Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A new Democrat

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • TrackDaddy
    replied
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    Originally posted by lonewolf
    I think this is the Democratic leadership's leverage to influence Specter to toe the party line.
    Exactly. If Specter wants his seniority back, he'll have to demonstrate his Democratic bona fides over the next year.
    Filibuster.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vince
    replied
    Originally posted by TrackDaddy
    Originally posted by Vince
    Senate strips Specter of his 29 year seniority. What a rube.
    Does that affect his pay?
    I think a lot of these old geezers in "leadership" positions have bigger and better staffs and offices that they lose and get kicked out of, when there is a change.

    He was too stupid to negotiate his position in advance(and in writing, when dealing with liars). He was blinded by his interest in getting reelected.

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Originally posted by lonewolf
    I think this is the Democratic leadership's leverage to influence Specter to toe the party line.
    Exactly. If Specter wants his seniority back, he'll have to demonstrate his Democratic bona fides over the next year.

    Leave a comment:


  • lonewolf
    replied
    I think this is the Democratic leadership's leverage to influence Specter to toe the party line.

    Leave a comment:


  • ndamix
    replied
    Originally posted by Vince
    Senate strips Specter of his 29 year seniority. What a rube.
    Specter's loss of seniority is only for this Congress which runs until 2010...we'll have to see if this will be in affect when the new Congress convenes in 2011:

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capito ... ecter.html

    Leave a comment:


  • TrackDaddy
    replied
    Originally posted by Vince
    Senate strips Specter of his 29 year seniority. What a rube.
    Does that affect his pay?

    Leave a comment:


  • lonewolf
    replied
    Originally posted by Vince
    Senate strips Specter of his 29 year seniority. What a rube.
    No bad deed goes unrewarded, to paraphrase..

    Leave a comment:


  • Vince
    replied
    Senate strips Specter of his 29 year seniority. What a rube.

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Originally posted by paulthefan
    jazz, you are my friend and I am not upset in the least. I am trying to share information. I think if Goldwater were around today he would probably be in the GOP as his instincts tended towards freedom, liberty and responsibility. That means limited government, he would be appalled at the 40% total tax rates that many americans face. He ran a family business. Unlike Arlen Spector, another honorable man, who was a career lawyer from a liberal northeastern city, Goldwater would not be at home in the democrat party. Goldwater may have many many problems with todays GOP, but he had many many problems with the GOP of 1963 too. He was a revolutionary and a political jugernaut. It was impossible for him not to make waves, he was a creator and motivator not a dealer. He would see many many trends as troubling and he would say so in very clear terms. But where in 1964 he could deeply inspire 35-40% of the population, today it would be more like 25%.
    Agreed! Of course there's no way that he would ever be a Democrat. And though he would have problems in a Republican primary, he might actually do better in a general election today than he did in 1964. What got me thinking about that is a Ron Paul interview last year, in which he pointed out that there was a lot of overlap between his supporters and Obama's supporters, which meant that he had to be careful how he talked about Obama for risk of alienating some of his own supporters. I find it ironic that a politician with one of the most liberal voting records in Congress and one with one of the most conservative voting records could both appeal to the same people.

    Leave a comment:


  • paulthefan
    replied
    jazz, you are my friend and I am not upset in the least. I am trying to share information. I think if Goldwater were around today he would probably be in the GOP as his instincts tended towards freedom, liberty and responsibility. That means limited government, he would be appalled at the 40% total tax rates that many americans face. He ran a family business. Unlike Arlen Spector, another honorable man, who was a career lawyer from a liberal northeastern city, Goldwater would not be at home in the democrat party. Goldwater may have many many problems with todays GOP, but he had many many problems with the GOP of 1963 too. He was a revolutionary and a political jugernaut. It was impossible for him not to make waves, he was a creator and motivator not a dealer. He would see many many trends as troubling and he would say so in very clear terms. But where in 1964 he could deeply inspire 35-40% of the population, today it would be more like 25%.

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Paulthefan, I don't see what you're so upset about. I agree with you that the country has changed since 1964. I agree with you that there's no comparison between Specter and Goldwater. What do we disagree about? Are you saying that Goldwater would be embraced by the GOP today? Are you saying that the Republican Party establishment and FOX News rolled out the red carpet for Ron Paul in 2008? Please tell me what FACT I got wrong or nonsensical statement I made. :?

    Leave a comment:


  • paulthefan
    replied
    Originally posted by paulthefan
    Should I list 50 video and speech transcripts that would show that he would have been public enemy number one for today's Democrat party?.. what is your point? Suggesting that he would have been a public Specter is patently absurd, get a grip!
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    I never said or implied that he would have embraced by today's Democrats, nor did I try to compare him to Specter. The point was to give a visual illustration of Goldwater so that he might be contrasted to today's Republicans. Take a chill pill.
    Originally posted by paulthefan
    You may want to study the clash that Goldwater had with the Republicans of his own day. Goldwater was despised and slandered by the establishment GOP of the early 60s so your drawing a discernible difference between how Goldwater was treated by the GOP of the early 60s with how he would be treated today is sophomoric and could be considered deceptive to any ill informed.

    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    But his differences with the GOP in the 1960's weren't so significant that they prevented him from attaining a leadership role in the party and being his party's standard-bearer in 1964. Ron Paul preaches a lot of the same things as Goldwater, but was treated like a leper by the GOP in the 2008 Presidential primaries.
    Even a superficial study of the 1964 primary and general election struggles would expose you to the facts on this. Avail yourself of the info, it is ubiquitous. It is just the opposite of what you are posting as the country club and east coast GOP establishment effectively sabotaged Goldwater. They were mortified that rank and file conservatives were taking over their party. They owned that party just like they owned their businesses, their country clubs and their banks and they were not going to watch it get taken over by Goldwater, Reagan and their western and rural unwashed rabble. They cut every back room deal to see Goldwater slandered in the major papers during the general election. Ron Paul may have similar values to Goldwater but Goldwater wrestled control of the GOP from the clutches of the big money GOP east-coasters because his ideas and stature resonated with a large self-sufficient american middle class. The US has changed dramatically since the early 60s and people just dont see themselves or their country in the same way. No surprise that Ron Paul did not win. In fact Ron Paul faced a much much more benign and "handsoff" party leadership than Goldwater did in '64. Just do some reading and you will forget the nonsense you are now posting. The only close analogy would be the GOP leadership that Reagan faced in 1976, in fact Goldwater faced a much more savage party leadership than Reagan did in '76. It was not until the party was transformed a bit by 1980 that the majority of the party could accept Reagan.

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Originally posted by paulthefan
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    Originally posted by paulthefan
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    As this video illustrates, Mr. Goldwater would have clashed with many of today's Republicans.
    Should I list 50 video and speech transcripts that would show that he would have been public enemy number one for today's Democrat party?.. what is your point? Suggesting that he would have been a public Specter is patently absurd, get a grip!
    I never said or implied that he would have embraced by today's Democrats, nor did I try to compare him to Specter. The point was to give a visual illustration of Goldwater so that he might be contrasted to today's Republicans. Take a chill pill.
    You may want to study the clash that Goldwater had with the Republicans of his own day. Goldwater was despised and slandered by the establishment GOP of the early 60s so your drawing a discernible difference between how Goldwater was treated by the GOP of the early 60s with how he would be treated today is sophomoric and could be considered deceptive to any ill informed.
    But his differences with the GOP in the 1960's weren't so significant that they prevented him from attaining a leadership role in the party and being his party's standard-bearer in 1964. Ron Paul preaches a lot of the same things as Goldwater, but was treated like a leper by the GOP in the 2008 Presidential primaries.

    Leave a comment:


  • paulthefan
    replied
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    Originally posted by paulthefan
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    As this video illustrates, Mr. Goldwater would have clashed with many of today's Republicans.
    Should I list 50 video and speech transcripts that would show that he would have been public enemy number one for today's Democrat party?.. what is your point? Suggesting that he would have been a public Specter is patently absurd, get a grip!
    I never said or implied that he would have embraced by today's Democrats, nor did I try to compare him to Specter. The point was to give a visual illustration of Goldwater so that he might be contrasted to today's Republicans. Take a chill pill.
    You may want to study the clash that Goldwater had with the Republicans of his own day. Goldwater was despised and slandered by the establishment GOP of the early 60s so your drawing a discernible difference between how Goldwater was treated by the GOP of the early 60s with how he would be treated today is sophomoric and could be considered deceptive to any ill informed.

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Originally posted by paulthefan
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    As this video illustrates, Mr. Goldwater would have clashed with many of today's Republicans.
    Should I list 50 video and speech transcripts that would show that he would have been public enemy number one for today's Democrat party?.. what is your point? Suggesting that he would have been a public Specter is patently absurd, get a grip!
    I never said or implied that he would have embraced by today's Democrats, nor did I try to compare him to Specter. The point was to give a visual illustration of Goldwater so that he might be contrasted to today's Republicans. Take a chill pill.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X