Specters Beware!

So I'm back here writing, this time post-election and looking at the changing Senate. Arlen Specter has now been retired by the Democratic voters within the state of Pennsylvania and not at the time that best suits him. Down in Arkansas Senator Lincoln was dealt a devastating blow by Bill Halter, but she still has a run-off to try and prevent a liberal from taking her place after years of serving at the behest of corporation instead of her constituency. North from there, Rand Paul, son of Ron, beat the Republican party's favorite to succeed Senator Bunning for the Republican nomination.

What does this all mean? Do we have a revolt against long-term politicians? Is everyone that's in bed with Wall Street and the rolodex of the Fortune 500 on their way out? Well one thing that is for sure, the faces, they are a changin'.

From RawStory:

Insurgent US Republican voters in Kentucky routed their party's establishment candidate and selected iconoclastic political outsider Rand Paul on Tuesday night, a clear show of anger at Washington ahead of November elections to decide control of the US Congress.

Similarly, Democrats in Pennsylvania appeared to have ended the political career of Sen. Arlen Specter, one of the state's best known politicians who became a Democrat after Obama's election in an effort to prolong his time in Congress.

Democrats also managed to hold onto the Pennsylvania congressional seat formerly held by deceased Rep. John Murtha with the victory of Mark Critz. The race was heavily watched and hyped as a predictor of voter mood in the lead-up to November's elections.

What it says, and to concur with what I mentioned yesterday morning, is that a small but dedicated bloc of voters can precipitate major changes. Reports of low voter turnout were a plenty and definitely not surprising. So in a nutshell, Americans have become extremely apathetic (even with the already low voter turnout rates from years past) and those that aren't have tremendous influence with their votes. And that is why the teabaggers get to celebrate a nominee they helped choose in Rand Paul. That is why liberals are enthused (myself among them) that Halter and Sestak did so well last night.

It just goes to show, if people wake up and participate in their government, their ability to effect change and use power is mind boggling.

Anti-Incumbency Fever Set To Hit PA, AR, KY

It's a cool, rainy and most likely uneventful political day in New York. All eyes will likely be fixed on the primary elections in nearby Pennsylvania, and Arkansas and Kentucky as well. Two incumbents are looking at serious challengers and after Senator Bob Bennett (R-UT) was booted by a more right-wing Republican, the situation has become quite serious. Two of today's races are contests on the left, while the other in Kentucky pits a teabag backed candidate versus the Republican party's choice to take over for resident loon Jim Bunning (who has spurned the establishment and backed the teabag-friendly Rand Paul).

From The Huffington Post:

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is not on the ballot in this week's primaries, nor is Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican Senate leader.

But both have a stake in intensely competitive Senate races in three states, contests testing the strength of the tea party among Kentucky Republicans and the durability of incumbent Democratic Sens. Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas and Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania.

In a fourth race of national significance, Republican Tim Burns and Democrat Mark Critz battled to fill out the term of the late Democratic Rep. John Murtha in a congressional district in southwestern Pennsylvania. Both political parties reported spending roughly $1 million to sway the race, turning it into a laboratory for the fall campaign, when all 435 House seats will be on the ballot.

Laboratories aside, the biggest issue here that isn't mentioned in the article is that turnout will likely be extremely low. Any kind of defining moment, or partisan revolution, will come from a small minority of voters who are either fearful of new blood or sick of the same old politician and wish to make a change. Of course, there'll be a big headline on every paper tomorrow morning proclaiming a mandate has been stated by the American people (living in PA, AR and KY) regardless. The truth of the matter though, is that most people simply do not care about these contests and do not see a point in bothering to make it to the ballot box.

Specter's Cancer Charity Is Really A Fundraising Tool

If you've ever been personally affected by cancer, this story about Arlen Specter might make you sick. Now Specter is a two-time survivor of Hodgkins disease and yes, a great supporter of cancer research. However, his website "specterforthecure.com" is not exactly what you might think it is. Getting baseline funding for the NIH is a wonderful idea, but the website's motives are not made clear to those that visit it.

From TPM:

The idea is pretty simple. Specter is an advocate in the Senate for setting a $40 billion annual funding baseline for the National Institutes of Health--and if he's defeated at the polls, that bill will lose one of its most storied and influential sponsors. But if he wins, then the money raised by Specter for the Cure will, de facto, also support Specter's various other, eclectic legislative priorities.

But that's not how he sells it. According to the website, "Arlen Specter will seek re-election to the United States Senate. Without Arlen Specter back in the Senate to see it through, Specter for the Cure could be lost to the ordinary politics of Washington that kills real change." Some of the money he uses in that re-election bid will surely come from people who think they're giving to a cancer charity.

If Specter is defeated at the polls he will be replaced by a strong, progressively-minded Democratic challenger. Since there is no way that the right-wing Pat Toomey will win in a general election, Specter can only be tossed out by an actual Democrat. All we'd have to do is ask Joe Sestak or Joe Torsella about their views on cancer research and that would be that.

About Specter's Coleman "Joke"

Yesterday it was reported that in a New York Times interview with Senator Arlen Specter that he made a comment endorsing Norm Coleman's efforts at delaying Al Franken's ascendancy to the U.S. Senate. Basically he was wishing and hoping that Norm Coleman would prevail in his never-ending litigious quest against the victor of the Minnesota Senatorial election. Then when the story got out, I heard that it was just a joke, and that Specter misspoke. The whole thing was confusing, but apparently the joke wasn't funny with the rest of the Democratic caucus, so much so that they stripped him of seniority in all his committees. Losing seniority in the Senate is a big deal, so naturally people wonder if Specter was really telling a joke. Surely if it was in jest, the rest of his new-found party might consider some sympathy.

Well why not ask the woman who interviewed him:

So was Arlen Specter joking, when he seemed to say he wanted Norm Coleman to win in Minnesota? That’s what some people have been wondering after Specter said this: “There’s still time for the Minnesota courts to do justice and declare Norm Coleman the winner.”

So I asked New York Times reporter Deborah Solomon, who conducted the interview, what her impression was of Specter’s actual tone of voice and overall expression.

“I trust he meant what he said,” Solomon wrote to me. “If he had been joking, surely he could have come up with a wittier line.”

Perhaps he has bad sense of humor but I sincerely doubt it. If I had to choose who I thought was more credible, a reporter from the New York Times or a life-long politician, I wouldn't even give my decision a second thought, unless of course that reporter was Judith Miller. Specter got what he deserved when the Democratic party pulled his seniority. Perhaps now he'll be more mindful of what he says, and as Markos said earlier, it looks like he's making progress today.

What Kind Of Democrat Roots For Norm Coleman?

Before the name "Joe Lieberman" pops in your head, please remember that he is no longer a Democrat, even if he caucuses with them. No, the Senator that wishes to thwart the will of the voters in Minnesota and have Norm Coleman drag out the process for another month or two is the newly-minted Democrat, Arlen Specter. Although he's only been in the party a week, so far he hasn't said anything that resembles what one would think an elected Democratic politician might say.

From TPM:

In an interview with the New York Times, Specter stated in no uncertain terms that he wants Norm Coleman to win the disputed Minnesota Senate race: "There's still time for the Minnesota courts to do justice and declare Norm Coleman the winner."

So what exactly are the Dems getting out of this whole deal?

Late Update: NRSC press secretary Amber Wilkerson gives us this comment: "First he voted against President Obama's budget, then he said he wouldn't be a loyal Democrat, now he wants Norm Coleman to win. We've never agreed so much with Arlen Specter. You just have to wonder whether Joe Sestak agrees with the positions of his fellow Pennsylvania Democrat?"

Well Amber, Joe Sestak doesn't even consider Arlen a Democrat yet. If he keeps this up, Sestak for one will be challenging him in the Democratic primary come next year. While Norm Coleman doesn't stand a chance at coming back to the U.S. Senate anytime soon, the way Arlen Specter is going, he'll be out of a job once the Pennsylvania Democratic base replaces him with an actual member of the party, not one that slaps a (D) next to his name to avoid the wingnuts from primaring him on the right.

Update 5/6/09 11:15AM: Specter backtracks, but only after he was stripped of seniority for the remainder of his current term.

Sestak's Reponse To Specter's Switch Is Spot On

Arlen Specter's change in party has made for a considerable amount of news. Part of that story was the support of many within the Democratic establishment without really examining what Specter is going to bring to the party. Joe Sestak, a congressman that had already been considering running against Specter (before the switch) was on CNN yesterday and he when presented with a question about Specter being a good Democrat, responds with a question:



That should be on the minds of Democratic Pennsylvania primary voters next year when Arlen asks to be on the ticket as one of their own. Specter probably believes that his defection entitles him to be nominated as a Democrat in the primary, but Pennsylvania Democrats are not about to simply bow down in his presence.

Maddow Reminds Everyone Specter's Switch Isn't The Greatest Thing Since Sliced Bread

Like Rachel says, the last thing the Democratic party needs is another Joe Liebermanesque conservadem. The media has been repeating verbatim that with 60 seats in the Senate, Dems can be filibuster-proof, yet that isn't how the Senate works. All you have to do is listen to Arlen's words after having switched.

Arlen Specter Converts....To A Democrat

It is now being reported that sometime later today, the five-term Republican Senator from Pennsylvania is going to switch parties and run as a Democrat. The consequences of this action are huge. Whether it be the 60 seat "filibuster-proof" majority for the Democratic caucus, the stinging blow to an increasingly fringe Republican party or Pennsylvania's final affirmation that it is no longer a swing state but one that is solid blue, this is monumental news.

From The Washington Post:

"I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary," said Specter in a statement. "I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election."

He added: "Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans."

That has to hurt if you are Mitch McConnell or one of his forty thirty-nine caucus members. Then again, it should have been expected, because there was no other way for Specter to have gone unless he purposefully wanted to lose next year's primary election. The Republican party in PA, like the rest of it nation wide is moving far to the right and away from not only Arlen's political philosophy, but many other Americans as well.

Politically speaking, this gives the Republican nomination to Club for Growth's Pat Toomey on a platter and wipes out any Democrat who was thinking of going in to the race. Toomey's victory though will be short-lived, because come November of 2010, Specter will be looking ahead to his sixth term, only this time with a (D) at the end of his name.

Though as Kos notes, he stays anti-EFCA, a very odd way to start off as a Dem representing Pennsylvania.

The more I think about this, while it sounds good as a story for a story's sake, having Specter stay in and not be replaced by a more liberal, actual Democrat is overall a bad thing for PA. Pennsylvania needs someone that isn't like Joe Lieberman. Progressives down there need to come up with a quick plan if they are going to get someone in the race that will actually stand up for the unions, not just a senator that (after several months) had the wherewithall to switch parties so that he'd remain a senator.

Bi-Partisan High Speed Rail, It's About Time

It really is about time we get serious about mass transit in this country. We have let our local systems languish and Amtrak...well, the treatment of our national railroad is atrocious. For far too long Congress has bowed down for the highway lobbyists, automakers and developers that prefer concrete and pollution to an effective rail system that most of the industrialized world already has. Well, Senators Kerry and Specter are ready to step up to the plate.

From The LA Times:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) introduced a bill to create new jobs by updating the nation’s crumbling infrastructure. The High-Speed Rail for America Act of 2008 would transform America’s outdated and underfunded passenger rail system into a world class system.

“At a time when our economy desperately needs a jumpstart, we need an effective national investment that puts Americans back to work,” said Sen. Kerry. “A first-rate rail system would protect our environment, save families time and money, reduce our dependency on foreign oil, and help get our economy moving again. The High-Speed Rail for America Act will help fix our crumbling infrastructure system, expand our economy, and match high-tech rail systems across the globe.”[...]

The High-Speed Rail for America Act of 2008 builds upon the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 which reauthorizes Amtrak and authorizes $1.5 billion over a five-year period to finance the construction and equipment for eleven high-speed rail corridors. It provides billions of dollars in both tax-exempt and tax credit bond and provides assistance for rail projects of various speeds. The bill creates the Office of High-Speed passenger rail to oversee the development of high-speed rail and provides a consistent source of funding.

Specifically, the High-Speed Rail for America Act of 2008 provides $8 billion over a six-year period for tax-exempt bonds which finance high-speed rail projects which reach a speed of at least 110 miles per hour It creates a new category of tax-credit bonds – qualified rail bonds. There are two types of qualified rail bonds: super high-speed intercity rail facility bond and rail infrastructure bond. Super high-speed rail intercity facility bonds will encourage the development of true high-speed rail. The legislation provides $10 billion for these bonds over a ten-year period. This would help finance the California proposed corridor and make needed improvements to the Northeast corridor. The legislation provides $5.4 billion over a six-year period for rail infrastructure bonds. The Federal Rail Administration has already designated ten rail corridors that these bonds could help fund, including connecting the cities of the Midwest through Chicago, connecting the cities of the Northwest, connecting the major cities within Texas and Florida, and connecting all the cities up and down the East Coast.

This is definitely a good start and a step in the right direction. Imagine if this is how we'll be shifting money from the war to rebuilding our nation's infrastructure. As bad as the last eight years have been for our country, the potential for the next four and beyond are incredible. President-Elect Obama wants to take us in a bold new direction and going at it on high speed rails will get us there in record time.

Investigate George Bush, Not The NFL

Investigating high crimes and misdemeanors would seem like serious business with all of the serious charges and subsequent proof of them by our President. Instead of preserving our Constitution Arlen Specter is more focused on the NFL and in particular the New England Patriots for a "SpyGate" scandal. Why would he do this? Well when it comes to the old way of doing business in Washington, its all about the money.

From Attytood:

When Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter went more public last week with his increasingly strange and quixotic battle against the National Football League -- supposedly over the New England "Spygate" scandal -- some politically savvy wags raised an interesting point.

They noted that the longtime GOP stalwart's No. 2 source of campaign funds in recent years has been none other than employees of Comcast Corp. and their families, linked to at least $153,600 in donations going back to 1989. That's significant because Philadelphia-based Comcast has been engaged in a protracted war with the NFL over an issue that has nothing to do with New England and spying but is worth millions of dollars: Whether the cable giant can and should charge its consumers extra money to view the NFL Network.

Good find, but if you dig a little deeper...it's even worse than that.

Look again at the list, and see who Specter's No. 1 source of campaign contributions has been -- by far. That would the law firm -- also based here in Philly but with a large D.C. presence -- of Blank Rome LLC, now a growing lobbying powerhouse. Since 1989, partner and employees and family members from Blank Rome have donated $358, 483 to Specter's political kitty, dwarfing all others.

Hmm, now isn't that interesting?

Really it isn't, it is more of the same by the corruptive influences in Washington. Why people like Arlen get the respect they do is dumbfounding. So what if he is a Senator, serving in office for many years and getting re-elected over and over again. The thing is, he is not serving his constituents, just the ones that fork over barrels of money for his campaign. We need more of the opposite, the ones that value principles over the ones that want to stay in office for the sake of staying in office.

Arlen Specter Is A Fool

Senator Arlen Spector got his name in the news today, looking like the same old buffoon that he usually is. His latest outburst was to pan Congress for stalling FISA legislation and the Bush Administration for throwing up roadblocks to see what was on those CIA torture tapes.

Sigh.

Spector can't possibly be this stupid can he? Well, he can certainly act like it.

From RawStory:

Specter is proposing a compromise that would give the telecoms immunity but make the federal government the defendant in their place. "I believe that it is very important on our checks and balances to have the courts as part of the picture," he told CNN. "Regrettably, the Congress has been very ineffective in oversight on what the executive branch does."

The ACLU has argued that suing the government isn't an adequate substitute, because it can use the state secrets privilege, executive privilege, and even a claim of sovereign immunity to get the cases thrown out. "My bill answers all of those considerations," Specter replied, saying that it would make the government an exact stand-in for the telecoms with no special rights. However, a CNN legal expert who commented at the end of the segment said she believed the ACLU was right and Specter was wrong.

Specter was also asked about Attorney General Mukasey's refusal to give the Judiciary Committee any information on his investigation of the destruction of the CIA interrogation tapes. "I'm very disappointed in what the Attorney General did because it runs exactly counter to the assurances he gave us at his confirmation hearings," Specter said.

Wow. Lets start with the first paragraph, shall we? Giving the telecoms immunity would relinquish them from their responsibility for standing before a judge and jury for their crimes against the country and all the Americans that they allowed the Bush Administration to spy on. This "compromise," or "bending over and grabbing Congress' ankles for the President" would not solve one goddamn thing. And to talk about not having effective oversight on the Administration??? Where the hell have you been these last seven years Senator?

Obviously the ACLU answers Spector in the second paragraph. As for the third, this is further proof that Spector must walk around the Senate with a giant blindfold, because he exhibits no common sense whatsoever. Anyone that could rub two braincells together knew that Mukasey was going to do whatever it takes to keep the President away from legal scrutiny.

Apparently Arlen is down to his last working neuron.

On Air Force One, Specter Talks Tough, But Its Just An Act

If you are so honored to fly aboard Air Force One (sic) there are certain rules you need to follow. Basically you need to shut up and not say nice things about the President or those that work for him. It actually sounds kinda fair to me, its his house and even though it is Air Force One, you are in tight quarters, so why let it be messy (even if Bush is a serial breaker of laws in general)? Senator Arlen Specter obviously didn't feel that way and broke both rules.

From The New York Times:

Mr. Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, wandered back into the press cabin as the plane sat on the tarmac at Andrews Air Force Base before the president arrived from the White House.

According to a pool report of the encounter, Mr. Specter expressed anew his criticism of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales but said he saw no signs that Mr. Gonzales would be forced to resign. Mr. Specter attributed Mr. Gonzales’s job security to Mr. Bush’s “personal loyalty” to him.

Mr. Specter spoke derisively of Mr. Gonzales’s appearance Tuesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, where he faced accusations that he misled Congress last year when he said there had been no disagreement within the administration over the National Security Administration’s domestic surveillance program.

“Our hearing two days ago was devastating,” Mr. Specter said. “But so was the hearing before that, and so was the hearing before that.”

If the hearings were so devastating as you say Arlen, why not do something about it? Those hearings showed the Attorney General has no respect for the rules he was sworn to uphold. He lies without a care to Congress and expects to get away with it all.

Despite your tough talk Senator, you are an enabler. By not pressing for his impeachment, you sir are helping to further the sinister cause of Alberto Gonzales and the White House that he is so loyal to please. Every time you participate in a hearing without taking the appropriate action, you make a mockery of the Congress, the Constitution and this nation. And that goes for every single Senator that acts this way.

Gonzales Can't Keep His Story Straight

Even a liar at the caliber of Alberto Gonzales is eventually prone to screwing himself over. After a while, all the false stories weave together and inadvertently paint a picture of the truth that lies below the surface of Alberto's skin. The more lies he tells, the less anyone will believe him and his reputation will continue to slither down into the recesses of society. He had a chance to come clean today at the Senate Judiciary Committee, but you know Alberto doesn't have much in the way of a conscience.

From ThinkProgress:

SPECTER: Let me move quickly through a series of questions there’s a lot to cover. Starting with the issue Mr. Comey raises, you said “there has not been any disagreement about the program.” Mr. Comey’s testimony was that “Mrs. Gonzales began to discuss why they were there to seek approval” and he then says “I was very upset, I was angry, I thought I had just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man.”

GONZALES: The disagreement that occurred was about other intelligence activities and the reason for the visit to the hospital was about other intelligence activities. It was not about the terrorist surveillance program that the president announced to the american people.

SPECTER: Mr. Attorney General, do you expect us to believe that?

I don't believe anything that comes out of that bastard's mouth. Of course Specter talks tough to him and so do most Democrats, but the solution is impeaching him. If it doesn't work the first time, try again, and again and again until we rid our nation of one of the worst Attorney Generals that have served under the worst President of all time.

Arlen Specter Is Clueless

Arlen Specter seems to think that the no confidence vote next week in the Senate will have an influential impact on the Commander-in-Chief. If he seriously thinks that any part of Congress will have an effect on him, Specter doesn't have a clue as to how Washington is working these days.

From Reuters:

Asked on CBS' "Face the Nation" whether many Republicans would join the majority Democrats in voting against Gonzales possibly as early as this week, Republican Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania said, "I think so."

"You already have six Republicans calling for his resignation," he said. "I have a sense ... that before the vote is taken, that Attorney General Gonzales may step down."

Gonzales has refused to resign under mounting pressure that began after criticism of the Justice Department's firing of U.S. attorneys which Democrats claimed was done mainly for political reasons.

But President George W. Bush has solidly backed Gonzales so Democrats in the Senate -- who have tried to broaden their complaints against the attorney general -- scheduled a rare "no confidence" vote in hopes of pressuring him to leave.

Congress hasn't been able to pressure the President yet on anything, since he has taken up the role of unitary executive. Six Republicans and all of the Democrats voting for a "No Confidence" of Gonzales won't do anything to stop the White House and what he has accomplished for the power of the executive. The only thing that can stop the Administration from its criminal acts is a vote for impeachment.

Not A Grilling, A "Reconfirmation Hearing"

Today the Attorney General finally got to face the music at the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting meant to examine his role in the political power play that is the U.S. Attorney scandal. Gonzales took fire from all sides, regardless of party affiliation Everyone from Jeff Sessions to Patrick Leahy accused him of being dishonest in his testimony and that his story did not add up with the facts.

From The Associated Press:

WASHINGTON — His job in jeopardy, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales insisted Thursday he played only a minor role in the dismissal of eight federal prosecutors. Skeptical senators reacted with disbelief.

"We have to evaluate whether you are really being forthright," Sen. Arlen Specter bluntly informed the nation's chief law enforcement officer.

The Pennsylvania Republican said Gonzales' description was "significantly if not totally at variance with the facts."

In a long turn in the witness chair, Gonzales said that despite initial administration claims that the prosecutors had been fired for inadequate performance, he approved their dismissals without looking at their job evaluations.

The facts are that Gonzales was heavily involved in the process as the memos note, particularly the one where he attended a meeting in November about the matter. Then there is that thing about Monica Goodling. If she pled the fifth and ended her political career, there must be something to hide that not only protects her but the people she worked with in the White House and the Attorney General's office.

No matter how many lies the principals in the scandal tell, the facts will come together to paint a vivid picture of what actually happened. It is only a matter of time, what with the media frenzy and commitment of the investigating Senators who want to get to the bottom of this.

Sing Louder Mr. Sampson

The former Chief of Staff to Alberto Gonzales spent a grueling day in the Senate today. Here's a clip of him admitting to Senator Specter that he abused the U.S. Attorney's office procedures concerning the termination of the eight prosecutors and the means of replacing them. Check out the grilling:

Time For Gonzales To Step Down

Much like last year when elected officials finally listened to the will of the people over Rumsfeld and called for his resignation, now they are doing it for the Attorney General. AG Alberto Gonzales has failed at his job to provide justice in a fair fashion and now it is time for him to go. Today on Face the Nation, Sen. Chuck Schumer called on Gonzales to resign.

His reasoning mirrors that of the rest of us that have known for far too long that Gonzales is no good. Schumer cited the abusive nature of the FBI under the auspices of the Patriot Act and the brewing Prosectur Purge scandal. He lied to Congress under oath by saying that firing the eight U.S. Attorneys was not politically motivated yet the prosecutors themselves said under oath that they were fired to make way for Bush's favored people. When it comes to lying under oath, I'll believe the prosecutors over Bush's loyal man Alberto anyday.

Watch the clip of Schumer and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) here.