Since I wrote this, there are a few comments that I'd like to add.
On Friday night, I again saw Rep Habay at a local GOP committee social event where I believe he was trying to mend some fences and build some bridges with the Toomey camp. He tried to downplay our earlier discussion, but I told him that we still had a few rounds to go.
I've been told countless times now that voting for Hoeffel is reprehensible and that I cannot possibly be a conservative if I'm willing to vote for this Democrat who is more likely a socialist.
I will agree that what I am doing and advocating others to do is not a normal course of action. Half a loaf is better than none, says the old saw. Generally speaking, this is true, but replacing liberal Specter in the Senate with a socialist Hoeffel is a small tradeoff when you consider that we also accomplish putting a real conservative -- Jon Kyl -- into the Chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee.
Kyl's credentials are impeccible. He'll do what is right simply because it is right. We won't have to persuade him, cajole him, or make deals with him that we can only hope that he'll honor.
If, instead of Kyl, Specter's loss would mean that a Snowe, a Collins, a Chaffee, a Jeffords, or some other spineless, gutless coward like Frist would chair that committee, I would not be advocating this action.
We face a unique opportunity to get rid of one of the RINOs that is obstructing a Republican, conservative or a Constitutional agenda. This may be the last chance in many of our lifetimes to have an elected Republican government in DC.
We see in our own lives the value of our principles. We know that our principles are the right ones. We know that our nation will grow and prosper under a government that leads with those principles. We just need to courage to take a bold step and show that the Republican Party stands for something meaningful. Something beyond being in the majority, but with no core and no spine.
I hope that you all enjoy a safe Memorial Day. May God bless America and America's brave defenders in uniform.
We just need to courage to take a bold step and just DO IT!!!!!
I think you are misguided. Doing good means first, identifying a problem and then second, have a plan that improves on the situation.
You identified the problem, specter is a rino. You have no plan that improves on the situation since specter wins or the democrat wins. The democrat winning, does not improve the situation. Toomey lost the primary, now get over it and support specter. If Toomey won the primary and specter's supporters started freeping Toomey, you would be crying foul, and rightfuly so.
Ping
I can support this only if the Republicans will gain several seats this November. Otherwise it is better to preserve the majority than to put an extreme leftist like Joe Hoeffel in the Senate.
The RINO Ganske lost by 10 points.
Specter's loss would mean that a Snowe, a Collins, a Chaffee, a Jeffords, or some other spineless, gutless coward like Frist would chair that committee, I would not be advocating this action.
But a Pat Leahy(Who I think it would be), Dianne Feinswine, Joe Biden, or Ted Kennedy would be worse. The Senate majority could go down to the wire too. It's a gambit. While Specter would be terrible, the dem would be worse, and Schumer will likely chair a subcommittee. Jon Kyl is better, but he won't make it if there isn't a majority.
I know you do what you have to do, but keeping the senate is not a give, and I hope you consider that in your vote. No matter what, Specter will be gone in 6 years anyway if not earlier. Hoeffel may be there for 20+.
The problem with voting Republican is you no longer get half a loaf, or a quarter of a loaf. Reagan knew how to leave the table with something, the rest give away the farm with both hands and are happy to promote more socialism, or worse, globalism.
It's become a why bother for every voter I know IRL many of whom have no intention of visiting the polls this Nov. My neighbor, who has a picture of herself and Bush at a function shocked me when she said she will not vote for him again. Seems a gay friend of her's convinced her that we needed Bush to fight the war, now that he has done his job, we need Kerry to negotiate a peace and get us back in line with the E.U. and U.N.
We had a long talk, I hope I had an impact on her thinking. I don't plan to vote for Bush myself, but a persons reason should not be the reasons she came up with. The thing about the Republican Party courting RINO's at the expense of their conservative base is, that the loyalty of a RINO is not even skin deep.
Question to all the Arlen Specter haters: Will you devote the same amount of energy to knock off Ed Rendell in 2006?
I personally wouldn't vote for a Democrat, but I certainly can't fault you in this case.
Even if we lose control of the Senate it won't be a total disaster. In fact, it would make Republican Senators more dependent upon Bush than they are when they are the majority party and can afford to thumb their noses at him.
"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"
A prospect real conservatives should dread.
Just ask your 'loyal' Republican friends why Arlen is planning to oppose Bush's nomination for federal bench, a guy by the name of Holmes.
PING!
Love your report, and I agree! At this point, I'm staying away from all political people.
We all need to read once again, George Washington's farewell speech. He understood the future danger. Here's what he said: Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
If I were in your position I would vote for the Constitution or the American Independednt candidate in your state as opposed to the Democrat.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
But that's just me. That way, my vote would also stand on the same principles as my protest since I couldn;t use it (as I know you would) if Toomay were in the race.
This ray is your typical liberal who 'used to be a republican until (fill in the blank). Don't let him fool anyone.
Nonsense. You are 100% ABSOLUTELY CORRECT regarding this issue and many people agree with you. If Specter were a moderate or a lukewarm conservative, those statements might be correct. HE ISN'T. Along with a very few others he is the most LIBERAL Republican in the legislature more LIBERAL then many democrats. Specter is a DEMOCRAT in sheep's clothing. AS HEAD OF THE JUDICIARY, a post he is due to assume if reelected, he will block any conservative judicial appointments and promote Liberal appointments. If he loses, a true conservative (darn if I haven't forgotten his name), with a conservative voting record of 95%, will head the Judiciary.
We are currently in no danger of losing our senate majority. On this one vote, at this particular time, VOTE FOR ANYONE OTHER THAN ARLEN SPECTER!
Specter offers to shake hands with someone who then declines...bet that made you feel real good, didn't it.
Isn't this what you wanted, Badray? Your man is moving up within the Party. Everything in good time. It just wasn't his time to be Senator.
Methinks that Specter should get better security for his appearances.