To the Sen Spector haters

[HooptieWagon]

With the announcement of Justice Souter's retirement, I think Obama's plan is clear... and thus the necessity for Spector's vote. He will fall in line - bet on it. It will truly be a joyous day of freeper heads exploding.

[Political Heretic]

1. Doesn't matter if he does (and he won't)

There are about 20 other conservadems who can't be counted on to vote with the party.

EDIT - I should say, he won't of Obama nominates a good judge, i.e. an actual liberal constitutional scholar

[HooptieWagon]

4. yea, the DLCer's are a PITA

but they'll fall in line for a SCOTUS nominee - that's why Rahm was hired. And you can count on Spector's vote... there was a deal. Dems gave up a lot to a guy with no bargaining power - it was to secure his SCOTUS vote.

[John Q. Citizen]

19. This makes Rendell quite powerful. In many ways he has a lot of say in who the next

SC Justice is, since he has a lot of say as to whether Specter retains a cleared path to the Dem nomination.

And I'm not sure that's such a good thing in terms of who the selection is.

I guess we will see.

[Sebastian Doyle]

2. The only area where I would expect LESS cooperation from Specter than judicial appointments

...would be a TRUE investigation into the assassination of JFK.

(Because his track record on both is shitty)

In fact I seem to remember Arlen asking President Obama to re-appoint a bunch of Chimp flunkie judges even before Opie Roberts could administer the correct oath of office.

[stevedeshazer]

3. It's pretty hard to take you seriously if you can't even spell his name correctly.

That's just embarrassing.

[HooptieWagon]

5. Spelling smack = no valid arguement. n/t

[scarletwoman]

7. No, seriously. If you're going to start a thread about a person in the news, whose name is

ALL OVER THE DAMN PLACE, it's just pathetic to not manage to spell it correctly.

Just say "oops" and edit your post instead of complaining about someone pointing out that you spelled it wrong. :eyes:

[HooptieWagon]

9. If he had been polite, I gladly would have.

But since he was an asshole, he can blow me.

[stevedeshazer]

10. That's your polite right there.

I pointed out an error, and you want to sexually assault me.

Nice one.

[HooptieWagon]

12. You reap what you sow.

[stevedeshazer]

13. Fail.

You called me an asshole.

Instead of resorting to schoolyard insults, you should reinforce your argument.

[HooptieWagon]

14. Why? You have no counter-arguement,

... only spelling insults. Very weak...

[liberalmuse]

6. Oh c'mon!

Dude, what's embarrassing is berating strangers for an honest spelling mistake on a message board. :eyes:

What's up with the rapidly escalating fuckwaddery in the past couple of weeks? My ignore list is starting to blow. Be nice, people.

On edit: So the grammar police don't show up.

[NYC_SKP]

21. +1

lol "fuckwaddery". :P

[NYC_SKP]

20. Just an fyi.

When pointing out spelling errors, courtesy suggests this subject line:

"pssst."

Followed by the reply, "check your spelling", or some such.

Anything else screams of snark, I think you'd agree.

Of course, if you mean to snark or disagree with the OP, then all's fair.

Just sayin'.

:donut:

[vixengrl]

8. I'm not a "hater", but I pretty much know we can't count on him.

If he changed parties for no other reason than fear he wouldn't make it out of the GOP primary (and after all these years....) the fun part for him will be competing in a Democratic primary.

[HooptieWagon]

11. A Dem was going to win that election regardless.

He is on the Judiary Committee, his vote and sway was needed. Yes, most of the time he can't be counted on, but I think in this instance it can. Remember, the Dems promised not to run a primary candidate against him - if he doesn't vote for a SCOTUS nominee, that deal can be cancelled and he'll lose his precious Senate seat.

[vixengrl]

16. I hope you're right--I'm currently miffed about his stated

non-support for Dawn Johnsen for OLC (he's heard from me--or rather, his office's e-mail in-box has, a bit.)

[HooptieWagon]

18. Overused cliche', but true... Obama= chess, Reps=checkers.

I think this was a well planned and beautifully executed move. Yes, Specter's going to be a pain in the ass most of the time - but in this case I think a very crafty deal was swung.

[Greyhound]

15. Another LIEberman,

_yay. How much of your own money are you willing to put on your assertion?

[HooptieWagon]

17. True, but I disagree.

Lieberman won his election, is caucusing with the Dems b/c his vote is needed - he was bargaining from a position of strength. Specter (note correct spelling for the spelling nazis)was certainly going to lose his primary, and a Dem was highly likely to win the general. Spector had nothing to offer the Dems, yet they agreed not to fund a primary opponent against him and allowed him to keep his seniority. Why give up so much? Logical answer - they needed his vote and position on the Judiary Committee for a SCOTUS nominee. Still want to bet?

[Greyhound]

22. Again, how much of your money are you willing to put up? n/t

[HooptieWagon]

24. $20 says Specter votes for cloture and the nominee that comes out of committee. n/t

[MADem]

23. Specter.

But yes, that's probably part of the package, and where Biden was going when he "recruited" the guy. I'm guessing they want him to get on board with health care votes, too--given he's a cancer survivor.