Posted on 05/30/2004 8:54:37 PM PDT by Badray
Party over Principle?
That is the $64,000.00 question.
This past Friday morning, Arlen Specter was at a town hall meeting in Ross Township (suburb north of Pittsburgh PA). According to Specter staffer Justin Lokay, this was at the suggestion of Lou Nudi, the Ross Committee Chairman.
There were about 35 people in attendance including the Senator and 5 or 6 staffers and interns. Also there was Congresswoman Melissa Hart, State Senator John Pippy, former Hart staffer and 16th state house district candidate Pat Geho, former row office candidate Becky Toomey (oh, the irony, but she is still the prettiest, and my favorite Specter supporter), Lou Nudi, as well as some various other local committee people. Arriving late as usual was State Representative Jeff Habay. More on him later.
I arrived shortly before the meeting started and checked to see if I was on the PNG (persona non grata) list, but was welcomed in, much to my surprise because I have been barred from previous events. I sat and listened to how conservative values were important to Arlen, how much he enjoys being around G.W.Bush, and how we must defeat the Democrats.
This is a pretty stock speech when he tries to court Republicans. Sadly too many pubbies have short memories and actually believe Arlen when he speaks. He invoked the name of his recent challenger, Pat Toomey and says that he enjoys his support because the Dem candidate is so bad. Yada, yada, yada . . .
He then tried to ingratiate himself by mentioning the names of several people in the crowd. There names were conveniently written on the cue card in his hand. The whole thing was a sad charade, but that didn't stop many from sucking it up. I don't know if they were all die hard supporters or simply supporting the "R" against the horrible "D" that looms ahead if we don't support Arlen.
He then 'yielded' to Melissa Hart. She yucked it up with him for a moment (Think Sonny and Cher, except that Sonny was the conservative, not Cher.) before he stepped aside. About now, there should have been a commercial break, but they continued anyway. Melissa then spoke in glowing terms of Arlen and how important it was to put Arlen into office so that he could chair the Judiciary Committee and help get Bush's judicial nominees approved. She cited the brave defense of former PA Attorney General Mike Fisher when some Democrats posed some minor opposition to Mike's approval. Thank God, Arlen was there to save the day and he convinced the Dems not to block him. BTW, Fisher was supported in his quest for the bench by his recent opponent for the Governor's office - Democrat Governor Ed Rendell. Gee, that must have been a tough fight, Arlen.
What no Borking of Fisher? Don't worry, if Mike starts to make some sound judgements, you can bet that Arlen will apologize like he did after fighting for Clarence Thomas.
Melissa was about 3 minutes into her praise when I just couldn't take it any longer. There she was defending the man that has been pissing on us for years and she was calling it rain. I walked out. On the way out, I said to her brother that I just couldn't stand the BS.
I stayed outside for the remainder of the meeting. I missed the Q and A session, but was told that there was only one tough question asked and that Arlen spent about ten minutes addressing it. The question may have hit a nerve, but I doubt that he will do anything more than pay lip service to it.
Some good news. There was some who expressed continued opposition to him despite coming to be convinced that they should now be supporting him.
I did tell Melissa's aide that I was not alone in my displeasure with her support of Arlen. She may or may not care, but I am sure that I am quite right in my assessment. She is putting the party before any principle she ever espoused and this will cost her later.
Another person that I engaged was Rep. Habay. He arrived only after I had left the meeting and was outside for about 15 minutes. He approached me as he entered the building and I greeted him with a snide remark that he resembled a man that I used to know and told him that I was disappointed in his support for Arlen. He told me that Arlen helped him early in his 'career' (God, I hate that word when applied to politicians.) and that he was repaying the favor. (Doesn't the mob do favors now for favors in the future too?) I told him that that is what happens when you get into bed with the wrong people. He started getting testy at that point (I have to keep the BAD in badray, ya know) and retorted that he wasn't in bed with anyone, but that he would be glad to sit down and discuss the issue with me. I said OK, but he needed to dig himself out of a big hole. Walking away, he said that he was very comfortable in his position. I thanked him for telling me what I needed to know as he turned the corner (more than metaphorically?).
Just before Arlen came out, I spoke to County GOP Chairman Rich Stampahar and he tried to convince me that Specter was the man to support. His pleas fell on deaf ears, but they were overheard by an intern of Specter's who wimpily came over to tell me that this was a private event and asked me not to create a disturbance. I replied only that I was talking to people that knew me and approached me and wasn't talking to any one else. Can you imagine anyone thinking that I would cause a disturbance? LOL Not me, I'm too shy.
On the way out, Arlen either didn't recognize me or thought that I went over to the dark side and was now a supporter. He approached me to shake my hand, but I politely declined. I reserve my handshake for those that I respect.
Maybe I'm just not a 'good republican'. Maybe I'm an 'unappeasable'. Maybe I am a purist. I've been called all of these things and more. And worse.
What I do know is that I cannot support this man. Not for party loyalty, not even for the Senate majority (we do not effectively have it now because of people like Specter). I also know that it is not out of bitterness or hatred. It's just principle. He doesn't believe the things that I believe. He doesn't value the things that I value. His vision of America is not my vision.
This November, a vote for Democrat Joe Hoeffel is a vote to put a true conservative, a true Republican in charge of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I'm voting for Joe.
Ray Horvath
As a PA'er, I disagree with you 100%. Deliberately replacing electing Specter with Hoeffel is an insane plan and I find it frustrating and even embarrassing that the idea keeps getting pushed here.
That's more like it.
But, I'll put you down as a staunch Joseph Hoeffel supporter. Good luck with that John Kerry vote in November too."
Ignorance, insults, and lies are all signs of your desperation.
Is that all you have left?
What does this strategic vote for Hoeffel have to with the Bush/Kerry race?
You should ask for a name change to Fearmonger.
Had you stopped right there, you might been perceived as honest.
"The right half of the political spectrum currently stands alone against our international enemies and HALF of our own country."
True, and you defending RINOs who are on the left side is reprehensible.
"It's time to choose our battles."
We have. We've identified the problem - RINOs and we're taking them on. That's what has you scared. You'll lose the GOP as one of your avenues to power.
Your post at #326 is so full of lies, misconceptions, and deceptions that I can't even copy it here to comment on it.
You apparently never read what I've written because I've addressed this at the beginning. It's been the attempt to create a 'bag tent' by GOP power brokers that has attracted liberals from the Democrat party. It's given you liberals a second chance to win and wield power by diluting the strength of the GOP message.
It doesn't matter if those holding the stated beliefs of a party are old or young, white, black, yellow, or brown, men or women, rich or poor, or anything else. If there is to be a big tent, it, of course, includes a variety of people. What it doesn't and can't do is embrace every idea and philosphy. That is insane.
Any party or group that is big enough that it can embrace both a pro life position and a baby killing faction, both pro gun and gun control sides, etc., is too big to stand for anything but power. If it doesn't stand for one side of an issue, a solid stance for one philosophy, for a principle then it isn't a party. It's just a mass of people without direction or meaning. It's only purpose is power for who ever is in charge. Power without principle leads to corruption and to tyranny.
And that's what you RINOs are advocating. You want acceptance of everything except conservatives. You want us to support you, but you always try to find a challenger for an incumbent conservative. You will find yourselves more at home where you belong in the Democrat party. You can leave any time now and you will not be missed.
Perhaps your principles have deadlines or they just aren't very important to you, I don't know. My goal has been to get rid of Specter. It's not a protest. It's because he is not fit to chair the SJC.
Some will simply write in another name. Some will vote for a third party. Some of us will pull the lever for Hoeffel because that's what will make it the most difficult for Specter to win. Some of us have previously voted for Specter. Some of us haven't. The thing that we have in common is that we will NEVER vote for him again.
For now, liberal Specter is a bigger threat to GOP principles and good judges and he must go. We'll deal with Hoeffel at the next election.
Thanks, Bob.
When I get a thumbs up from good people like you and joanie~f, Jeff Head and so many other solid conservatives, it makes taking all of the attacks worthwhile.
Think of voting for hoeffel as chemotherapy."
That's a brilliant analogy. I hope you don't mind me borrowing it.
The man that you are promoting as a good republican for the senate is at 43%. That's a LIBERAL. 50% and 60% is a RINO.
When someone is 70% or 80% in agreement, I will likely support or at least tolerate them (depending on what the 20% or 30% actually is), but I wouldn't necessarily consider them a RINO.
The difference is that I acknowledge that the socialist scumbag that I'm voting for is a socialist scumbag. Specter agrees with him more than Specter agrees with us. I'm not trying to kid myself that Hoeffel is a republican or our friend. I know what I'll get from him. You are deluding yourself (and that's your right) and trying to delude others into believing that Specter is something that he is not. That's wrong.
Thank you. It's gratifying to see someone grasp the big picture. People think that I want to do this. I don't. But sometimes, you just have to do what you have to do. At the same time, I realize that not everyone can pull the "D" lever. I'm happy to see them NOT pull the "R" lever either.
Interesting that you suggest that. You would have no way of knowing this but some local members of the LP asked me to consider running against Specter. As tempting as that was, (not saying that I would have been selected as the candidate - I'm just omnicient, not an ego maniac ;-)) I realized that that is not the most effective way to defeat him. Neither a 3rd party vote nor a write in vote would unseat Specter. Each vote for Hoeffel requires Arlen to get 2 votes to overcome it.
Even more interesting is your tag line. You ask why vote dem lite? Why indeed? That's what Specter is. This is just the best way to defeat him.
That's my point. Jeffords was a RINO and he jumped to benefit himself at a time when it would hurt us the most. I am advocating NOT electing them in the first place. Principled men and women in office would eliminate this worry.
Of course one of them could die. And it's very much the case that any one of them could be caught up in a scandal, but that is much more likely to be a Democrat.
I am dealing in reality. RINOs cannot be trusted. You seem unable to consider them as anything other than our friends, but hold the 'cross over' threat over our head in the same breath.
Thanks for joining the debate, but I am/we are as specterfatigued as you are clintonfatigued.
He has obstructed our first (and maybe, once) in a lifetime chance of a Republican elected govenment in Washington implimenting policy to advance our values. If reelected, he will ascend to chair two of the most powerful committees in the first two years of the next term. His pro baby killing votes, government is the solution attitude, anti gun rights bias, and big tax and spend habits make him off limits to conservatives and SHOULD even make him totally unacceptable to the rest of the Republican party.
You are right. They are very common, but they run about 10 to 1 democrats becoming republicans the last time that I saw any figures on this subject.
Nice try. You still can't salvage Badray's pathetic reputation.
And you are the worst combination of arrogance and ignorance.
You don't have to be a moderate to vote for Specter or believe that sticking together on the right is the best plan. That's all you have, though, try to demean or intimidate other people who point out the flaws in your argument and pretend that they can't possibly believe in the same values as you but just believe in a different strategy to put them forward.
WF Buckley... "I support the rightward most viable candidate." Specter won the primary against our hopes but that is what we are stuck with and he IS the rightward most viable candidate. I can't stand the man but he's much better than Hoeffel, one of the most severe leftists in Washington. Grow the hell up.
Distort much? First of all, I don't promote him as a good republican, I promote voting him in as the most rightward viable candidate.
The man is 7 percentage points over the center and you consider that a hard-core liberal? But yet you don't consider a 57 to be a hard-core conservative.
Badray, when you have to lie and distort to prove your point it means you don't have a good one.
Spain has also proven unreliable... using your strategy we should install bin Laden as the next Prime Minister.
If this were about me, I'd stack my reputation against anyone's. But it's not about me, it's about Specter's reputation.
I won't even give you points for trying to deflect from the key issue because this was an unimaginative effort.
Having said that, my reputation, my credentials, and my soul are all still in tact.
I'm not the one calling any one names - except RINO or liberal. You and your pack have been the ones hurling personal insults.
IIRC, you voted for Specter, yet you say that you can't stand him. That would make you the worst kind of hypocrit. I guess that you can add that to the list names. But all 3 of those names are accurate descriptors of political facts of life.
There are none so blind . . .
By tucking their tail between their collective legs, Spain has virtually put OBL into power.
The problem that you have (or one of them) is that you cannot grasp the difference between the position of chief executive where one man wields the power and a senate seat that has 1 vote of 100 and the position of a committee chairman whose power is much greater than an ordinary senator and still less than the chief executive.
Hoeffel is a liberal who will have no power.
Specter is a liberal who would have lots of power.
If you want to keep liberals out of power, vote for the democrat now and a good republican in 6 years to replace him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.