex for pleasure and I am not equating humans to aquatic life - but Dolphins are highly intelligent. Do you think God judges them for indulging in pleasure? I believe that exploiting the vulnerable for sex is morally wrong (children, women....that's as far as I'll go on that). Sex between 2 consenting adults is not wrong.
I believe that every religion has it's place on earth and I am in no way authorized or vetted to judge which one is right and which one is wrong. They are all right. Paganism, Wiccan, the Jewish faith, Catholic, Muslim, etc., etc. We, as humans, have the right to decide what is right for us in that regard.
I think all religions know the difference between right and wrong and stealing from others, torturing others, even JUDGING others is morally wrong. You can boil it down to not having ANYTHING to do with religion.
And to believe that whoever is in the white house holds your moral values as a primary reason for decisions that are made is naive. I think the last 8 years proves that and for that reason, I fear more of the same. I am willing to cross party lines just to see if this disaster of a country can be repaired.
The other side of the coin....
Karl Rove would be working to get any Republican elected. That is what he does. He is not a member of the campaign and it is a free country...he can advocate anyone he wants.
If Obama was serious about change he would not have picked a senator who has been in the senate over 30 years. That is not change. That is also more of the same.
James Johnson, of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac fame, who used to be an economic advisor to Obama...after he came under scrutiny for possible fraud, he left the OBama campaign with his tail between his legs. Don't see much difference in the two.
Other side of the story...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/09/16/2008-09-16_john_mccain_campaign_releases_troopergat.html
I'm just going to explain our side...
please don't start a war about this.
We are taught in the Bible that homosexuality is wrong and that marriage is between ONE man and ONE woman. We believe in the holy sanctity of marriage. Therefore it is violating the laws of God when homosexuals marry.
Again, it is not the homosexuals that we "hate" or "despise". It is the sin of homosexuality.
I do believe homosexuals are born that way. We are all born into sinful natures. Remember, in God's eyes, all sins are equal. We all have natural tendencies, and that includes homosexuality. I was born a compulsive liar. Since as far back as I can remember I have lied about anything and everything. Now that I am a Christian, that doesn't change. But with the help of Christ I am changing that and I have put away my sinful nature of lying. In the same sense, when a homosexual comes to know the true Christ, He will give them new desires and help them to withstand the temptation to go back to their old ways.
I know most of you won't understand this, but I just wanted to give you our viewpoint. True Christians do not hate homosexuals, or blacks, or immigrants, or abortionists, or anyone else. We just hate the sin, because sin separates us from God.
We want a president who is going to keep the sanctity of marriage, meaning one man and one woman. Marriage came from God, and it is a holy matrimony.
Please don't flame, I'm just trying to explain in a way that maybe you can understand. I see it from your side too. Before I became a Christian I didn't understand the big deal either. But now I do and I see the big picture. If God had meant for man and man or woman and woman to be together, he would have given us the "parts" to be able to do so.
On the lighter side (maybe)
This was sent to me from a friend. Don't know where the info came from.
Guess who I am?
I am 42 years old
I love the outdoors,
I hunt,
I am a Republican reformer,
I have taken on the Republican Party establishment,
I have five children,
I have a spot on the national ticket as vice-president
with less than two years in the governor's office.
Who am I?
|
|
|
|
|
V
I am Teddy Roosevelt in 1900
How can anyone say that Sarah Palin is not qualified?
|
And I'll be right there on the side with you.
I gotta take a break, this board is making me crazy.
On a side note..
Where in the Mojave desert did you live? I grew up in a tiny town called Inyokern and went to high school in Lone Pine.
On the up side of things.........sm
Since I've been such a downer, gloom and doom "prophet" in my last posts  , here is an article that recommends buying now, if you have the cash and the stomach for it, and reap the rewards 10 or 20 years down the road. Might be our solution to no Social Security when that time comes.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27829555/
I think I have the other side of the story.
I've been watching all those other stations for years. I just started watching Fox lately. How much more "open-minded" do you want me to be???
...and on the flip side...we will soon see...sm
what Obama will do with his regime.
I have a feeling it won't be pretty.
At least we'll have a reason to throw all the democrats out of all branches of offices when they fall flat on their you know whatsits, and find they can't do what they think they can.
The American people won't stand for what the country is about to become, you included, once you wise up and see what's about to come.
|
