And to think I used to have a smidgen of respect for Senator Spector, but that was back in the mid-1990s and just after the OK City bombing.

I have to ask: what's the reasoning behind point #4? Greater comedy value today?

He took a lot of shit about the single bullet theory he installed in the Warren Report.

And he was right.

I'll post teh link

I think you mean "the link".

just when the Ross thread was yielding results

The best outcome of this miserable situation is that an authentic Democrat might primary Specter and win. What a beautiful thing that would be....

Guffaw! LMAO.

Two words, TERM LIMITS! He should not be able to get a janitors job in DC. Period.

...beyond the questions of raw political power, it is mystifying why they would want to build their majority by embracing politicians who reject most of their ostensible views.

That's the point. It has nothing to do with anything but raw political power.

Democrats or Republicans -- power exists to reinforce itself. Do kids still read Nineteen Eighty Four in middle school /high school these days?

The value of having as many "D's" as possible regardless of issue stands. It's bragging rights. That's big.

take down this post - it's a diversion

just when the Ross thread was yielding results

More than one topic can be posted and discussed on a "blog" at the same time. What results was the Ross thread yielding?

What a joke. What a horrible, awful joke.

I'm starting to hate the Democratic Party as much as I hate the Republican Party. And that's saying something.

Specter’s Plan to Rein In the Presidency

The Lede NYT blog, By Robert Mackey April 28, 2009 (see sig)

The current issue of the New York Review of Books includes an article by Senator Arlen Specter, Republican Democrat of Pennsylvania, called “The Need to Roll Back Presidential Power Grabs,” which suggests that Mr. Specter has not switched parties with the intention of simply rubber-stamping President Barack Obama’s legislative agenda.

Finding Mr. Specter’s byline in the left-leaning Review would seem to underscore that, as he said in his official statement on Tuesday, his “political philosophy” is now “more in line with Democrats than Republicans.” But the article itself makes clear that the newest Democrat hopes to use his position to rein in the power of the presidency.

In it, Mr. Specter makes the case that “since September 11, the United States has witnessed one of the greatest expansions of executive authority in its history, at the expense of the constitutionally mandated separation of powers.”

He then lays out an ambitious effort to roll back those powers, in words that indeed seem more natural coming from a senator of the majority party, rather than one in the minority:

[...]

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/specters-plan-to-rein-in-the-presidency/

Not about what is good for the Dems or good for the country, just what is good for Arlen. Shorter: How can I stay in power?

dating back to 1980, in weighing his position for committee chairmanships...

we so need a...

i need a shower...

I am not surprised the Establishment of the party agreed to back him in the primary. I suspected he must have asked them for something before he "switched".

Let's hope MoveOn can find a credible candidate to blow him out of the water in the primary.

I hope there's enough analytical skill in Dems and Repubs to see this move for what it is--

the last, desperate political move of a grandstander. May his political demise be not mourned.

The confused Dem party needs him like a boil on a plastic surgeon's nose.

Specter's switch is surely because he was beat on the GOP primary front, and this is all that is left to him--the "Lieberman Option".

In reality, this swells the Evan Bayh conservative democrats by another unhealthy number, strengthens the already-too-strong pull to the positionless, valueless center.

One would hope that Penn. Democrats will not stand for having this rammed down their throats by Senate Leadership--that they will choose to be represented by a senator who is so utterly void that he/she doesn't rattle when shaken.

That has been too evident for too long. The leadership is divorced from the ideals of the people who put, and keep it in place.

I hadn't thought about Specter as another Lieberman, but you're right. He will just give greater credence to opposition to real change, ("Even the Democrats are opposed to the Universal Health Care that Obama is asking for." Yikes.

Maybe it would have been better to keep him as an R and then just get his support vote by vote.

Thanks for pointing out what a great day it is to watch FOX. I'm sure they're having about the same reaction that the abusive husband has when the sheriff shows up with the restraining order. Schadenfreude comedy gold. They don't know much, but they know the meaning of symbolic (if not substantive) defeat. Bill's going to really need a loofah today.

OR Olympia Snowe, who is making the same noises.

Since when do we need MORE divisiveness in the Democratic Party?

Like a hole in the head...primary, baby, primary! More and BETTER Democrats is what's needed, not recycled retreads like Arlen "Warren Commission Whitewash" Specter.

My most vivid memories of him are of his relentless attacks of Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/125611

For me, his support for Thomas is enough reason not to support him.

I'd rather have him as a Demo, voting cloture & in our caucus than have him in theirs. He's a cynical opportunist for sure, but now he's our cynical opportunist. I agree with W.E.S. that it's good to have as many Senators with a 'D' as we can, since getting all of ours to vote the right way is like herding cats. This gives him a chance to atone for some of those craven votes he cast that Glenn recounted in the post.

The Repubs will make a play for Sen. Nelson.