I believe Specter is lying. I have no doubt he promised anything and everything to get support to get reelected.
Let’s see who am I going to believe Rick Santorum or that ridiculosPOS known as Arlen the lyin Specter???? No contest...I believe Rick. A.S. has always been delusional and at his current age has less memory than ever
The “Cornhusker Kickback” and Ben Nelson gave us Obamacare in the Senate, and Bart Stupack did it in the House. If they didn’t, you can bet the farm that some other arms would have been twisted out of their sockets. Be that as it may, there are TWO houses of Congress, and *Rep.* Stupac was the last to capitulate, the Senate having voted prior. It’s inaccurate to place the whole blame of Obamacare on Specter.
Your point is a fail, Mitt.
WTH??? This sounds like a replay of the controversy from April 2010 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qv76qogrkvk&feature=endscreen&NR=1
Spector is scum, but I don’t think Santorum can survive this.... he has become damaged goods.
This will not just blow over, it is going to get very nasty over the next few days.
Specter won’t admit he made a deal. Here’s another article specter did not refute
Specter: I Won’t Block Pro-Life Judges
NewsMax Wires
Thursday, Nov. 18, 2004
After two days of appealing to fellow GOP senators, embattled Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania said he would make a public statement to assure Republicans at large he would not block anti-abortion judicial nominees from President Bush.
“I’m working on it,” Specter said of the statement after receiving more Senate support despite calls from anti-abortion conservatives that he be skipped over as the next chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
Story Continues Below
Specter, a moderate on abortion rights, has been trying to repair the damage caused by his postelection comment that Democrats would probably block judicial nominees who would try to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case legalizing abortion.
“And I would expect the president to be mindful of the considerations which I am mentioning,” he said then.
Since then, he has been trying to reassure Republicans that he would not stand in the way of Bush’s nominees if he takes over the Judiciary Committee next year when current chairman Orrin Hatch of Utah steps down because of term limits.
He’s been on radio and television and telling senators one by one and in groups that he doesn’t have a litmus test on abortion for judges. In addition, he’s been stressing that Democrats plan to filibuster against conservative judges regardless of what he does.
“People are looking to him to provide some assurance, so he’ll make a statement,” said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., who is in line, in terms of seniority, to become the committee’s chairman if Specter is passed over.
Senators have said that there would have to be some kind of public reckoning for Specter to smooth over relations with abortion opponents, and to give them some political cover from the e-mails, faxes and phone calls they have been receiving.
But nothing Specter says will satisfy some conservatives, who say he has a track record of opposing their issues.
“When Jon Kyl, Jeff Sessions or John Cornyn would make a great chairman, why in the world would Republicans take the great risk of trusting Specter?” said Jan LaRue, lawyer for the conservative Concerned Women for America.
**************************
Nevertheless, the Senate’s No. 3 Republican, staunch anti-abortion advocate and fellow Pennsylvanian Rick Santorum, offered Specter support.
“I think everyone knows that I have been a supporter of Sen. Specter throughout this process, in his re-election,” Santorum said. “I expect him to keep his commitments, to move judges out of committee, and to be an advocate of the president in getting those judges passed.”
Specter spent most of Tuesday talking to noncommittal Senate leadership and to GOP Judiciary Committee members, who will take an official vote on his chairmanship in January.
That vote, whichever way it goes, can be appealed to the full GOP caucus, which heard from Specter on Wednesday.
No one would say what Specter told senators, and that includes Specter. “Under no circumstance would I begin to tell you what I said,” he said afterward.
********************************
But no one spoke out for or against Specter during the meeting. At the same time, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said Specter’s comments “were received well.”
Even before the meeting, Specter was getting public statements of support from colleagues like Hatch, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., and Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine.
“He was just restating the facts about potential challenges with a Supreme Court nominee before the United States Senate,” Snowe said.
His subsequent statements since Election Day, said Warner, have been “clear as a bell — no ifs, ands or buts. I think he’s made clear the circumstances under which he made that statement, and he should be given the opportunity to serve.”
© 2004 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Editor’s note:
Condi Rice for president? Find out the details – Click Here Now
Get your copy of “Stolen Honor” and find out why John Kerry is afraid you and millions of Americans will see it – Click Here Now.
Dan Rather Shocked by Bush Map – Reds Are Growing – Click Here Now
Didn’t Toomney vote with Snowe, Collins, Brown and Lugar to repeal DADT? Some “social conservative”!
Let’s see.....mmmmm....Santorum lied? Spector lied. My money’s on the magic bullet.
As it turned out Bush won the 2004 election carrying along a plus 4 in new Senate seats resulting in a 55 to 45 Senate. It did not matter if Specter lost in the primary to Toomey or if he lost in the general election. Trying to make the case of holding the Senate for the Republicans over a single state election is silly unless you have a crystal ball that can tell the outcomes of future events. I have little doubt that the new Republican head of the Senate Judiciary Committee would have supported the President’s SCOTUS nominees.
The only thing that makes sense of the Santorum’s endorsement of Specter was he supported the GOP party favorite incumbent over the primary challenger. As in being a GOP-e team player.
Specter’s the one lying. I remember the 2004 campaign quite well.
Specter’s been lying since he came up with the magic bullet theory and before.
Dumb article. There is no reason to believe that Toomey would have won the senatorial seat. Given the nature of elections these days, it would have been at least a 50/50 proposition in liberal pennsylvania.
On the other hand, we know that Specter DID usher Roberts and Alito through the confirmation process.
Also a dumb article because Specter helping with Roberts and Alito did not have to be a deal between Specter and Santorum. It could have been between Santorum and GWBush.
And Santorum specifically said he did it for the team on behalf of GWBush. How are such messages passed?
I’m betting there’s probably no piece of paper anyplace. They are understandings based on conversations.
If you are going to use Spector as a source, I will cite Scottish law and say this is “not proved”.