Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: hansel; OwnershipSociety
. . . a Chairman can be voted out of the spot. If he can or the rules can be changed so he can, then we should go that route.

That sounds like a reasonable request.

Those who support Specter for Chairman should start a call-in campaign of their own requesting just that.

My greatest fear is that we will have come all this way and gain nothing. I would solve that by removing what I see as an obstacle before it can trip me up. If you can remove this obstacle another way, that's fine, too.

We just can't lose. Not again.

170 posted on 11/08/2004 7:32:49 PM PST by reformed_democrat (Just a red-state woman trapped in a blue-state nightmare.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies ]


To: reformed_democrat

I concur.


174 posted on 11/08/2004 7:37:30 PM PST by OwnershipSociety
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]

To: reformed_democrat

I definitely understand your perspective about not wnating to come this far and lose. I only came to my position after a lot of thought.

I also don't want to lose by alienating a lot of people who we will need to vote with us to confirm nominees and also pass Bush's agenda in general.

I think the best route to accomplish both (not alienating anyone yet being able to hold Specter accountable) would be to see what the rules are and if they can't vote a chairman out then change the rules so they can.

I just don't know right now what the rules are to make a suggestion other than the above. I don't think the nuclear option would be wise unless we know we will win and we know the positives will outweigh the negatives.


177 posted on 11/08/2004 7:39:59 PM PST by hansel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson