http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/13/specter-republicans-suppo_n_166875.html Specter: Republicans Support Stimulus, Don't Want 'Fingerprints' On It Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), who broke with his party to support President Obama's stimulus package last week, said before the final vote Friday that more of his colleagues would have joined were they not afraid of the political consequences. "When I came back to the cloak room after coming to the agreement a week ago today," said Specter, "one of my colleagues said, 'Arlen, I'm proud of you.' My Republican colleague said, 'Arlen, I'm proud of you.' I said, 'Are you going to vote with me?' And he said, 'No, I might have a primary.' And I said, 'Well, you know very well I'm going to have a primary.'" Specter, along with centrist Maine Republican Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, joined with Democrats last week to move the stimulus bill forward. Specter said he doubted there would be any more Republican votes than those three Friday night. "I think there are a lot of people in the Republican caucus who are glad to see this action taken without their fingerprints, without their participation," he said. Specter was asked, How many of your colleagues? "I think a sizable number," he said. "I think a good part of the caucus agrees with the person I quoted, but I wouldn't want to begin to speculate on numbers." Being the 60th and deciding vote isn't easy for a centrist who will likely face a more conservative primary challenger and then a more liberal general election opponent. "I'd feel less uncomfortable about being the sixty-first and even better about being the sixty-seventh, but I'll take 'em one at a time," he said. Specter added that his hope was that next time there would be more Republicans joining within him. But is that realistic? "I didn't say it was my expectation, it was my hope," said Specter, before walking on to the Senate floor.
Are you really surprised the G.O.P has no political courage?When was the last time the G.O.P supported something bold that affected us domestically in a positive light?
This is why Obama's push towards bipartisanship will likely fail. It directly contradicts Republican party "discipline" which doesn't want anyone to think for themselves. 2010 is going to be a referendum on whether: (1) Obama and the Dems can be trusted to govern without the GOP turds blocking them or (2) the GOP is ready for a return to prominence because the Dems can't handle control. It will be somewhere in between these two viewpoints. If Obama fails miserably and gets blamed, the GOP might hold serve in the 2010 elections. (Forget history, the way things stack up now it looks very good for Dems). Otherwise, it will become a matter of how high in the 60s the Dems go. Right from the beginning it seems like 2010 & 2012 is all the national GOP is thinking about. Forget the country. It's all about developing themes for the next two election cycles and taking back control. Rush Limbaugh may not be the Republican party spokesman, but it's clear the national party wants Obama to fail at all costs.
Arlen has made his entire career just going against republicans. what else has he done? nothing He is the coward afraid to stand up for what is right and just caves on his beliefs if he really has any.
I don't doubt that both sides are filled with spineless people. I wish the GOP would just stand up, be firm, and quit with the flip flopping they have been doing. It makes me want to go into politics, so I could actually change something.
The Senator has said that there are Republicans who believe that the stimulus plan is good, but even though they believe that way, they won't vote for it because they are scared of someone in a primary using it against him. You accuse Arlen Specter of being spineless?
It's no surprise that the libpig circle jerk in this thread has the exact backwards interpretation of these events... no surprise at all. Republicans have always stood for smaller government and less wasteful spending. It's their core philosophical belief. Not supporting Porkulus is entirely consistent with that approach. The reason Specter and the two Senators from Maine didn't support it was for fear of political retribution from voters in their heavily Democratic states. So the OPPOSITE of HuffPo's premise is true -- it's these three Republicans acting out of political self-interest and against their core beliefs. Major, for you not to see that is just embarrassing on your part.
In that case, the GOP's went against their core philosophical beliefs for the past eight years, which would explain their sound trouncing in the last two elections. I would be a Republican if I actually believed that they would act on what you claim is their "core philosophical belief," but that has not been the case for a long time now. I would rather have a tax and spend Democrat than a borrow and spend Republican.
moon, spending money on national security after the largest terrorist attack on American soil is just a little bit more justifiable than spending $800 billion on Nancy Porklosi's pet projects... (including $45 billion on society's unemployed... think that gives them an incentive to go find a job? but hey, look at the bright side -- that's a lot of weed they can buy!)
Tj's game is in full swing. 1. TJ offers up the unemployed nugget to help everyone. He knows that statistics show that money spent on unemployment is one of the best investments in the economy. And that for every dollar spent on it, you get far more back into the economy in return. 2. He's trying to see how blatantly he can argue for one side using facts that actually help the other side. I'm sure it's a fun little game. But there is no need to respond in a serious manner.
There is no upside to Republican bi-partisanship. If they are on board and the policy succeeds, they are marginalized, if it fails they are marginalized as being complicit. If they oppose and it succeeds, they are no worse off, if they oppose and it fails they have a shot at regaining power ... it's their only rational course in the world of party politics.
I think if Republicans are from a district where people are hurting from jobs and the economy, and the point is made that they did nothing or were obstructing a way to improve the situation, they will lose out.
If this suceeds, then they will be worse off. In 2-4-6 years, the effects of the bill will be seen. With positive results, it'll give the dems a lot of ammo for the coming years.
Though I know you are already aware of this fact, nondiscretionary nonmilitary spending increased by record amounts over GWB's terms. That is not spending on the wars, that is spending on everything else. If we were to regulate and tax the weed you mentioned, that would be about $10 billion in tax money plus $50-150 billion in savings from not arresting, prosecuting, and incarcerating nonviolent drug offenders. That kind of money could really come in handy in today's economic climate. So, your post resulted in an epic fail on two separate counts. Nicely done!
I'll erase away your typical half-truths and fibs and just address this part... You know, BongBoy, the other way of saying what you just said is "lazy pot smoking dopes cost the economy $150 billion a year." GOOD DAY
And yet another way of saying it is that people trying to do the impossible (prohibit the use of drugs, which has never worked through the entire course of human history) are costing the economy $150 billion plus per year. And the only reason that you won't address the other point is that you have no answer as my statement was 100% accurate. I will have a good day, every day I can pwn you in epic fashion is a great day!
This statement is garbage and you know it. Take from somebody who has voted Republican in every election since the age of 18 that this USED to be true, but those days are dead and buried. You do realize that the entire homeland security budget in 2007 was $31 billion, right? That means the rest of the budget was something else. You fail to mention the billions Bush pledged for AIDS programs in Africa and aid to Israel. I guess that just isn't important to you. I voted for Bush twice and voted for McCain. I will tell you that the Republican Party needs to get back to what it used to do well...champion the middle class through lower taxes and more accountable spending. From a spending perspective, Republicans and Democrats...same crap, different horse.
