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
Why?
Well excuse me, self-proclaimed all knowing omnipotent one for having an opinion.
The party whose 'big tent' is big enough to embrace every philosophy isn't interested in principle, only power.
You may be right, but if I don't hold out hope for a conservative Congress, I'd have to resort to the 4th Box of Liberty.
Unfortunately, the leadership of Frist and Santorum et.al. that supported Specter's campaign will never have the stones to block his ascension to the chairmanship of the committee that he has dreamed about for so long. This is where he wants to make his mark in history and it ain't gonna be one that we'll like.
The Republicans did fight harder for principle when they were in the minority and when there was a Dem president. I don't want to cede the majority, but I agree, it won't be the end of the world if we do.
The party that stands purely on principle will have no power! I don't like it, but conservatives have to play politics, too. That means they might have to compromise on some issues in order to achieve other, bigger goals.
Realistically, there aren't enough conservative votes in the US to win all of the battles.
Apology, if it was one, accepted.
Specter moves to the right in the lead up to an election because he needs conservative votes. The more conservative the challenge, the better his voting record. He's never faced a conservative like Pat before.
I do not, and will, not trust Bush or Santorum to make my voting decisions. They both claim to be conservative, but endorsed and campaigned for a man that represents almost the exact opposite of their professed beliefs. Bush was afraid of backlash from the other RINOs. Santorum didn't want to lose his leadership position. It was more important to him than any principle that we thought that he stood for. I believe that he liked the idea of being 'the conservative senator' from PA. Toomey was a threat to that status.
I'm no doubt among millions who are really, truly tired of hearing that we "must" keep reelecting and reelecting piles of crap like Specter.
When does it stop? Are piles of crap like Specter always going to be "good enough", do we just have to wait for them to die of old age in office after squandering hundreds of billions more, or do Big Stupid Government Republicans plan on drawing the line somewhere, someday?
Thanks. I couldn't think of the name of the Specter's new 'blockee'. I'm sure that they will try to tap dance there way around that.
Let me jump in on that question.
The dems voted along party lines to acquit and they deserve our scorn. But it was the Republicans who failed to take the proceedings seriously that gave the dems the political cover that they needed to hold fast for clinton. Perhaps, just perhaps, if they did, the outcome would have been different. Can you imagine if they actually listened to witnesses and looked at evidence?
Thank you, Trent Lott and Rick Santorum.
Don't be afraid to pester the RNC, Senate Campaign Committee, Bush/Cheney Election Committee, etc...
If Bush really wants Specter relected he might strongly suggest that he compromise a little.
I would contact the prolife organizations in your state about Spectpr's intent to block the appointment of a prolife Arkansas district judge even though Arkansas' two Democrat senators support him. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1144839/posts
GREAT post! BRAVO! (BRAVA?)
I'm confused. When I say that we will gain seats this year, I'm told that we won't. When I say that it will take 2 elections to get to 60, you tell me that it won't.
Which is it?
I understand being wary about this, but if the dems can still block what we want when we're in the majority, why can't we block the dems if (in the slim-to-none-chance that) they do?
Or alternatively, if we can't get anything done when we're in control, why is the world going to end if they have a slim majority and any legislation has to get past Bush's (still missing) veto pen?
I don't want to see the dems have the control that they had for 5 decades either, but I think that you may be assuming an outcome far worse than possible.
Of course, this all assumes that the remaining RINOs remain as faithful to the GOP as so many here suggest they will.
My turn to apologize, but I jumped on your comment as quickly as you jumped on mine. I hope that my apology was a quick as yours.
Signed,
The Omnipotent One (And Only)
I think that you have bought into the liberal/RINO lie that we must compromise principle to get elected. There are prominent examples to the contrary. Reagan. Toomey. Ron Paul. Rick Santorum. Daryl Metcalfe. (Who?)
The problem isn't when a pubbie pol stands on principle that his election is jeopardized. It's when he waffles and compromises. When the pubbie acts, campaigns, and votes like a democrat, the voters are turned off and drop out. They don't see a difference in the politicians or that their vote matters in the outcome that they want.
Reagan took the country by storm. Then he really kicked butt in the second race. Bush I won because people were expecting Reagan term III. When Bush I folded, he was abandoned.
Toomey is in a predominately dem district, but he has consistently promoted conservative values and won with respectable margins. Even the dem voters appreciated and supported him because he was consistent and honest. He didn't pander. He didn't promise what he had to intention of doing just to get votes. If Bush and Santorum had the courage of their (stated) beliefs or even just stayed neutral, Toomey would have won the race against Specter.
Ron Paul is the same. He tells his voters (mostly dems), not what they want to hear, but the truth. Do you know that his biggest opposition is from the GOP? They want him replaced because he votes based on the Constitutionality of every issue and not on who proposed it or how popular it is. If we had more men of principle like Ron Paul, we wouldn't have the mess that we have in Congress now.
Locally, a state rep Daryl Metcalfe is the most conservative rep in PA house. He clobbers any dem challenger, but the state GOP constantly tries to find someone to challenge him because he holds true to the Consitution and doesn't waver.
Now I know that in some areas of the country, these men would have a hard time winning, but that doesn't mean that principle doesn't matter. Above all, people, including dem people, want honestly even if it conflicts with personal political beliefs.
If more Republicans were like these men, they win more often, not less and with bigger margins, not smaller. There are lots of people who would gladly vote again if their vote meant that they'd get a man (or woman) like any of the above.
If Bill Clinton had been convicted by the Senate, we would have Al Gore as President today, and that is fact pure nonsense and ridiculous speculation. There, that's better.
The rest of your post is even worse. Maybe you can start your recovery by eliminating the sugar from the koolaid. Just a suggestion.
First, Specter distanced himself from Bush within 12 hours of winning the primary and he wouldn't have won without Bush. In his vitory speech, he reminded everyone that he was an independent voice and (using Bush's campaign ad wording) rubbed Bush's face in it.
Then days later Specter sided with the dems and voted against Bush's overtime pay bill.
Now, as you point out, he's standing in the way of one of his judicial nominees (Holmes).
Specter is not liked because he is so nasty, arrogant, and so hard to pin down. He has more weasel words than clinton. Any you deal that you make with him today will be broken tomorrow and he'll have you thinking that it was your fault.
He plays to his crowd. Everyone thinks that he is their best friend when he's pandering, er, I mean campaigning. And he is in perpetual campaign mode.
The only pressure that Specter feels is that which comes during an election from a conservative candidate. Now that he is facing a socialist, he beliefs that we don't have a choice but to vote for him. The most that we'll get from him now is lip service.
Good luck.
PING!
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.