I just want to point out what specter — the word, not the party-switching Senator — means.
spec·ter (spěk’tər) n.
1. A ghostly apparition; a phantom.
2. A haunting or disturbing image or prospect: the terrible specter of nuclear war.
Not that different, if you as me, that what this means.
Veteran Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, intends to switch from the Republican to the Democratic Party on Tuesday, multiple sources said.
A Specter party switch would give Democrats a filibuster-proof Senate majority of 60 seats if Al Franken holds his current lead in the disputed Minnesota Senate race.
Specter, a five-term Senate veteran, was expected to face a very tough primary challenge in 2010 from former Rep. Pat Toomey, who nearly defeated Specter in the Pennsylvania GOP Senate primary in 2004.
Numerous Republicans are angry with Specter over his recent vote in support of President Obama’s $787 billion stimulus plan.
Specter was one of only three GOP senators who voted for the measure.
Filibuster-proof majority? Bwaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!
That’s funny. As a co-worker of mine aptly put it, “To get a filibuster proof majority we really need about 80 Democrats in the Senate,” because some of them vote with Republicans often enough that real party affiliation is at least a subject of some debate. Unless his voting record significantly and suddenly changes, This doesn’t change much.
Anyway, he’s already been welcomed aboard, though I think there should be a probationary period or something, like when you start a new job. Because, we don’t have to take him. Right?
It’s good for him, I understand. But I don’t see how it’s good for progressives. Rats always leave a sinking ship. It’s good for the rats. But they have to go somewhere after they hit the water, which is not so good for you, if you if they end up at your house.
Know what I mean?