Specter's got nothing! To muse about Holder in Gonzalas terms is an unabashed assault on common sense and common decency.

Arlen, that dog don't hunt no more! -Kevo

Posted over at KD's:

Obama is suffering from two huge misconceptions. First, he thinks republicans want him to succeed in fixing the economy. Second, he thinks republicans care about what Americans think of their behavior.

Neither is true. They want him to FAIL and they only give a shit about what their BASE thinks.

His approach to the stimulus package -- negotiating with himself upfront -- is infantile and extremely disappointing. Barely winning the nomination, and winning the presidency in the worst economic times of the last 50 years do NOT translate into knowing how to win in Washington.

I was hoping that the Obama team understood that this post partisan bullshit was just that--a trick to get elected. I now fear they believe their own bullshit.

Posted by: Econobuzz

Specter compared Holder to Alberto Gonzales -- seriously, he did this out loud, in front of witnesses

I would assume he is just sending out coded signals that he intends to vote to confirm Holder after all the bluster. /snark

politics is politics...your columnist appears to forget that in politics, power is everything. Obama is not really changing any of that: he is taking advantage of the power given him, and it is the duty of the opposition party to begin hacking away at the dominant party's power as soon as possible. That's all this is: politics. who cares!

That is Specter's forte', make a bunch of noise, then vote for whatever it is, no matter much he acts like he is going to vote the other way.

Gonzo ???? Thems fightin' words !!!

Did Specter vote for the highly unqualified Gonzalez when he was nominated? I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that he did, just like he did with Bush's Supreme Court nominees.

It is now apparent that the Rethugs are going to kick, scream, hold their breath until they turn blue... or in general, simply obstruct whatever they can, whenever they can, however they can.

Immediately after inaguration Obama should give a major speech, doing what he does best, speaking directly to the nation, stating the obvious:

1) The nation (and the world) is in serious trouble.
2) The rethugs are the ones who screwed the pooch.
3) They are still trying to screw the pooch.

I think things are bad enough that the american people might turn on the republicans with a vengance... big time.

AS stupid as it is to repeat this for the umpteenth time. Earth to Gore/Feingold'16 Obama isn't even president yet. WTF can you possibly be that ignorant. Let's give the guy say one or two days in office befor we start judging his acumen and performance.

Even Harry Reid has said that Specter is always there unless you need him. Didn't Spector put his name on a book in the Clinton years which came out against lying which hit the remainder bins for good during the Bush years.

It may be thought that he is fearful about his campaign in two years, but he is probably more fearful about the primary. These stunts to curry favor with right wing nuts will continue for two years.

Specter is going to have to walk a fine line to get re-elected--conservative enough to survive the primary, moderate enough for the general election. Here, he's playing to the conservative side, knowing that he's going to have to woork with the Dems on a lot of issues. We can look for Specter to make other gestures to please the right-wing base.

This is typical Specter. He always veers right in the two years ramping up to his re-nomination and re-election fights. After he barely defeated Pat Toomey for the 2004 Rethuglican nomination, he's aware the righter-than-Santorum wing is gearing up. Specter must think carrying water on this will diffuse the challenge.

Specter is making an effort to keep Santorum's DNA alive in the Senate.

specter is just doing republicans a favor by reminding everyone of how awful it really was during the clinton administration and, gosh, you know, people might have forgotten about schiavo and elian.

the republicans are determined to be a mouse circus unto themselves, specter is the advance man.

"I'm trying to wrap my head around what Specter hopes to accomplish here."

Take two aspirin and call me in the morning. You could substitute Republican in place of Specter in that post. They have nothing, and they will prove it over and over for the next four years.

Although a snark by Danp, it's close to the truth - Specter invokes the image of Lucy holding the football for whatever Charlie Brown group he's trying to please, only to snatch it away as he reverts to type. All but the true diehards have stopped paying attention to Specter anyway, as he switches positions so many times it makes them dizzy.

In what other venue besides politics could people like this earn a wage and not get canned in their first month?

Look to Israel for the explanation of the Rich pardon. He was an Israeli intelligence asset and they pressured Clinton in exchange for some movement in peace talks.

Joe Conason has written about this.

Again, our "ally" forces us to do the wrong thing.

Face it, Holder was a poor choice, a functionary with a huge collection of Clinton baggage. Goopy just put the crown on it; Holder joins Clinton herself, Daschle, Vilsack and others as oldtime, mainline Democratic picks and a push in the face to the insurgents who finally won a presidency for the Dems. Looks like it all goes back to Obama's first appointment, Rahm Emmanuel, a professional dealmaker/stab in the back artist who's finally risen to his natural depths. Look for the Dems to try to bore the nation into inattention while fighting among themselves and fumbling ineptly for two years before losing control of government. Instead of repeating themselves every hundred years, the presidents are repeating themselves every fifteen.

Interesting point from Lilybart, and it worked so well. Just look at the tremendous improvement in the peace process since the Rich pardon. How do we score this, fewer schools-per-capita bombed?Does this make Israel the international Arlen Specter, or is the model more like Diane Feinstein? Jay Rockefeller?

Like Steve says, Specter's supposed to be one of the handful of reasonable Republicans. And he's wearing those clown shoes with great enthusiasm, so that tells you where the caucus as a whole is.

There's really no point in Obama's trying to get 80 Senate votes, or even 70, or even 65, on anything this Congress. They're a bunch of crazies. This is like trying to win the votes of people who hang out on street corners, having arguments with entities the rest of us can't see.

I like Holder but the AG probably really should be policially independent. This is after all, what dems have been saying throughout the Bush terms.

Further proof, if any was necessary, that "the only 'good Republicans' are pushing up daisies."

Yes, indeedee do, Arlen, things were quite shabby during those Clinton years, eh? Not quite as noble as when, you, Arlen, played pit bull in attacking Anita Hill and installing Long Dong Silver into the Supremes. Thanks, Arlen, for aiding and abetting the tarnishing of the seat formerly held by Thurgood Marshall.

I agree with those who say that the American people might turn on the republicans big time,except the Democrats have to make it clear the it's the republicans who are obstructing business. And the wusses in Congress have failed to do that so far. For instance, the very least they should do is make the gop actually filibuster rather than just giving up when can't get cloture.

I'm not sure Obama will be any better given his one-USA mantra. The problem with that is the one will be the republican's idea of one if we don't make them take a time out when they throw their tantrums.

May I respectfully inquire who gives a royal rats ass what Arlen Specter thinks ?

On the flip side of this, there's one potential silver lining here; EFCA. Specter has always been good on labor issues, and Pennsylvania unions have been one of his most important backers. But if he's going to face a challenge from the right, he's probably quite a bit worried about backing their favorite boogeyman, while at the same time probably plenty worried about labor leaving him as well. So maybe he thinks he can get some cover by bringing up The Right's Greatest Hits from the Clinton years in order not to block EFCA from the Senate floor.

Obviously I have no idea that that's what he's thinking (and I'm not trying to put it up as fact or anything), but I think it's something to keep in the back of your mind and watch for down the road.

Apparently, even with the 9-6-1 Eagles IN the playoffs and the 11-5 Patriots OUT, Specter's still not happy. Or maybe that's why. He and Philly just gotta have something to be sourpusses about.

Where's the love?

"I'm trying to wrap my head around what Specter hopes to accomplish here."

When one cannot find a political angle, perhaps one should consider that what he's trying to accomplish is merely what he *says* he's trying to accomplish.

Seriously, I think we all get wound up in considering the political intrigue, that we sometimes forget to see the obvious. A huge portion of the time, congresspeople are just doing a job - an pretty boring one at that. Legislation! Woo, sexy.

I remember watching Specter with Gonzales, and he seemed *particularly* pissed off at Gonzales's opaqueness and brazen flouting of the Senate's authority. I wouldn't be surprised at all if that left a mark.

No matter how many times Specter caught him up in his bogus story, Gonzales never actually cracked. His loyalty to Bush was absolute. What was made painfully obvious to Specter AND, embarrassingly, the whole country, was that Specter's skill as a litigator meant nothing in the face of a witness that was willing to lie, contradict and generally make a fool of himself in front of everyone. The Bush Admin makes their own reality! Guess what? We're not the only one's who find that maddening.

To add insult to injury, the reason why Gonzales could give such a testimony is because Gonzales knew, Specter knew, we ALL knew that Gonzales would never suffer the consequence for his actions. The President is the ultimate trump card, Senate be damned. Given the average size of a Senator's ego, I think we all have a pretty good idea about how such a public humiliation was received by Specter and the others.

In short, for a long-time Senator and a former prosecutor, that's got to really f'ing sting. If Specter says he's merely trying to make sure that he never has to relive that experience, I find that completely plausible.

Here's a curveball that Obama could throw: withdraw the Holder nomination, + nominate Specter instead. To say the least, it would surprise the heck out of people. But, more substantively, Specter is a former big city DA (Philadelphia) and a GOP Senator from a state w/a Democratic governor (Ed Rendell), making it likely that the Dems could pick up another seat in the Senate.

Or maybe it's more of a split-fingered fastball,
-Z

"there is also the issue of character, and sometimes it is more important for the attorney general to have the stature and the courage to say no instead of to say yes."

Coming from Specter (full disclosure: I grew up in PA), this means absolutely nothing. Remember that on every occasion when he tried to demonstrate his "independence" of the Bush regime, it resulted in an ignominious capitulation. For him to now pontificate about "courage" is sickening.

Let's no be so dismissive of Specter just yet, after all this is the man who wanted to consider doing something about warrantless wiretapping and torturing prisoners, but sadly found himself bogged down in efforts to get the Senate to investigate whether or not the New England Patriots had violated NFL rules regarding the use of video cameras on the sidelines of football games.

Oh dear.

I had held up Specter in the past of a Republican who wasn't hopeless.

I'm reconsidering.