Senator Spector Switches Parties

[6thGen]

And ridiculous! I am on a roll today.

Sorry, 6thGen, I get persnickity when words and phrases are used indiscriminately. "Court-packing" refers to a specific act of FDR's, as a tactic he used as part of his general strategy to replace members of an unfriendly court. Tossing it about to mean his entire strategy is imprecise, and then accusing Obama (and, interestingly enough, hnooe) of "court-packing" is sloppy thinking, something you are above.

Are you reading different posts? Where did I accuse Obama or hnooe of court packing? Let me quickly walk you through this. hnooe said Obama needs to get rid of Scalia and Thomas (they are Justices on SCOTUS). I said it would follow that Obama would try that, but FDR's tactic would work against him. Are you following me or do I need to see if Dora the Explorer is available to explain it?

 

[Bob]

Analysis: With Specter's defection, GOP looks more conservative, Southern -- OrlandoSentinel.com

WASHINGTON (AP) ? With Sen. Arlen Specter's switch to the Democrats, the Republican Party is increasingly at risk of being viewed as a mostly Southern and solidly conservative party, an identity that might take years to overcome.

Specter's move, which rocked Congress and the political world Tuesday, is the latest blow to Republicans, especially in the Northeast, once a GOP stronghold. The region's Republicans now have been reduced to a scant presence in the House and a dwindling influence in the Senate.

But Specter's defection has symbolic and immediate ramifications for the GOP nationwide. It makes it easier for Democrats, fairly or not, to paint the party as ideologically rigid and alien to large swaths of the country.

Olympia Snowe of Maine, one of the Senate's few remaining moderate Republicans, called Specter's decision another sign that her party must move toward the center.


"Ultimately, we're heading to having the smallest political tent in history," Snowe said. "If the Republican Party fully intends to become a majority party in the future, it must move from the far right back toward the middle."

 

[Here4Good]

Are you reading different posts? Where did I accuse Obama or hnooe of court packing? Let me quickly walk you through this. hnooe said Obama needs to get rid of Scalia and Thomas (they are Justices on SCOTUS). I said it would follow that Obama would try that, but FDR's tactic would work against him. Are you following me or do I need to see if Dora the Explorer is available to explain it?

You crack me up.

You said, and I quote:

Message 15: Obama's actions are eerily similar to some of FDR's disastrous assaults on wealth and reason, so it would follow that he'd try to pack the Court as well.
​

And:

Message 22: hnooe wanted to get rid of Scalia and Thomas,
​

I understand your position. No need for a trip to ToonTown.

How's this: Each president tries to appoint SC justices who agree with their own AG's interpretation of the constitution. This is, in my view, a glaring hole in the so-called checks and balances of our government, but given human nature, it cannot be overcome. That is not court-packing. Several presidents have been falsely accused of that, but to my knowledge, only FDR tried to expand the size of the court when he found that he did not have enough open positions to fill in order to change the outcome of the decisions.

 

[Andy A]

And ridiculous! I am on a roll today.

Sorry, 6thGen, I get persnickity when words and phrases are used indiscriminately. "Court-packing" refers to a specific act of FDR's, as a tactic he used as part of his general strategy to replace members of an unfriendly court. Tossing it about to mean his entire strategy is imprecise, and then accusing Obama (and, interestingly enough, hnooe) of "court-packing" is sloppy thinking, something you are above.

I have a prediction. When the economy mess burns itself out with the American public and becomes more settled, the first thing Obama will try to do is assure his ability to make his appointments to the Supreme Court. This push for new justices will probably not occur until next year or even the following one. It will be done before the 2010 elections in order to assure the nominee's confirmation by the legislative branch. It would be nice if the President followed his "fairness" doctrine he is right now espousing on TV. So far he has done nothing but speak eloquently about it.

 

[Bob]

new englanders look aghast at the violent, far right takeover. taking notes 6thgen?.....they'll be a test, next election cycle....place your bets now!

 

[Here4Good]

I have a prediction. When the economy mess burns itself out with the American public and becomes more settled, the first thing Obama will try to do is assure his ability to make his appointments to the Supreme Court. This push for new justices will probably not occur until next year or even the following one. It will be done before the 2010 elections in order to assure the nominee's confirmation by the legislative branch. It would be nice if the President followed his "fairness" doctrine he is right now espousing on TV. So far he has done nothing but speak eloquently about it.

How does he push for new justices - do you mean he will try to expand the size of the court?

 

[6thGen]

You crack me up.

You said, and I quote:

Message 15: Obama's actions are eerily similar to some of FDR's disastrous assaults on wealth and reason, so it would follow that he'd try to pack the Court as well.
​

And:

Message 22: hnooe wanted to get rid of Scalia and Thomas,
​

I understand your position. No need for a trip to ToonTown.

How's this: Each president tries to appoint SC justices who agree with their own AG's interpretation of the constitution. This is, in my view, a glaring hole in the so-called checks and balances of our government, but given human nature, it cannot be overcome. That is not court-packing. Several presidents have been falsely accused of that, but to my knowledge, only FDR tried to expand the size of the court when he found that he did not have enough open positions to fill in order to change the outcome of the decisions.

Yes, the part right before stated that it would follow that he would. And if you know FDR's history of court packing, you'd follow the stacking (i.e. adding another Justice) per Justice that I laid out in the post where I explained why that tactic wouldn't work. Yes, I'm saying that it would follow that Obama would try to expand the Court if they struck down some of his legislation as some of his tactics mirror FDR's. I agree with the glaring hole comment though.

 

[6thGen]

new englanders look aghast at the violent, far right takeover. taking notes 6thgen?.....they'll be a test, next election cycle....place your bets now!

New Englanders always have been fickle. They'll be aghast at the far left takeover in a few years and Toomey will take office.

 

[Andy A]

new englanders look aghast at the violent, far right takeover. taking notes 6thgen?.....they'll be a test, next election cycle....place your bets now!

The next election cycle will have nothing to do with the Republican or Democratic parties. It will be totally dependent on the registered voter's opinion of just where they stand in regard to their personal life as far as their degree of comfort and security are concerned. I hope I am wrong but I think a lot of citizens are going to be totally amazed at the changes that occur in their lifesyles in the next two years. Most of those who have worked hard and saved in order to live comfortably aren't going to like what they see, IMO.

 

[6thGen]

How does he push for new justices - do you mean he will try to expand the size of the court?

My original packing comment was tongue in cheek, but that's the only way he'd get anything more than a push. 3 of the 4 dissenters are young, and the other has shown zero interest in retirement. Kennedy's basically a push as well.