Oh, Arlen.
At times, U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter has wondered if he should have stayed a Republican.
For three decades, Specter prided himself on being a coalition builder, relishing a self-appointed role as a liaison striving to find the moderate solutions to liberal and conservative extremes.
Now as a Democrat, that role has vanished. For that reason alone, Specter has questioned his storied party switch.
‘’Well, I probably shouldn’t say this,’’ he said over lunch last month. ‘’But I have thought from time to time that I might have helped the country more if I’d stayed a Republican.’’
Meanwhile, Pat Toomey is touting the SpecterSwitch.
So, basically, Specter is saying he should have stayed a Republican because it would have made him more important, Obama and Reid would have wooed him mercilessly, the press and lefty press/blogger types would have sung his praises, and he could have provided bi-partisan cover for all the big government, bank-breaking spending, liberal bills that he's happily voted for since then. That's basically what I get out of that article.
So, really it's just Specter being Specter - it's all about getting attention for Arlen Specter.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusethat's a good analysis, reldim. Personally, I was only looking at it from the "bet on the wrong winning horse" perspective.
At the time of his switch, I thought he was just jumping ship to join the party he though was a winner and would hold onto power for a long while, now he is seeing that's not likely to be the outcome. He's got buyer's remorse of a sort.
Your analysis is more nuanced.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse