Alarming News

January 31, 2007

Yeah, stop the presses, Arlen Specter is disagreeing with Bush

From a story titled “Specter, other Republicans deserting Bush”:

You know things have changed when Arlen Specter is talking back to the president and fellow Republicans nod in agreement.

We here at Alarming News strongly dislike Arlen Specter. It’s not what you think; it’s not because he’s a liberal. We have no problem with liberal Republicans running in states, like New York, because we believe a liberal Republican is better than any Democrat. No, it’s because he is a perpetual thorn in the side of the president and his party when it is convenient for himself. However, when he needs Republican support, whether it’s to be re-elected Senator from Pennsylvania or to become Judiciary Committee Chairman, he seems to forget all of his moral qualms about his party.

(/Royal “We”)

I interviewed Arlen Specter, shortly after he won the extremely close primary against Pat Toomey, and he assured me he would be the same Arlen Specter he’d always been. He didn’t clarify that he meant “two-faced”, but it could be assumed. I know of at least one person who is all too aware that Sen. Specter can’t be trusted.

Posted by Karol at 01:33 AM |
Technorati Tags:

What do you expect from a guy who originally defended murderer Ira Einhorn?

Posted by: Craig at January 31, 2007 at 8:11 am

I would opine that this has less to do with partisan politics and more to do with Congress trying to regain some lost constitutionally granted power. Perhaps congress is finally taking the opportunity to wake up and notice that its power in foreign affairs, which the executive has chipped away at for decades, is indeed valuable in the face of such an administration that takes such broad liberty with executive power and moreso shows absolutely no respect for the constitutionally granted right to privacy, congress’s power to investigate or even the concept of due process.
Sure, it’s a great time to Bush bash. That fact that it is envogue, even in the Republican party, has me wanting to serve fondue and champagne. That lousy SOB was three blocks from my office today after his motorcade drove right past my window. It made me want to throw tomatoes rather than pull out my camera.
Yet, I don’t think Spector’s comments were solely aimed at poking holes in this dead rotten carcus of an administration. There are those of us who believe in the first three articles of the U.S. Constitution (even article III) and patriotically want the scales balanced.

Posted by: Toby at January 31, 2007 at 3:12 pm

If it was just Specter, I don’t think this would be a story. Ditto Hagel and Susan Collins. But when the likes of Brownback and Warner were taking shots at W……well Houston, you got a problem.
Look, it’s no secret that Specter often plays the role of a contrarian (remember him voting “not proven” for Clinton’s impeachment?) and he really has not gotten along with any adminstration. So why the hell did Santorum and W. back this guy ?
Sorry if I don’t feel bad for W. on this one. He backed Specter and now, like so many other aspects of his presidency, he is reaping what he has sown.

Posted by: Von Bek at January 31, 2007 at 8:06 pm
Post a comment