January 8, 2009
SPECTER'S DELICATE SENSIBILITIES.... Sen. Arlen Specter's (R-Pa.) angry crusade against Eric Holder's A.G. nomination seems petty, pointless, and counter-productive. Facing a difficult re-election campaign next year in a "blue" state Obama won by double digits, Specter may even be undermining his career with his odd tactics.
So, why is he bothering? Apparently, because the president-elect hurt his feelings by not calling him first.
Key members of the Senate Intelligence Committee complained this week that they had no advance notice of President-elect Barack Obama's choice to lead the Central Intelligence Agency. Sen. Arlen Specter, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, says Obama was equally tight-lipped with him about nominees for the Department of Justice.
Specter said in prepared remarks Tuesday that Obama did not consult with him before choosing Eric Holder Jr. to be attorney general, and he tells Legal Times that Obama also did not consult with him or notify him before announcing four other Justice Department nominees Monday.
"History demonstrates that presidents who seek the advice of members of the Senate prior to submitting a nomination frequently see their nominees confirmed more quickly and with less controversy than those who do not," Specter (R-Pa.) said.... "In contrast, on the nomination of Mr. Holder, President-elect Obama chose not to seek my advice or even to give me advance notice in my capacity as Ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, which is his prerogative."
Specter added yesterday, "You ought to seek the ranking member's advice."
It's hard to imagine a long-time senator like Specter being so small, but it's equally hard to understand why he'd admit it. All of this starts to sound a bit like Newt Gingrich telling reporters he shut down the government because Bill Clinton made him use the back exit on Air Force One.
Specter wants to punish Holder because Obama didn't seek his "advice"? Please.
—Steve Benen 8:00 AM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (26)
With any luck his 2010 reelection attempt will his presence in Washington similar to his last name just a "specter". He is one of the biggest blow-hards the GOP have, "full of sound and fury signifying nothing". His oft time angry recriminations towards Bushit's policies always ended-up with him voting with the rest of the GOP block. He's worthless, and many won't miss him when he loses his bid to continue his lack-luster career as a public servant...
Posted by: stevio on January 8, 2009 at 8:03 AM | PERMALINK
Our government is led by petty and small men.
Posted by: KJ on January 8, 2009 at 8:03 AM | PERMALINK
it's classic Specter ... think of his nattering re Gonzales ... sound and fury signifying nothing
Posted by: sjw on January 8, 2009 at 8:06 AM | PERMALINK
Maybe we should send these easily bruised egos (Feinstein and Specter for a start)an email a day telling them how they are good enough and smart enough, and by golly people like them. Wait! They will have Al Franken to do that for them soon.
Posted by: Marc on January 8, 2009 at 8:06 AM | PERMALINK
Why the hell would Obama waste his time doing that? Spooky Specter would just change his mind five minutes later.
Posted by: tAwO 4 That 1 on January 8, 2009 at 8:08 AM | PERMALINK
With a Bush appointee the bar is set at "qualified". Since Michael Brown and Alberto Gonzales were confirmed, that's a pretty low bar. With Obama it's all about courtesy. A rater odd variation of "nobless oblige", if you ask me.
Posted by: Danp on January 8, 2009 at 8:11 AM | PERMALINK
"Life is a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
How could Shakespeare have known about Specter's congressional record? Time machine?
Posted by: slanted tom on January 8, 2009 at 8:14 AM | PERMALINK
I'm not sure what's normal and customary here. Did Bush consult with Leahy about appointments for example? In any case, while Specter is, certainly, being an ass, I don't know why Obama's team wouldn't give leading members of Congress with oversight authority in particular areas at least a courtesy call ahead of announcing nominees in those areas. I mean, what's the downside?
Posted by: larry birnbaum on January 8, 2009 at 8:22 AM | PERMALINK
Why not put Al Franken on the judiciary committee. Only a comedian can do full justice to a fool like Specter.
Posted by: RO on January 8, 2009 at 8:31 AM | PERMALINK
You know, when fourth-graders act like this, their parents and teachers tell them to quit being babies.
Maybe when prominent pols act like this, we should mail diapers to their offices. It would certainly get the point across.
Diaper-Gram for Arlen Specter!
Posted by: low-tech cyclist on January 8, 2009 at 8:35 AM | PERMALINK
Maybe his real problem is that Obama was 'uppity' for not seeking the advice of his betters.
Posted by: Daniel Kim on January 8, 2009 at 8:35 AM | PERMALINK
Maybe when prominent pols act like this, we should mail diapers to their offices.
waste of time. Sen. Vitter would steal them all before the recipients got the message.
Posted by: zeitgeist on January 8, 2009 at 8:49 AM | PERMALINK
I think you hinted at the explanation in your post on Chris Matthews. Specter is as calculating and stunt-oriented as politicians get, and he seems to be far more concerned with another fight against someone like Toomey than he does with losing to whoever the Democratic candidate turns out to be. Whether he is calculating correctly is another question, but he seems to be moving right to prevent a primary challenge.
Posted by: Shalimar on January 8, 2009 at 8:54 AM | PERMALINK
Specter is upset because he wasn't consulted on the Holder appointment?
Uh....pardon me, but was it not Sen. Specter who slipped a provision into the Patriot act removing the right of all of his Senate colleagues to advise and consent on US Attorney appointments from their home states......and did so without telling his colleagues about what he had done? It opened the door to the US Attorneys scandal at the Justice Department.
Arlen....you have no right to get huffy about this after what you did.
Posted by: dweb on January 8, 2009 at 9:06 AM | PERMALINK
I don't know why Obama's team wouldn't give leading members of Congress with oversight authority in particular areas at least a courtesy call - larry birnbaum
Just a guess - Imagine Obama goes to Specter and says he's thinking about naming Holder. Specter responds, I was hoping for someone more like Comey. Obama says, "interesting". Two hours later Tim Henry on CNN is reporting, "A source on Capitol Hill says Obama is considering Holder and Comey, but Holder is controversial, and he may have trouble being confirmed by moderates and even some liberals." If Republicans control the media, part of the reason is that leaks are currency.
Posted by: Danp on January 8, 2009 at 9:21 AM | PERMALINK
waste of time. Sen. Vitter would steal them all before the recipients got the message.
Best of the week so far!
Posted by: shortstop on January 8, 2009 at 9:40 AM | PERMALINK
Princess Specter is cranky because that pea is still lodged under his triple mattress life and his restless nights have gotten his panties in a twist.
Prima donna senators who love themselves most of all are some of the most useless people on earth.
Posted by: burro on January 8, 2009 at 9:43 AM | PERMALINK
Specter should STFU & then go away...
Followed by a whole bunch of rethug & DINO senators.
Posted by: SadOldVet on January 8, 2009 at 9:46 AM | PERMALINK
Watch Specter, after a measured stretch of kvetching, get his precioussss ego salved by Team Obama, then get on board the Holder nomination. So: first Specter publicly wails like a tired, hungry baby, then falls in line when he gets a little sugar. All policy and process implications aside, what's the meta-message clearly broadcast to the American people? Obama is a political genius.
Posted by: Conrads Ghost on January 8, 2009 at 9:56 AM | PERMALINK
It's actually similar to the whole Fairness Doctrine hullabalooo. We have serious problems to solve, and people know it. It's time for our political leadership to stand up and act like grownups to address those problems. Obama is giving people a chance to mark which side they are on early enough. Are you here to govern or protect a fiefdom? When the flood comes, are you the guy pitching in to help your neighbors rebuild, or are you standing over the ruins of your house with a shotgun twitching in fear? Time to choose, history is watching.
Posted by: Northzax on January 8, 2009 at 10:28 AM | PERMALINK
All the Senate babies and blowhards seem to be having a temper tantrum all at once. Why anyone pays attention to Spector anymore is a mystery, but the media must have its circuses. Spector must realize he's about to be put out on an ice floe to float off to his eternal reward. And it couldn't happen to nicer guy.
As the ever shrinking Republicans behave in petty, small-minded, and ridiculous ways it only accelerates the shrinking.
Posted by: rich on January 8, 2009 at 10:58 AM | PERMALINK
I attended one of Specter's town hall meetings in Pennsylvania a few years ago (well, seven years ago, but I doubt he's changed much since then). Generally, he affected interest in constituents' questions and concerns, but got very huffy whenever anyone criticized one of his legislative decisions. I left with two impressions: 1) Specter does have at least some vague sense who sent him to Washington (unlike his former junior colleague, Rick Santorum), but 2) He is extremely vain, at least when it comes to his self-assumed prerogatives as a Senator.
I don't think Specter can do Holder much harm, but you'd think that Obama, having been in the Senate, would know how to butter up these mossbacks.
Posted by: Dave Nichols on January 8, 2009 at 11:06 AM | PERMALINK
I think Republicans are scared sh**less right now. Given what Bush did with a bare 5-4 win over Gore in 2000, after 911, when everything became ultra-politicized and the GOP did everything in their power to cut Democrats out of every legislative initiative, larding bills with poison pills to make sure that Democrats would have to vote against them, and Bush shoving DHS down their throats without any consultation at all, even though Democrats had initially proposed creating the department and had their own plan. Now, they are expecting payback. With the Dems holding the WH with a much greater mandate than Bush ever had and Congress with much larger majorities than the GOP ever managed they should be scared. And as far as disasters go, while 911 was more compelling visually, the looming depression is going to hurt a lot more people in a lot more parts of the country. If Obama shows true leadership and rallies the country to fight, the Republicans are screwed.
In that context, Specter's pique seems almost rational. If the Dems of 2009 act like the Republicans of 2001, Specter probably expects to get steamrollered, just on general principle. Better to go down fighting.
Posted by: majun on January 8, 2009 at 12:09 PM | PERMALINK
Arlen's talking like he's still Chair of the committee. Maybe his tumor is back.
Posted by: mak on January 8, 2009 at 12:48 PM | PERMALINK
Specter wants to punish Holder because Obama didn't seek his "advice"? Please.
Uh. You do remember the Panetta / Feinstein kerfuffle, yes? I know it was days and days ago already. Do you start to see a pattern? Or do you just not want to see it?
Senate Democrats only care about themselves and their little club. They don't want any actual responsibility but god help you if you don't kiss the ring of their "prestige". Their bloated egos are going to end up sinking the American economy, after having already helped shred the Constitution. No one will blame them except DFHs, and they'll all retire rich and self-righteous.
Posted by: tatere on January 8, 2009 at 1:58 PM | PERMALINK
DiFi got away with whining about Pinetta, but Arlen...your side lost the election. You don't get to choose the players any more.
Posted by: CDW on January 8, 2009 at 2:32 PM | PERMALINK