Arlen Specter to switch parties, giving Dems filibuster proof majority

sweetcell wrote:

Venerable wrote:
especially after whatever dear leader did to get the nomination, you shouldn't be so shocked anymore.

what are you referring to?  i don't want to start a fight (and to be honest, i'll probably dismiss your gripe as sour grapes), i'm just curious what your complaint is of obama's nomination campaign. 

Venerable wrote:
i would have loved to see lieberman, specter, snowe, collins and ben nelson all jump ship together and become The Independents. 

agreed - THAT would have been amazing. 

as to your first part- NAFTA would be one example.  another would be the state secret defenses that the obama administration is expanding upon. . .both are examples where during the primary, obama stated he would a) re-negotiate nafta (to the cheers of environmentalists and unions alike) and b) criticized bush for using the state secret defense on wiretapping (to the cheers of lots of people who have no idea what's actually going on). . .instead, he has now come out and said there will be no renegotiation of nafta (which i'm thankful for; as an added bonus: he says the colombia free trade agreement should be passed as well…), and has a DOJ that is looking to expand where the state secret defense can be used on "illegal" wiretapping. . .

i would rather of specter engaged in a frank discussion about the future of the GOP- not that mitch mcconnell would listen, but there are a lot of people out there who don't like the GOP in washington.  part of that was apparent in the tea party protests, which were started in response to TARP (which specter voted for, and was probably the main reason why he was down in the polls).  i would rather specter have just become an independent, instead of switching to the democrats, where he will become another pain-in-the-ass moderate/conservative member of the senate that will bog down the precious agenda of the progressives. . .there were going to be republicans that would vote with democrats on some issues, and there were going to be democrats that voted with republicans on other issues. . .simply having "60" still isn't going to change that because of the reality of those 5 members. 

i have no doubt that specter truly believes that the gop in washington doesn't adequately represent him anymore. . .much like lincoln chaffee (who had no business losing his seat a few years ago). . .i know that some will see this as "addition by subtraction" (see manimtired), but specter always seemed to me to be a reasonable person (even if he did come up with that cockamamie "magic bullet" theory). 

i voted for him in 98

manimtired wrote:
sorry man..i dont have the time or the need to write 5 paragraphs and justify myself to these morons. i'd rather just lol. 

uh oh . . . mannie went where he should not of gone.  i think a mod is in question for somebody calling another the "f word" even if they do misspell it in an attempt to downplay the meaning.  try the "n word" mister tired, and see how far that gets you.  ;)

Venerable wrote:obama stated he would a) re-negotiate nafta

And I told you that wasn't going to happen repeatedly on this board.

i would rather of specter engaged in a frank discussion about the future of the GOP- not that mitch mcconnell would listen, but there are a lot of people out there who don't like the GOP in washington. 

You don't know that that didn't happen.

  i would rather specter have just become an independent, instead of switching to the democrats, where he will become another pain-in-the-ass moderate/conservative member of the senate that will bog down the precious agenda of the progressives. . .

Comcast made him do it.

walkonby wrote:

manimtired wrote:
sorry man..i dont have the time or the need to write 5 paragraphs and justify myself to these morons. i'd rather just lol. 

uh oh . . . mannie went where he should not of gone.  i think a mod is in question for somebody calling another the "f word" even if they do misspell it in an attempt to downplay the meaning.  try the "n word" mister tired, and see how far that gets you.  ;)

agreed.

callat703 wrote:

walkonby wrote:

manimtired wrote:
sorry man..i dont have the time or the need to write 5 paragraphs and justify myself to these morons. i'd rather just lol. 

uh oh . . . mannie went where he should not of gone.  i think a mod is in question for somebody calling another the "f word" even if they do misspell it in an attempt to downplay the meaning.  try the "n word" mister tired, and see how far that gets you.  ;)

agreed.

stfu 703. 

vansmack wrote:

Venerable wrote:obama stated he would a) re-negotiate nafta

And I told you that wasn't going to happen repeatedly on this board.

i would rather of specter engaged in a frank discussion about the future of the GOP- not that mitch mcconnell would listen, but there are a lot of people out there who don't like the GOP in washington. 

You don't know that that didn't happen.

  i would rather specter have just become an independent, instead of switching to the democrats, where he will become another pain-in-the-ass moderate/conservative member of the senate that will bog down the precious agenda of the progressives. . .

Comcast made him do it.

1) and i said, "but he's a "different type of politician," when it turns out he's just another politician."

2) i know that didn't happen, i admitted as much- the GOP leadership in the senate and house are simply unable or unwilling to face reality, witness the way they've treated jeff flake (i'd argue that the democratic leadership is just as blind, as evidenced by pelosi's unwillingness to start an ethics investigation over the PMA group because john murtha is guilty as hell and he must have something on her)….

3) actually, i really wonder about this. . .specter has already announced his opposition to card check, and brought feinstein with him (along with both arkansas members). . .i can't imagine that he'd now go back on that…..reid must have given specter an assurance about that.  are the unions now to going to mysteriously support specter in his bid in the democratic primary?  i should check with mickey kaus. . . .

walkonby wrote:
uh oh . . . mannie went where he should not of gone.  i think a mod is in question for somebody calling another the "f word" even if they do misspell it in an attempt to downplay the meaning.  try the "n word" mister tired, and see how far that gets you.  ;)

indeed, quite offensive.  mannie is basically brain-dead - you expect him to understand such subtleties?  i doubt that a moderator will do anything - mannie has set such a low bar of what we expect of him, homophobia (as despicable as it is) is par for the course.  interestingly enough, his own party is slowly moving on without him (link)… yet another example of evolution leaving him behind.

and what he meant to post:

manimtired wrote:
sorry man..i dont have the intelligence or the ability to write 5 paragraphs and justify myself to these morons. i'd rather just lol. 

keep on keepin' on, manimtired.

ok, back on track: about that Dem majority in the senate…

Venerable wrote:
1) and i said, "but he's a "different type of politician," when it turns out he's just another politician."

You're right, one who effectively used the media to swing trade negotiations.  It's a very clever stance to get what you want by threatening to renegotiate a treaty forcing the other side to meet your demands without actually having to renegotiate the entire treaty. 

It proved very effective in his first meeting with Calderon.  He doesn't have to renegotiate NAFTA to get what he wants, he just has to have Mexico, and to a lesser extent Canada, think that he will.

It's a much different negotiating stance then we saw over the last 8-10 years.

Lieberman isn't a true independent, he's just a self-serving ass sucker.  He stands out even in a profession where such types are commonplace.

vansmack wrote:

Venerable wrote:
1) and i said, "but he's a "different type of politician," when it turns out he's just another politician."

You're right, one who effectively used the media to swing trade negotiations.  It's a very clever stance to get what you want by threatening to renegotiate a treaty forcing the other side to meet your demands without actually having to renegotiate the entire treaty. 

It proved very effective in his first meeting with Calderon.  He doesn't have to renegotiate NAFTA to get what he wants, he just has to have Mexico, and to a lesser extent Canada, think that he will.

It's a much different negotiating stance then we saw over the last 8-10 years.

yes, it shows that he's just a shill for labor and environmentalists upset at the relative success NAFTA has at increasing trade between the three countries; at least he appeared to realize that the u.s. was in a weak position in a re-negotiation, hence, we aren't going to re-negotiate nafta.  at least be honest about all of this- labor and environmentalists are largely anti-trade organizations, for different reasons. 

all obama got out of his meeting with calderon is a) yeah, we aren't gonna touch nafta, but b) we'll work on, maybe, someday, putting together another agreement to deal with the perceived failures of NAFTA (nevermind that congress, and obama signed, a law that violates NAFTA on mexican truckers; let me know when obama comes out and tells congress to send him a law to over-turn that language.  maybe it will be part of an omnibus bill that will fix all that other language in the budget and stimulus bill that he and congress supposedly read in two days, such as chris dodd's aig bonus language.). 

now, about those free trade agreements with panama and colombia. . . . . . . . .

btw, this is a pretty funny story. . . .

FAA knew Air Force 1 photo-op would cause panic

sweetcell wrote:

walkonby wrote:
uh oh . . . mannie went where he should not of gone.  i think a mod is in question for somebody calling another the "f word" even if they do misspell it in an attempt to downplay the meaning.  try the "n word" mister tired, and see how far that gets you.  ;)

indeed, quite offensive.  mannie is basically brain-dead - you expect him to understand such subtleties?  i doubt that a moderator will do anything - mannie has set such a low bar of what we expect of him, homophobia (as despicable as it is) is par for the course.  interestingly enough, his own party is slowly moving on without him (link)… yet another example of evolution leaving him behind.


and what he meant to post:

manimtired wrote:
sorry man..i dont have the intelligence or the ability to write 5 paragraphs and justify myself to these morons. i'd rather just lol. 

keep on keepin' on, manimtired.

ok, back on track: about that Dem majority in the senate…

sweetcell…you are just boring and non lol-causing. you also worship at the alter of p-jam and the pet shop boys..why do you even post here?

your "comebacks" and "requotes" are on par with a 8 year olds. gtfo of the thread! 

manimtired wrote:

sweetcell wrote:

walkonby wrote:
uh oh . . . mannie went where he should not of gone.  i think a mod is in question for somebody calling another the "f word" even if they do misspell it in an attempt to downplay the meaning.  try the "n word" mister tired, and see how far that gets you.  ;)

indeed, quite offensive.  mannie is basically brain-dead - you expect him to understand such subtleties?  i doubt that a moderator will do anything - mannie has set such a low bar of what we expect of him, homophobia (as despicable as it is) is par for the course.  interestingly enough, his own party is slowly moving on without him (link)… yet another example of evolution leaving him behind.


and what he meant to post:

manimtired wrote:
sorry man..i dont have the intelligence or the ability to write 5 paragraphs and justify myself to these morons. i'd rather just lol. 

keep on keepin' on, manimtired.

ok, back on track: about that Dem majority in the senate…

sweetcell…you are just boring and non lol-causing. you also worship at the alter of p-jam and the pet shop boys..why do you even post here?

your "comebacks" and "requotes" are on par with a 8 year olds. gtfo of the thread! 

also sweetcell thinks "homophobia" is repulsive but calling women the c-word is just a ok…he defended his "friend" for doing so in a thread made months ago. wtf?

Venerable wrote:
btw, this is a pretty funny story. . . .

FAA knew Air Force 1 photo-op would cause panic

i dont see why thats funny. 

You guys got no sense.

The most important thing a president can do at this time is make people feel confident about things..this is difficult of course given the way the previous administration (republican) left things and handled governing…

And Obama is doing that..He is succeeding.

Unless you want to be standing in line waiting for a handout a la the great depression I suggest you wise up.

All this stuff about Obama promised he would be Jesus but he's just another politician is gradeschool material. Everyone knows politics is politics. You say things to get elected: thats getting elected/politicking. Then you do your best to govern in the way you deem best. Thats governing.

hutch wrote:
You guys got no sense.

The most important thing a president can do at this time is make people feel confident about things..this is difficult of course given the way the previous administration (republican) left things and handled governing…

And Obama is doing that..He is succeeding.

Unless you want to be standing in line waiting for a handout a la the great depression I suggest you wise up.

All this stuff about Obama promised he would be Jesus but he's just another politician is gradeschool material. Everyone knows politics is politics. You say things to get elected: thats getting elected/politicking. Then you do your best to govern in the way you deem best. Thats governing.

i sugget you stf "up"…….LOLZORZ!

hutch wrote:
The most important thing a president can do at this time is make people feel confident about things..

Really? Because I'm pretty sure GWB's numbers when it came to this in the months after 9/11 were through the roof. I'm glad to know we can rate his response to terrorism over the next 5 years by his ability to make people feel confident about what we were doing.

Most plans look solid until hindsight kicks in. Not saying what Obama is doing is wrong, just that "making people feel confident about what we're doing" is what got us into trouble in the first place.

manimtired wrote:

manimtired wrote:

sweetcell wrote:

walkonby wrote:
uh oh . . . mannie went where he should not of gone.  i think a mod is in question for somebody calling another the "f word" even if they do misspell it in an attempt to downplay the meaning.  try the "n word" mister tired, and see how far that gets you.  ;)

indeed, quite offensive.  mannie is basically brain-dead - you expect him to understand such subtleties?  i doubt that a moderator will do anything - mannie has set such a low bar of what we expect of him, homophobia (as despicable as it is) is par for the course.  interestingly enough, his own party is slowly moving on without him (link)… yet another example of evolution leaving him behind.


and what he meant to post:

manimtired wrote:
sorry man..i dont have the intelligence or the ability to write 5 paragraphs and justify myself to these morons. i'd rather just lol. 

keep on keepin' on, manimtired.

ok, back on track: about that Dem majority in the senate…

sweetcell…you are just boring and non lol-causing. you also worship at the alter of p-jam and the pet shop boys..why do you even post here?

your "comebacks" and "requotes" are on par with a 8 year olds. gtfo of the thread! 

also sweetcell thinks "homophobia" is repulsive but calling women the c-word is just a ok…he defended his "friend" for doing so in a thread made months ago. wtf?

you are correct "my friend" . . . i did once enjoi calling women that word, and i would also ramble endlessly on here about black people, thinking i understood them through microscope eyes.  then i grew up.   

Julian, wrote:

hutch wrote:
The most important thing a president can do at this time is make people feel confident about things..

Really? Because I'm pretty sure GWB's numbers when it came to this in the months after 9/11 were through the roof. I'm glad to know we can rate his response to terrorism over the next 5 years by his ability to make people feel confident about what we were doing.

Most plans look solid until hindsight kicks in. Not saying what Obama is doing is wrong, just that "making people feel confident about what we're doing" is what got us into trouble in the first place.

Thats an outrageous comparison! Talk about comparing apples and oranges!

Read what I wrote again: "at this time"

If people lost faith in the government  (primarily in Obama) we'd be heading into a great depression as it looked like would be the case towards the end of February.

Anyways to be honest I have zero interest in debating this stuff because the intellectual level on this board is about -as I said earlier- grade school..