Since everyone else opined I figured I have license to pile on as well, but here's my two cents:
I like Arlen Specter. I really like Arlen Specter.
I'm an unashamed liberal, but I like Senator Specter, and I'm glad he's under our tent.
Yes, he flip-flopped on EFCA, he's going to be blocking spending, and he won't be a "reliable vote" on some issues(although if he hangs around the Democrats I have a feeling he'll come around on some of them).
But I like Arlen Specter. Here's why I like him:
He stands up to authority, and he deserves a lot of credit for being a lone voice in the Republican Party for what should be non-partisan issues.
Let me hit some of the highlights:
Specter: Now let me review some of the record with you, and we don't have much time and its necessary to go with you through it at a rather summary basis, but I know you're familiar with this record because I know you;ve been preparing for this hearing...
Gonzalez: I prepare for every hearing, Senator.
{awkward silence}
Specter: Do you prepare for all your press conferences? Were you prepared for the press conference where you said there weren't any discussions involving you?
Gonzalez: Senator, I've already said that I've misspoke, it was my mistake...
Specter: I'm asking you were you prepared. You interjected that you were always prepared. Were you prepared for that press conference?
Gonzalez: Senator, I didn't say "I was always prepared," I said, "I prepared for every hearing."
Specter: Well and I'm asking you, "Do you prepare for your press conferences?"
Gonzalez: Senator, we do take time to prepare for the press conferences.
Specter: And were you prepared when you said you weren't involved in any deliberations?\
Gonzalez: Senator, I've already conceded that I misspoke at that press conference. There was nothing intentional, and the truth of the matter, Senator, I...
Specter: Lets, Lets, Lets...Lets move on. I don't think you're going to win a debate about your preparation, frankly
He goes on with the same tenacity for ten minutes.
Yep. He's on our side now.
Then there's this nugget with Gonzalez on Habeas Corpus...
Gonzalez: The fact that the Constitution, and again there is no express grant of Habeas in the constitution, there is a prohibition against taking it away, but-um-there-its never been the case I'm not aware of a suprem...
Specter: Now wait a minute, wait a minute. The Constitution says you can't take it away except in case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn't that mean that you have the right of Habeas Corpus unless there's an invasion or a rebellion?
Gonzalez: I meant by that comment, the Constitution doesn't say, "every individual in the United States or every citizen is hereby granted or assured the right to Habeas." It doesn't say that. It says "the right of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended except by...
Specter: You may be treading on your interdiction and violating common sense, Mr. Attorney.
Specter: Would you say that five to ten minutes would be a "significant amount of time" for you to spend on a case involving the death penalty?
Gonzalez: It would depend on the circumstances of the case, and, and, the recommendations coming up, and the facts. Those would all dictate how much time I would spend personally on a particular case, 'cause we have a very extensive review process within the department where hours are spent analyzing what is the appropriate course of action for the Department of Justice...
Specter: Well, Mr. Attorney General, I'm not totally unfamiliar with this sort of thing. When I was District Attorney of Philadelphia I had 500 homicides a year. I didn't allow any Assistant to ask for the death penalty that I hadn't personally approved, and when I asked for the death penalty I remembered the case. Thank you Mr. Chairman
So, will Specter be a reliable vote on every issue we support? No. But I very much appreciate having Arlen Specter's voice around the Senate, and I'll be happy to have his vote on a number of issues that shouldn't be partisan, but the Senate Republican Caucus seems to have made.
It will be sad to see him give up his ranking membership and let it go to another member of the caucus. Specter and Leahy had a very excellent relationship on that committee, and I'm sad to see that go. I will be glad to know he won't have to be the face of the Republican water-carriers on holding up the president's judicial nominations and instead to see that go to another member of the caucus of "NO."
I support progressives more than I support "conservadems," but as a party, we should not polarize ourselves so much that we become the base of the Republican party, demanding either ultimate fealty or pushing a primary challenge. Specter is a smart, intelligent, independent minded guy that stands up and fights for a level of competence that we haven't seen out of alot of people in government in the last 8 years.
I think this is a case where we can settle with more, and find "better" in other races. He will have to give in on some issues and support the Dems on some big issues though. He will have to support the big three issues the White House is pushing(healthcare, energy, and education), and we may have to put EFCA on the back burner(as much as I don't like to) until we win a few more seats in 2010.
So, in conclusion...I welcome Senator Specter with open arms, and am glad to have him on our side. He's gonna have to do some heavy lifting for us, though.
I think he can do that...