Jan 29th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
Judd Gregg for Commerce?
Roll Call reports that Barack Obama might appoint Judd Gregg (R-NH) to be Secretary of Commerce. If that were to come to pass, I’m sure Senator Gregg’s unique qualifications for this crucial post would be the sole consideration. The fact that Gregg joining the cabinet would lead to Gregg being replaced by a Democratic Senator is surely something nobody in the White House would give even a moment’s consideration to.
If this scenario were to come to pass, it would sort of make me wonder why Gregg would want to make the switch. Being a United States Senator seems like a pretty good job to me. Commerce Secretary—eh? But tastes differ.
87 Responses to “Judd Gregg for Commerce?”
Register
RSSLogin
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Books By Matthew Yglesias
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Abortion
Afghanistan
Basketball
Blanche Lincoln
Budget
China
climate
Congress
Crime
DC
Demographics
Economics
Economy
Energy
EU
Finance
Gender
Health Care
History
Immigration
Inequality
International Law
International Relations
Iran
Israel
Labor Markets
Media
Monetary Policy
National Security
NATO
NBA
Palestine
Political Reform
Public Health
Public Opinion
Race
Regulation
Russia
Sarah Palin
Sports
Stimulus
taxes
Technology
Trade
transportation
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Contact Matthew Yglesias
Use this form to contact blog author Matthew Yglesias.
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
January 29th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Gee, another Republican? Actually, this time the rationale couldn’t be clearer.
Plus another Senate appointment to bid on!
January 29th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
He’s up for reelection in 2010 and perhaps doesn’t like his changes in the solid blue NE? In a (presumably crappy) ARG Poll he leads Hodes 47-40, which means he’s endangered.
January 29th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
DTM beat me to it. You think this guy wants to run as a Republican, with Barack Obama backing his opponent, in a state Obama won by a mile?
Yo, Judd: plato ou plumbo, buddy? What’s it gonna be?
January 29th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Would Lynch name Hodes, or appoint himself?
January 29th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
it would sort of make me wonder why Gregg would want to make the switch.
He’s got the option of spending the next two years fundraising in order to win re-election, in a state that has turned increasing blue over the last four years. He hasn’t faced a serious challenger since being elected, which means that he’s probably out of the habit of campaigning, and there’s a fair chance that one of the two battle-hardened House Dems will run in 2010.
Of course, having his name floated might result in the promise of mucho dinero from the NRSC for the re-election campaign, and the White House might be circulating it just to see how the GOP Senate leadership reacts.
January 29th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
Others have beat me to it. But would you rather retire from your prestigious job to another (and less stressful, I imagine) stressful job, or be fired?
The only thing that surprises me is that it isn’t Snowe. I figured a retirement at this time would offer her the payback that she’d be almost inhuman not to want at this point. The insults that have been made public (the “weak sisters” of the party) are bad enough that I can only imagine the slights she’s endured in private.
January 29th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
I believe Lynch has ruled out running for the seat in 2010. Now, that doesn’t mean Lynch couldn’t appoint himself, but it would make it more obviously disreputable for him to do so.
Also, the prospect of my side picking up a Senate seat by appointment is a great opportunity for me to call for changing the system to special elections across the board, without having to worry about whether I’m making the call entirely out of self-interest.
January 29th, 2009 at 7:33 pm
Speaking of which, where’s today’s installment of Commerce Secretaries past? You’ve nearly made it up to Henry Wallace, who is the only interesting figure in the bunch! Don’t stop now! (But maybe stop soon. Its a little boring).
January 29th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Obama’s going to pick him to be his “lucky Cabinet member”, since Gregg won the lottery a while back.
January 29th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
Maybe it’s a result of me living in SV, but I keep hearing that John Thompson, CEO of Symantec, is a (leading?) candidate for Commerce.
January 29th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Well, it would explain Nate Silver’s analysis of the strange new voting patterns of Senator Gregg.
January 29th, 2009 at 7:57 pm
It’s a massive win to go with Gregg. Either he says no and its “no harm/no foul, just looking to get some more Republicans involved in my decision making, if they don’t want to be a part of it, well…” or Gregg accepts and we get a) our 60th Senator and b) probably enough Republican outrage to pass Fiengold’s amendment- which is a WIN for America.
Judd Gregg FTW!
January 29th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
Great! Another Democrat appointing a Senate seat replacement. What could go wrong?
January 29th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
I’m a big fan of Governor Lynch, but he’s such a self-styled “post partisan,” I wouldn’t bet against him choosing a Republican to replace Gregg. NH’s turning pretty solidly blue, for sure, but a Senate appointment that resulted in a party change and filibuster-proof Dem majority would definitely be controversial, and John Lynch isn’t one to willingly invite partisan controversies.
If this pans out, my money would lean toward a Senator Jeb Bradley.
January 29th, 2009 at 8:23 pm
Uh Dave…I don’t think so…
January 29th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
And here I thought I’d get bored of politics after the election…
January 29th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
Lynch would appoint someone old and busted, who would not seek reelection and instead endorse Lynch come 2010.
January 29th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
I’m a little confused by the logic here… I don’t see how this is a “would Gregg want it?” question, but rather a “how hard is Gregg begging for it?” question.
As pseudo already noted, Gregg’s pretty much Obama’s bitch already. He’s up for reelection in one of the bluest states in America. Does he really plan to vote against cloture and allow tons of ads starting with “Judd Gregg voted with Republicans to deny…” etc? I don’t think so. Unless he’s suddenly retiring in 2010, Gregg is already a lock for cloture votes. Sure, a Democrat in the seat would be a better guarantee, but is that really worth it if Gregg isn’t the best pick?
If Obama truly thinks Gregg’s the best choice for Commerce (or I guess second-best at this point) then by all means he should appoint him and enjoy the added benefits. But as a calculation for breaking a filibuster I think Obama already has Gregg on a leash for that.
January 29th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Steady Rifle,
I’m telling you, based on the way John Lynch has been running things up here, there’s absolutely no way he’d make a party-switching pick.
He’d never invite that type of controversy on himself, and giving the Dems a filibuster-proof majority would be a huge national story. He’d instantly be (unfairly) lumped in with the Blago-Paterson appointment mess, and this is a guy who gets a migraine when his approval rating dips below 70%.
Not gonna happen.
January 29th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
As pseudo already noted, Gregg’s pretty much Obama’s bitch already. He’s up for reelection in one of the bluest states in America.
What a fool. This is New Hampshire, the reddest state in the Northeast. No other New England state has had such a Republican heritage.
January 29th, 2009 at 8:58 pm
Regardless of whether or not he accepts the position, Obama just made Judd Gregg, a moderate Republican, the most powerful man in the Republican Senate caucus. It might help move Senate Republicans on the stimulus.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
I am intrigued at how this is going to play out actually. By gaining a filibuster-proof majority of 60 this (extra-electoral) way, the Democrats could actually be forced to be more cautious in the Senate.
You can hardly scream “MANDATE” at the top of your lungs when your filibuster-proof-ness is gained by appointment, not election. It would be interesting who would want to take on the responsibility of inducing such a situation. The NH governor could show himself to be a gutsy politician in doing so, but it could also backfire, giving the GOP an excuse to simply scream bloody murder at everything that gets passed.
And my guess is if the Democrats actually get this thing happening, card check would be dead. There is no way they will pass something that controversial (and opposed by majority of Americans) with as intriguing a majority.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
This is a master stroke. Quit fretting about the potential fallout. If this guy wants it, and the governor is duly consulted on the pick, this is a perfect scenario. Obama can continue to have cocktail parties and meetings with Senate/House Republicans, while he’s got 60 votes in the kitty. Boehner et al. will cry foul but it will fall on deaf ears as they’re heading over to the White House for “bipartisan” lunches.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Myles, card check is supported by a large majority of Americans.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:26 pm
What a fool. This is New Hampshire, the reddest state in the Northeast.
Wow, the reddest state in the Northeast. When I cast my first vote in 1992, Illinois was the reddest state in the midwest. It doesn’t mean much now.
Watching the Republicans is embarassing. They don’t understand what’s going on and until you can get in the 21’st century and figure out what’s wrong with your politics and why it doesn’t matter a whit that NH used to be red (see demographics and how much red died of old age there between 2000-2008) you won’t be a credible opposition and that’s a really poor thing for democracy.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Great job on Maddow, Matt! Totally insightful and didn’t stumble once. Well done, sir.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
No other New England state has had such a Republican heritage.
While NH is definitely New England’s reddest state at the moment, Vermont has the severest Republican heritage, having gone Republican every single presidential election in the 20th century except 1964’s until 1992, when it became one of the bluest of the blue states.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
I hope Judd Gregg hasn’t been reading your website lately about how much being Commerce Secretary sucks.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
We’ve been waiting for two days for your profile of Robert P. Lamont. I found this series oddly hilarious yet informative. Lamont’s Wikipedia does seem really short even for a Commerce Secretary, so maybe that has stymied you.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:34 pm
Good for Obama for considering trading the plum that is Commerce (cough) for 60 votes. Nobody gives a flying frack about the sclerotic old rules of the Senate. If this helps Obama get ‘er done, so be it. And good for Judd Gregg for (maybe) having the sense evolution gave him and taking a lifeline instead of plowing full steam ahead to his political death in 2010. Fight or flight is a natural response. You lose just about every fight politically when you have smaller numbers, bad ideas, and bad demographics so Gregg is wise to consider flight as a smart option. Gregg isn’t that old so retiring isn’t really an option like it is for so many others.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
Myles, card check is supported by a large majority of Americans.
This is demonstrably false. A large majority of Americans oppose the elimination of the secret ballot, whatever justifications there might be. Simple as that.
And I am waiting to see Sen. Gregg has any sense of loyalty to his party. For his sake and for GOP’s, I hope he does. Because we all know what happens if he quits the Senate. Because as far as I am aware, the GOP looks after its own, especially its senators. He has no need to sell out. A comfortable, cushy retirement with lots of well-paid speeches is in order.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
NH is turning into a Boston Suburb with their low taxes and high quality of life. southern NH is booming with transplanted mass liberals. Just look at the pounding the Repugs got in NH this year!
January 29th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
60 votes is not a panacea, and the Democrats certainly do not have 60 votes “in the kitty” on any but the least controversial issues. This is a caucus that contains Joe Lieberman for goodness sake, not to mention Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson.
You have to ask yourself, on what important issues is Judd Gregg (facing reelection in a state trending blue) going to vote differently from a new democratic appointee? Not likely on any energy issues, and also not likely on anything related to Iraq. Health care? It’s possible, but I would imagine Gregg will vote for most proposals there as well.
The electoral pressures on Gregg this year mean that the marginal difference in his voting patterns versus a new democratic appointee are probably quite small, as Nate Silver has discussed.
I don’t think much of the issue of political blowback, or that the democrats “cheated” to get to 60. It’s not like Gregg was forced or tricked into it or anything. I just don’t think that replacing Gregg with a democrat this year is likely to affect much legislation. This is not a Jeffords in 2001 scenario.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
What a fool. This is New Hampshire, the reddest state in the Northeast.
And one of the highest margins of victory for Obama in the election. Which makes us both right but only one of us sound like an asshole.
January 29th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
Re Myles’s comment “Because as far as I am aware, the GOP looks after its own, especially its senators. He has no need to sell out.”
————–
That is a crock of shit. My Republican Senator, Arlen Specter, has been a Republican for DECADES –back to the Barry Goldwater era. Yet the far right faction of the Republican Party beat the living shit out of him in the 2004 Republican primary, even though Rick Santorum was supporting him. Arlen had to spend a ton of money fighting them off.
Arlen’s run against the Democrat in the General Election was a fucking cakewalk by comparison.
Of course, Arlen has a LONG memory. Payback’s a bitch.
January 29th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
Another positive is that maybe a Republican Secretary of Commerce will have enough animal vigor to get me and 6.5 Million other Americans our $40 DTV Transition rebate. The Democrats appear to be too limpwristed to pull it off.
January 29th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
That is a crock of shit. My Republican Senator, Arlen Specter, has been a Republican for DECADES –back to the Barry Goldwater era. Yet the far right faction of the Republican Party beat the living shit out of him in the 2004 Republican primary, even though Rick Santorum was supporting him. Arlen had to spend a ton of money fighting them off.
Didn’t he vote for card check? You can’t claim to be a conservative and vote for card check. Gregg, on the other hand, is a New Hampshire Republican. That is solid.
January 29th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
Obama won 21 states by a larger margin than NH (including DC), and 7 states by a smaller margin. Of the states that he won by a smaller margin, John Kerry won precisely none of them. Link
New Hampshire is still competitive for socially moderate Republicans, though obviously trending Democratic. Judd Gregg is also no John Sununu (i.e. most people don’t viscerally dislike him.) Gregg could win reelection in the right circumstances (i.e. not against Paul Hodes, Obama less popular, etc.) He wouldn’t be a total fool to turn down Commerce.
January 29th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Don, I’m mail you a box if you want. It took a two-thirds vote to overturn it and the problem wasn’t democrats here. What would you want done at the SecCom level that you think would change this wierdness? I don’t even understand why the Republicans blocked it, it doesn’t seem to have a quid pro quo anywhere.
January 29th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
If Gregg is that unhappy in the Republican caucus, why doesn’t he just become a Democrat, or an independent caucusing with the Democrats? Retiring into the cabinet seems excessive.
January 29th, 2009 at 10:57 pm
Judge Dredd for Commerce! I am the National Institute for Standards and Technology!
January 29th, 2009 at 11:08 pm
“Of course, Arlen has a LONG memory.”
He used to be my senator, too. He’s a dick. But he certainly has a long memory. I wouldn’t cross him. I still can’t figure out why he keeps getting elected. But he always will. He makes just enough right votes to stay in power.
January 29th, 2009 at 11:10 pm
dick,
STOOP exposing Barack Obama’s strategy. The filibuster is the only thing standing between us and a second, more awesome New Deal. Don’t blow it!
January 29th, 2009 at 11:22 pm
Maybe he wants to be part of a Historial Event.
January 29th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
You’re both right! Americans oppose the elimination of the secret ballot and EFCA doesn’t eliminate the secret ballot!
January 30th, 2009 at 12:05 am
*sigh*
Myles, everyone’s entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. You can’t stick your fingers in your ears and start singing My Fair Lady and hope the facts go away.
http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/upload/Employee_Free_Choice_Act_polling_memo_1.pdf
“Three-quarters (75%) of adults favor allowing employees to have a union once a majority of employees in a workplace sign authorization cards indicating that they want to form a union, including 44% who strongly support the idea. Just 20% of adults oppose majority sign-up.”
Now, of course, you can get lower numbers if you define EFCA as “DESTROY AMERICAN DEMOCRACY AND BETRAY US TO THE SOVIETS,” but, well, EFCA doesn’t abolish the secret ballot.
January 30th, 2009 at 12:54 am
In any case, I hope Sen. Gregg remains loyal. I am sure some sort of cushy post-career arrangement can be orchestrated for him within conservative corporate circles.
There is no need for him to sell out to Democrats.
January 30th, 2009 at 1:09 am
Zephyrus,
Now your just being unfair, if Conservatives can’t make up their own facts they won’t have anything to say.
January 30th, 2009 at 2:19 am
What about the argument that EFCA will in effect abolish the secret ballot, since it would be up to union organizers to request a ballot election if that’s what they want (once they have a minimum number of cards signed), and there’s no reason for union organizers to ever request a ballot election?
Don’t get me wrong — I favor EFCA. But it seems to me that the argument that it wouldn’t be the end of secret ballot union elections is pretty weak. Unless I’m missing something?
January 30th, 2009 at 2:24 am
Because as far as I am aware, the GOP looks after its own, especially its senators. He has no need to sell out. A comfortable, cushy retirement with lots of well-paid speeches is in order.
Right… is former NH Senator Bob Smith still selling real estate in Florida?
January 30th, 2009 at 6:41 am
I agree with those above who suggest Governor Lynch’s weak partisan affiliation makes a cross-party replacement unlikely, especially considering the huge national implications.
On the other hand, the perfect out for Lynch would be to set a special election rather than filling it by appointment. Read the XVII Amendment carefully. Even if a Governor MAY be allowed by their state legislature to appoint a temporary replacement, the only thing the Constitution REQUIRES a Governor to do is issue a writ of election.
The NH GOP bench is really shockingly weak right now and Paul Hodes has been gearing up for this run. In a snap election, he’d almost certainly win it for the Dems, then be set up to retain it in 2010.
January 30th, 2009 at 8:11 am
Powerlessness of the kind the GOP now faces must be a dispiriting thing-maybe he just wants a challenge beyond kvetching about Democrats. As Commerce Secretary shaping industrial policy he would have plenty on his plate.
Maybe he just wants to be part of a history-making administration.
January 30th, 2009 at 8:48 am
the Democrats certainly do not have 60 votes “in the kitty” on any but the least controversial issues. This is a caucus that contains Joe Lieberman for goodness sake
Joe Lieberman, being an independent, is bound to vote as Dick Durbin instructs him to on procedural matters (including cloture) in exchange for maintaining his seniority and committee assignments. His cloture vote is automatic.
Which isn’t to suggest that 60 Democrats is an automatic 60 votes; Blanche Lincoln, for example, is due up in 2010 and will be stuck between party and constituency on some tough votes. But I’d rather go into the fight with Paul Hodes than Judd Gregg.
January 30th, 2009 at 9:05 am
Have you been advising Blogojavich?
January 30th, 2009 at 9:07 am
One problem with this maneuver is that now he can run in 2010 as. “The Republican Barack Obama wanted to head the Commerce Department”
January 30th, 2009 at 9:07 am
Maybe he just wants to be part of a history-making administration.
The laughable megalomania of liberals notwithstanding, history-making administration my ass.
With any luck we will turn it into another 1994.
January 30th, 2009 at 9:14 am
I am actually not that concerned with cloture. As soon as Democrats get to 60, there will be a couple in their ranks who will start to squirm about card check. Trying to get Specter to vote for it is one thing, but to get Blanche Lincoln to go along for a hugely unpopular vote, quite another. I am already looking forward to the say, $10 million, that Wal-Mart could give to her opponents and PAC’s?
She has the choice of facing the might of big labour (har har har) in the primaries or Wal-Mart in the election. In any case, I will enjoy watching a Democrat trying to wriggle herself out of the vote. And plus, pissing off the entire American Chamber of Commerce might make arranging cushy internships and that sort of thing for her children rather a bit harder….(does she have children?)
January 30th, 2009 at 9:17 am
That would be beautiful. And Judd Gregg cannot be looking forward to dealing with his own party for the next few years, what with Sununu out of retirement and ready to shoot his mouth off.
January 30th, 2009 at 9:21 am
Don and Ed, I think the govt should’ve sent coupons to the 3 million that requested the coupons that haven’t received them, but should go through with the transition at least on the bandwidth requested by emergency services.
January 30th, 2009 at 9:56 am
With any luck we will turn it into another 1994.
Yep, all they have to do is target those congressional districts held by white southern conservative Democrats and take advantage of all those other white southern Democrats who are retiring, and they’re on the path to retaking both houses!
Oh, wait…
January 30th, 2009 at 10:15 am
This has got to be Emanuel’s work… brilliant.
January 30th, 2009 at 10:18 am
As soon as Democrats get to 60, there will be a couple in their ranks who will start to squirm about card check. Trying to get Specter to vote for it is one thing, but to get Blanche Lincoln to go along for a hugely unpopular vote, quite another.
What’s your point here? In the event that Judd Gregg gets appointed to Commerce and a Democrat takes his place, the caucus will have sixty members. Trading Specter, who previously supported the measure, for Lincoln gives them . . . sixty votes.
January 30th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Trading Specter, who previously supported the measure, for Lincoln gives them . . . sixty votes.
In case you still have grasped it, neither Specter nor Lincoln are likely to support card check this time around. Nobody wants to actually get pinned down actually making this thing happen. It’s fine and dandy to vote for it when you know it’s not going to actually pass.
January 30th, 2009 at 11:31 am
You’re wrong. Specter needs labor support to win a general election in Pennsylvania. He’s always known that, and he’s always worked for it. Granted, he may have wavered EFCA if he was threatened with another tough primary race, but Toomey’s out. Another challenger will just be wasting his time. Without having to worry about what’s coming from his right, Specter’s vote will be as sure as Ted Kennedy’s.
You might want to tone down the condescending attitude given that you really have no idea what the fuck you’re talking about.
January 30th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Specter may not run in 2010 –given his health problems and age.
Which only gives him two years to fuck certain factions in the Republican Party. I curious to see what he comes up with — we’ll probably need another “magic bullet” theory to explain the corpses.
January 30th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
By the way, anyone seen Curt Weldon lately? heh heh
January 30th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
You’re wrong. Specter needs labor support to win a general election in Pennsylvania.
If he is that desperately groveling at the feet of big labour, then I suggest he join the Democratic Party.
You might want to tone down the condescending attitude
I have every right to condescend to people (i.e. most liberals) who think intellectual finesse and esotericism equals fitness for and superiority of leadership. I get a good laugh out of liberals’ intellectual snobbery there and then, and I don’t see why such good stuff of humor should go to waste.
January 30th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
If he is that desperately groveling at the feet of big labour, then I suggest he join the Democratic Party.
Who’s going to force him? His strongest threat from his right flank just declined to race. If you have no idea how things work in PA, perhaps you’d do better not to shoot your mouth off and make yourself out to be an ignoramus.
January 30th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Who’s going to force him? His strongest threat from his right flank just declined to race.
It’s a matter of principle. If he is not willing to be a conservative, then he should perhaps stop running under the conservative banner.
January 30th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
“It’s a matter of principle. If he is not willing to be a conservative, then he should perhaps stop running under the conservative banner.”
Perhaps. And I’m sure you’d vote for his Club for Growth primary opponent. But we’re not talking about what Specter should do. We’re talking about what he’s most likely to do, and since he now no longer faces a serious primary challenge it’s most likely he’ll be the 60th (or 61st) vote so he doesn’t lose re-election. So you should in fact be quite worried that it will be passed, since it very likely will this summer.
January 30th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
It will be interesting for sure. I am, at this point, quite nonchalant. If the Democrats want to pass stupid legislation, let them. It will most certainly end up biting them on the ass.
If the Democrats have not learned anything at all from the Republican resurgence of the last 40 years, it is that don’t piss a big chunk of the country off. And card check is next to guaranteed to piss off a nice big chunk of the country into never voting for the Democrats. So, let them be. If they want to go on handing the country over the big labour, let them.
January 30th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
It’s a matter of principle.
The “principle” politicians adhere to — and should adhere to — is keeping their constituents satisfied with their service. I’m sure there are some senators who are willing to tank their career and lose an election “on principle,” but most will satisfy voters and constituencies that need to be placated in order to get re-elected. And they should, after all: they work for them. Not every Republican — especially in a more liberal state like Pennsylvania — is going to adhere to every Republican dogma. The guy has decades of seniority. Why should he give that up “on principle,” especially if it’s a principle that he doesn’t actually care about?
January 30th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
“Why should he give that up “on principle,” especially if it’s a principle that he doesn’t actually care about?”
Because I don’t see how prizing big labour over a free economy makes anyone conservative. Sure there are some issues where Specter need not walk in lockstep, but this is a litmus test for conservatism. Conservatism in this country cannot continue to stand if it does not punch its weight against crusading labour.
For all I care, Mr. Specter is welcome to run as a Democrat in the next election. He can, for all I care, also switch parties right now and avoid even going through the harrowing processes of a competitive primary. But he ought not share the banner of conservatism if he isn’t willing to walk the walk. I don’t want people in my party who negotiate with socialists. There is no requirement that a Senator must remain with the Republicans, after all, given that they are representative of their constituency, not party. And if Mr. Specter refuses to act as a conservative should and vote against card check, he can still serve his constituents as a Senator, just, for God’s sakes, don’t pretend to be a conservative one.
Please switch to the Democrats, Mr. Specter. Nobody said you have to remain a Republican.
January 30th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
The People of the Great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania suggest that Myles take a flying leap and kiss our ass.
PS We also request that Myles not refer to “conservative principles”. It makes us collapse into helpless laughter and that makes our sides hurt.
January 31st, 2009 at 7:12 am
I think the British had a very popular comedy with this sort of thing.
January 31st, 2009 at 11:08 am
I think it is sad funny that USA is a country where the president can appoint a member of the opposite partyt to be a cabinet member but not to be a judge.
March 17th, 2009 at 2:17 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 5:51 am
tramadol
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:18 am
buy viagra online
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 23rd, 2009 at 4:14 am
viagra
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:19 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:58 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 1:47 am
Thanks for the review! viagra