For Those Who Don't Like Specter, Ask Yourselves This...

[WeDidIt]

Would A Freeper welcome Ben Nelson into the GOP?

[Barack_America]

1. Hey man, at least I now have a pro-choice Dem Senator.

Approx. 2 years earlier than I might have had.

And my letters to Specter regarding other issues now have more weight.

That's the way I'm looking at this.

[Sebastian Doyle]

2. Did Ben Nelson help cover up the murder of a President?

I mean, I don't have much use for Nelson either, but at least he's not part of the coverup of the biggest crime of the 20th century.

[leftynyc]

4. Biggest crime of 20th century?

There were two world wars and numerous other things that I think would qualify for that.

[Sebastian Doyle]

6. I consider war as a seperate classification from crime.

Not that people like Hitler or Chimpy aren't criminals by nature, but there is a difference.

But the assassination of JFK certainly went beyond merely the murder of one man. The coverup itself (in which Arlen Specter was a willing participant) is proof of that.

[Occam Bandage]

8. The proof of a coverup, of course, are the claims that there was no coverup. nt

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

13. It almost makes sense, doesn't it?

:crazy:

[Occam Bandage]

5. I would call the Holocaust a greater crime than any particular tinfoil theory about Kennedy. nt

[quiller4]

11. Here, here! n/t

[Sebastian Doyle]

12. And I would call perpetuation of the magic bullshit myth

the equivalent of holocaust denial.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

38. I wouldn't.

There are plenty of logical explanations for why the "magic bullet theory" is perfectly valid.

I don't know of any explanation as to why holocaust denial theories would be valid.

And, IMO, comparisons of the two are rather anti-semitic.

[grantcart]

77. It also defames the Kennedy family - It means that they kept silent to

perpetuate the conspiracy, out of fear apparently.

[WeDidIt]

9. There was a single shooter

A nutburger changed history with one gun firing three shots. Two struck Kennedy. One exited Kennedy and struck Connally.

[Sebastian Doyle]

14. Right.

And jet fuel melts skyscrapers (yet never harms aluminum airplanes), Saddam moved the WMDs to Syria, and HFCS is as safe as manna from heaven.

[damonm]

21. On your last two,

I have no qualms, but the first - OW. Ruins your credibility, and makes you sound almost freeper-class stupid. And you CAN'T be that.
IGNITED jet fuel,burning in an uncontrolled fashion, does indeed melt structural steel.
And do you HONESTLY think the combustion chambers of jet aircraft are made of the same material as the rest of the aircraft? Please say no...
Familiarize yourself here.

[demwing]

25. Jet Fuel Doesn't have to "melt" steel, just weeken it

Read the Popular Mechanics page, debunking several 9/11 theories:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=4

[Sebastian Doyle]

29. Yes.. read the Hearst published Bush apologist horseshit

written by Michael "of the Devil" Chertoff's cousin. No possibility of bias there at all :eyes:

[demwing]

35. Well how convenient. Debunk it

It's science. Can you debunk the claims?

[WeDidIt]

33. Loosen the tinfoil

Attempting to lend credibility to your whacked out conspiracy theories about 9/11 and the Kennedy assassination by attempting to associate legitimate explanations of those two events with rightwing conspiracy theories does you no credit.

In fact, your nutball theories are not more credible than the two rightwing nutball theories you have referenced.

[Alexander]

3. "Better to have him inside the tent pissing out...

...than outside the tent pissing in."

-LBJ

[depakid]

7. And in the short run- that's the bottom line

In the long run, deals like that prove problematic.

[PassingFair]

10. Better to have him OUTSIDE the tent....

than leaving puddles all over the place.

-PMG

[Alexander]

22. So you'd prefer 59 Democrats in the Senate to 60.

There's a reason LBJ was called "Master of the Senate" and you weren't.

[PassingFair]

23. He can vote with us anytime he wants.

As a MEMBER, however, he throws
more weight to the "conservative"
side of our party that consistently
sells out to corporate interests.

And LBJ also entrenched us in Vietnam,
if I recall.

:P

[Alexander]

28. And he's more likely to do so if he's a Democrat.

Surely you realize that the political parties pressure their members to vote a certain way on issues?

"And LBJ also entrenched us in Vietnam, if I recall."

I'm talking about the time LBJ was Senate Majority Leader.

You know, that career he had before he was vice-president and president?

Thanks for playing though.

[PassingFair]

34. No need to be so snotty....

We have a difference of opinion.

I think that fewer DINOS and
(apparently) BLACK-MAILED
"New Dems" would make our party
stronger.

Without them, we could have defended
the country against the Bush Administration,
instead of rolling over on critical
issues...

like attacking other countries to
steal their resources.

Or allowing deregulation of the
banking industry to the point of
bankrupting the country.

"Thanks for playing though".

:hi:

[Alexander]

36. No need to be so willfully ignorant.

"I think that fewer DINOS and
(apparently) BLACK-MAILED
"New Dems" would make our party
stronger."

Yeah, not like we need that Senate majority or anything. :eyes:

"Without them, we could have defended
the country against the Bush Administration,
instead of rolling over on critical
issues..."

How, exactly? By giving the Republicans control of the Senate?

This whole "we're better off without them" mantra is very poorly thought out.

Would you rather Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, etc. join the Republicans? Or that we primary them out of their seats? Nebraska and Louisiana were not beacons of progressive thought last time I checked.

"like attacking other countries to
steal their resources.

Or allowing deregulation of the
banking industry to the point of
bankrupting the country."

Please give me examples of progressives you have in mind for the Senate who could win statewide in those very red states.

"Thanks for playing though".

Oh, you're so clever! You can repeat what someone else says!

Sorry, your post contains a lot of bluster but no real solutions. Once again, you fail.

[PassingFair]

37. Yes and yes.

"Would you rather Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, etc. join the Republicans? Or that we primary them out of their seats? Nebraska and Louisiana were not beacons of progressive thought last time I checked."



Challenge them in primaries if they don't leave.
They give cover and credibility to the Republicans
with their anti-people votes.

[Alexander]

40. You can't name any liberals in those states who would win.

Once again, you fail.

[PassingFair]

42. Once again...

You are snotty.

I don't live in Louisiana or Nebraska,
so I am not personally familiar with
progressive democrats there, but I am
sure there many in both states that could
make a case for themselves in this climate.

Quit being afraid of the republicans.

This is OUR time.

[Alexander]

43. Don't blame me for your own ignorance.

"I don't live in Louisiana or Nebraska,
so I am not personally familiar with
progressive democrats there,"

Thank you. You've finally admitted you are completely ignorant of politics in those states.

"but I am sure there many in both states that could
make a case for themselves in this climate."

Despite your admitted ignorance, you are "sure". Well, that's just lovely. :eyes:

They are called "red" states for a reason. The rest of the world isn't as liberal as DU.

And the reason you can't name any liberals who would win in those states is simple. There aren't any.

But by all means, continue to advocate a Republican Senate majority if that's what makes you feel better. :eyes:

[PassingFair]

44. I'm not advocating "a Republican Senate majority"...

I'm advocating for a Democratic Majority
in BOTH houses, that actually votes like
DEMOCRATS, not RACIST republicans.

"And the reason you can't name any liberals who would win in those states is simple. There aren't any."

This statement is absurd.

[Alexander]

45. You're advocating a purge of the Democratic party. Same thing.

"I'm advocating for a Democratic Majority
in BOTH houses, that actually votes like
DEMOCRATS, not RACIST republicans."

Of course, you're the final arbiter on who votes like a Democrat and who doesn't. :eyes:

Do you think Barbara Boxer or Russ Feingold could win in Nebraska or Louisiana? Think again.

Did you even pay attention to how these states voted in the last three presidential elections?

"This statement is absurd."

Fine, then name some. If it's so "absurd", this shouldn't be too difficult.

What's absurd is your demand that we force every red-state Democrat out of the party, which is guaranteed to get us nothing but fewer Democrats in the Senate.

[PassingFair]

46. I think we need to challenge them to ...

act like Democrats.

If it means lighting a progressive
fire under them, so be it.

[Alexander]

47. And if their constituents don't approve?

Oh yeah, you conveniently forgot that part, didn't you? :eyes:

Nebraska and Louisiana voted for Republicans in the last three elections, in case you didn't notice.

You think states that elected the likes of Bobby Jindal and Mike Johanns are going to turn around and vote for someone like Dennis Kucinich?

Once again, you have no facts or substance to your posts, just ignorance and bluster.

[PassingFair]

49. I could give a rat's ass.

S.Amdt. 1014 to S. 896 (Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009)

With Democrats like Nelson and Landrieu, who
NEEDS Republicans....?


NAYs ---51
Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kyl (R-AZ)
LANDRIEU (D-LA)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
NELSON (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (D-PA)
Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Wicker (R-MS)

[Alexander]

50. So you could give a rat's ass if we have 60 Democrats in the Senate or 40.

Your memory is obviously very short, or you'd realize that even Landrieu and Nelson voted for the stimulus.

Good luck trying to get a Republican replacement to support our proposals, but then as you've said, you don't give a rat's ass anyway.

You want to purge them from the party, yet you are totally ignorant of the political realities of their states (as you've admitted), and you can't think of anyone more progressive who would win statewide.

You'd have just as much luck trying to get Ralph Nader elected president, and judging by your nonsensical posts, that may not be far from the truth.

Your post is such an epic fail on so many levels that you can't even sustain a reasonable discussion.

Special delivery. It's for you.

[PassingFair]

51. Pressure to bear.

They will never overcome their
love of corporate dollars unless
they are challenged.

You have a "team" mentality.

The numbers don't mean jack if
they ultimately push the party
right.

[Alexander]

52. The majority sets the agenda. What part of that isn't clear to you?

We sure got a lot done when the GOP was in power, didn't we? :eyes:

You have the political knowledge of a ficus plant.

[PassingFair]

55. Love your personal attacks!

So attractive!

Personally, I would rather vote
for what I want and NOT get it
than vote for what I don't want
and GET it.

But continue on with your fratboy
"go team" mentality.

A party that serves corporate
interests before it's citizens is
no bargain, no matter WHAT letter, (R), (D) or (I)
is behind the representative's names.

[Alexander]

58. I state facts. I know this must be a new experience for you.

You have no facts of your own to support your bizarre idea that we should be purging the Democratic Party.

"Personally, I would rather vote
for what I want and NOT get it
than vote for what I don't want
and GET it."

And I'd rather have someone who supports 50% of what I want than someone who supports 0% of what I want.

I imagine you would, too, you are just too proud to admit it because you would be conceding that I absolutely demolished your laughable "argument".

"But continue on with your fratboy
"go team" mentality."

Oooh, fratboy! Now who's using personal attacks? Pot, meet kettle.

You want 40 Democrats in the Senate instead of 60? You want to give Senate control to the Republicans? Fine. Say good bye to any chance of getting healthcare, EFCA, troop withdrawal, budgets or any progressive legislation passed. Good luck trying to persuade other Democrats here that you're right and I'm wrong.

It's clear you either never took or simply fell asleep in US Government class. Otherwise you'd realize the importance of controlling agendas and committees, which you obviously don't.

But if you want another epic failure to add to your already long list, by all means, continue with your drivel.

[PassingFair]

59. When your heroes can stop legislation from getting out of committees...

it doesn't do us a fat lot of good, does it.

You sweetheart, you.

:hug:

[Alexander]

60. So you'd give up the Fair Pay Act, the stimulus and SCHIP?

Good for you. Go on being "pure" if that's what makes you feel better.

Run along, now. We adults have work to do.

[dionysus]

61. .

:spray:

[PassingFair]

62. None of those would have even been necessary...

had democrats acted like democrats
and not de-regulated the banks,
not enabled Bush to lead us to war,
and not voted to with-hold bankruptcy
protection from working people.

[Alexander]

64. You answered with a non sequitur.

The Fair Pay Act and SCHIP, both supported by Landrieu, Nelson and Specter, did not have anything to do with what you said.

Again, you demonstrate your ignorance. Good work.

[PassingFair]

63. Rah, rah, sis boom bah!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/30/banks-beat-howeowners-for_n_193902.html

I will stand with Dick Durbin:

"How much did the Senate go for?

The banking and real estate industry has funneled roughly $2,000,000 into Landrieu's campaign coffers over her 12-year career, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics. The financial sector is Nelson's biggest backer; he's taken $1.4 million from banks and real estate interests and another $1.2 million from insurance firms. Tester has fielded roughly half a million in his two years in office. Lincoln has taken $1.3 million from banking and real estate interests.

Carper has raked in more than $1.5 million. Baucus, chair of the finance committee, has been on the receiving end of $3.5 million over his career. Specter has hauled in more than $4.5 million and Johnson has gotten some $2.5 million.

Across the United States, the measure is estimated to have been able to prevent 1.69 million foreclosures and preserve $300 billion in home equity.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Durbin is deeply unhappy with his Democratic colleagues that sided with the banks. "Frankly, I can't match what the bankers are doing in terms of lobbying," he said. Asked by the Huffington Post how bank influence could ever be reduced, he said, "When the voters speak, some elected officials listen. So I hope that, if we fail on mortgage foreclosure and we fail on credit card reform, I hope that people in this country will stand up and say to Congress, 'You've got the wrong friends.'"

[Alexander]

65. You stand with the same Dick Durbin who tried to get Arlen Specter to switch parties?

Hear it from the man himself:

http://durbin.senate.gov/listenToClip.cfm?clipId=fd5761c8-822a-4496-90f6-46f68fb916db

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

The only place you "stand" is in the corner, with your dunce cap on.

Christ, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. Could you be any more ignorant?

[PassingFair]

66. What the hell did you expect him to say?

Shove off?

Doesn't mean we shouldn't mount
and fund primary challenges to
DINOS and turncoat 'pukes.

[Alexander]

69. You want us to have 40 Democrats. Durbin wants us to have 60.

I stand with Durbin. You don't.

You really like getting your ass handed to you, apparently.

"Doesn't mean we shouldn't mount
and fund primary challenges to
DINOS and turncoat 'pukes."

Since you can't even name anyone who would be a formidable replacement for Landrieu or Nelson, your opinion on this matter is totally worthless.

[Veruca Salt]

75. If that did happen in either of those states...

in that they lost their primary and a progressive took their place for the election, said progressive would lose to the repub in the general election.

It's not being afraid of the repubs, it's running electable democratic candidates that may not conform to every single liberal view I hold, and some that may even anger me (like if they are against marriage equality... even our POTUS is and I still voted for him).

You can't run a democratic candidate from New England in the south as the values and politics are different regionally. Our republicans up here would probably be labeled progressives in the south.

While I totally agree, and would love nothing more than to populate the branches of government with progressives, we'd end up in the same boat as the repubs who, now that the religious right appears to be successful in taking over their party, are throwing all their moderates out and running hard right wing 'conservative' (read anti-abortion/marriage equality/science/religious freedom/etc etc) candidates who will fail with the moderates and independents every single time except in the regional areas that are populated by these bigots.

Sarah Falin' gets their 'base' excited because of her bigoted views. She was one of the huge reasons many moderate repubs came over to our side.

And you know, in time I think that a lot of the ideals and views that are considered liberal will be very commonplace. We'll look back at history and will say 'how could the previous generations ever have believed that?' I wasn't around for the civil rights struggles of african americans and women but I am living through the struggle for gay rights and equality is coming and I know that I'll be able to look back and say: 'It may be an everyday thing now, but fifty years ago that wasn't the case.'

[Alexander]

76. Exactly. Thank you.

Many parts of the country are simply not yet ready for people like Dennis Kucinich and Russ Feingold.

[Veruca Salt]

78. Oh no problem

and your absolutely right. I think that in time as society advances we'll eventually get to look back (and it may not be in my lifetime) and the same parts of the country that today wouldn't elect them will have representatives in the mold of Kucinich and Feingold. The northern and western states that are liberal now may then have ultra-liberals and we'll again be in the same position as today but the country is definitely moving in the right (or should I say left?) direction. :)

[TankLV]

67. umm - the "60" bullshit is just that - we can't even get ALL our dems to vote FOR the good of the

country - and nothing will change by the larger number...

the only "change" is that all the fighting is withIN the Democratic Party between the ASSHOLES and the progressives/liberals...

[Alexander]

70. The parties pressure their members to vote with the leadership.

You are aware of that fact, yes?

"the only "change" is that all the fighting is withIN the Democratic Party between the ASSHOLES and the progressives/liberals..."

Sometimes the assholes are the self-appointed "progressives/liberals".

Case in point: people who think we can still maintain 60 seats by demanding all of the Democrats vote like Dennis Kucinich.

[backscatter712]

15. He's a dirty, rotten bastard, but now he's *our* dirty, rotten bastard!

He'll definitely be a DINO pain in the ass, but my bet is that we do gain from having him in our party rather than the GOP.

[emulatorloo]

16. I find it humorous that he went from "RINO!" at freeperville to "DINO!" at DU in one day

I think he is gonna be a mixed bag, but like you I think we are going to get something out of this. For example his heart appears to be in the right place on healthcare reform.

[Fire1]

18. ONE issue does not make a democrat.

[PassingFair]

41. Does he support single-payer or a Medicare buy-in plan?

If not, then we don't need his kind of reform.

He will add to the watering down of our policies.

[demokatgurrl]

24. I even heard some pundit theorize

that he could help us to get a Democratic governor in PA next time. I have NO clue how, but that's what some genius said.

[backscatter712]

26. Rendell's a Democrat.

I'm not sure that's part of the deal.

My bet is that part of the deal is that he helps push through health care reform, and part of it is cloture votes on the little stuff - to help keep the GOP from obstructing and vetoing little bills.

I'm not sure what else the Senate Democrats could demand of him in exchange for welcoming him to the flock, but I'm sure they could demand quite a bit.

[Fire1]

17. I may be wrong but I doubt it. THIS is coming back to bite

us in the ass.

[HughMoran]

27. "us" meaning DU

I think the real world is a little less caught up in comparing Ben Nelson to Arlen Spector

[PassingFair]

39. Because the "real world" is not paying attention.

Do you think the republicans revered Zell Miller?



No. They despised him. Didn't help them at all.

[dionysus]

53. the "real world" democrats want a filibuster-proof majority, unlike some clowns...

:rofl:

[Alexander]

54. Yes, the clowns who want to purge half the party in the name of "purity".

Because we would obviously get so much done with 30 Senators. :rofl:

[dionysus]

56. yeah, we'd feel plenty righteous whilst ducking bullets in iran

[TankLV]

68. and the addition of specter doesn't get us even close...

because democrats NEVER vote in lockstep like repukes...

the number "sixty" means NOTHING in the REAL world...

[Alexander]

74. He will face pressure from Reid instead of McConnell.

Not exactly a difficult concept.

[Doctor_J]

19. Yes, the Greenwald "don't be happy that he switched" faction make zero sense

Suppose that Snowe, Voinovich, and Lugar decided to come over. Should we refuse?

Get real.

[Dr.Phool]

20. Turn the Dems into repukes, one Senator at a time.

Yeah, that's the ticket. Voinovich is an asshole. Always has been.

The pukes can have Ben Nelson, and he can take Bill Nelson with him as far as I'm concerned.

[DFW]

30. At this point, I think Freepers are so desperate

They'd welcome Teddy Kennedy into the GOP!

We are the ones watching rats desert their sinking ship. They, on the other hand, have
the most desperate position of hoping a fish will jump ONTO their sinking ship!

Don't hold your breath, guys, although if you're going down with the ship, I guess I don't have to remind you.

[The Bakery Wagon]

31. ask yourself this...

what if there were no "parties" and people were supported (or not) based upon their beliefs and plans?

But that wouldn't work because it might be too confusing to those that consider politics a sport. They'd have to think about issues once in a while, which apparently is very difficult.

Divide and conquer is the only way a blowhard jackass like specter could even be considered "good" for anyone at all that supported what the democrats used to support.

I despised his authoritarian ass as a (R)ethug, and I'm supposed to like him now because he switched a letter after his name?

what a disgrace

Specter is a grade A example of *exactly* what is wrong with DC politics. He should have retired years ago but he just can't give up the power. Maybe he'll live to be 90 and drool live on CSPANS camera or something. At least he wasn't in the KKK.

Disgusting. Have fun with your patriot act. And maybe specter has more to "offer"!

[WeDidIt]

32. And what if pigs could fly?

There are parties. IT's a political reality that will never go away.

So everything else is just bullshit.

[Egnever]

71. never say never

the pukes are well on their way to dissapearing right now. what then?

[WeDidIt]

72. Another party steps in to fill the void

There are a lot more than two parties in this country.

[Orsino]

48. I asked me. The answer is that I still don't like Specter.

What should the GOP's schoolyard antics have to do with whether or not I like Specter?

[Two Americas]

57. that would be all of us

That would be all of us - those who do not like Specter.

Wouldn't it?


...

[baldguy]

73. Prob'ly not.

But then we're not freepers - instead we're rational human beings who generally have a good handle on what's happening in the world & love our country.