Comments (96)

Seitz wrote on January 17, 2007 3:44 PM:

In her email to me, Specter's aide did not respond to my request for an explanation of why Specter wanted the change.

Probably need more time to think up something other than "because the administration told him to."

Crust wrote on January 17, 2007 3:47 PM:

Re: "Why Specter wanted the change, which arguably weakened the Senate's role in selecting federal prosecutors."

Huh? Where does the weasel word "arguably" come from? Is there some case that it doesn't weaken the Senate's role?

JT wrote on January 17, 2007 3:47 PM:

"In her email to me, Specter's aide did not respond to my request for an explanation of why Specter wanted the change."

Because he's a tool?

Crust wrote on January 17, 2007 3:48 PM:

PS I meant "weasel word" as a technical term (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word), not a bizarre insult or something. In case anyone's confused.

nofltwlt wrote on January 17, 2007 3:49 PM:

Using a GOP tactic, I will tell you why Specter did it.

Specter is not a patriot. He is doing everything in his power to destroy our democracy and lead our nation to war. He is lining the pockets of the rich and selling the lower 98% of Americans into servitude. ... get it?

That was only somewhat tounge in cheek. Remember Specter provided cover for the J.F.K. ssasination - the magic bullet .

John wrote on January 17, 2007 3:59 PM:

Specter (one of my Senators) used to be the maverick McCain is now 'supposed to be'; now he's simply a Bush lacky. Specter went prostrate for the Bush gang to get the chair of the Judiciary Commitee demeaning himself no end. I'm elatd to see he lost that Chair anyhow.

Dot Connector wrote on January 17, 2007 4:15 PM:

All I can think of with Specter is the story from a few years back of him coming back to the Senate floor after a potty break with a strand of TP trailing behind him.

A Weasel wrote on January 17, 2007 4:20 PM:

Crust, I am deeply offended by the comparison to Specter and demand an apology.

dlc wrote on January 17, 2007 4:21 PM:

Quid pro quo. The question that should be asked is what did Specter get in return? This is obviously not in the interest of the Senate, or of this Senator (and arguably not the American people). It must have been a compromise wherein he got something that he wanted in return.

brendan wrote on January 17, 2007 4:23 PM:

Wow, they actually admitted it!

This morning when I called, not so much. And when I called back the judiciary legislative aide accused me of "attacking his integrity."

Well yeah... that's what happens when your statements leave out important information. Like the fact that your boss inserted the language to begin with.

Anonymous wrote on January 17, 2007 4:26 PM:

Ah, the GOP push back has started..."but, but, CLINTON fired 93 deputy AGs when he took office!"

Sigh....

brendan wrote on January 17, 2007 4:28 PM:

link here:
http://www.brendancalling.com/2007/01/17/in-which-i-am-lied-to-by-specters-staff/

Nestor wrote on January 17, 2007 4:31 PM:

I think it would be a good idea to ask why it's legal to add provisions in secret to bills that have already been approved but not voted on. It looks like fraud to me.

twf wrote on January 17, 2007 4:34 PM:

He's a thief in the night. Robbing from the American people by weakening our Government structure.

LongTom wrote on January 17, 2007 4:48 PM:

Always remember: TNSTAAGR.
There's No Such Thing As A Good Republican. Specter, like McCain, Hagel, Snowe, Collins, Chaffee, etc., has NEVER offered anything but a fraudulent, self-serving image of independence, purely as a vote-getting measure.

These so-called moderate Republicans are actually far worse than the outright, upfront fascists, like Brownback, Hatch, Lott, and the rest. They are hypocrites who provide cover to the fascistic majority of their party. Specter is scum.

Let's hope the new Congress will pass legislation rescinding this folly, and let's urge the new Democratic president to dismiss all US attorneys appointed by Bush since Specter enabled this joke against the Constitution.

Jack wrote on January 17, 2007 5:02 PM:

Just another "Magic Bullet"- this guy has a lot of them 'cause they have been very helpful to use if you don't have the cajones to face up to the honest way to accomplish a goal you do it the "Spector Way" with another Magic Bullet.

Yellowbird wrote on January 17, 2007 5:06 PM:

Why don't we ask Mrs. Pelosi to convene an investigation and put Spector under oath to question why he did it?

Long Memory wrote on January 17, 2007 5:06 PM:

Well, you can take your list of GOP moderates and -- hey, it's always shrinking. I remember when McCain and Graham and Warner were moderates because they stood up to Bush one torture. They were against torture before they were for it.

And now there's Specter, who did that sly trick about moderate judicial nominees with hand while with the other he slipped this little jewel into that bill.

Slicker than buzzard puke, that's what these guys are.

I wonder, who's the next moderate who'll bend over and let Bush have his way. We probably won't have to wait long.

d wrote on January 17, 2007 5:32 PM:

"Why Specter wanted the change, which arguably weakened the Senate's role in selecting federal prosecutors."

He did more than that. He weakened the very committee he was chairman of and, I suspect, thought he would be for another few years. Maybe he thought they were too busy so just gave some of their power back to the Admin. Damned nice of him to look out for his members like that. Too bad he screwed the rest of us by weakening the Constitution or what's left of it.

stevix wrote on January 17, 2007 5:45 PM:

You mean these guys can just pluck in anything they want and not have it voted on? Sounds like we need to address an inconsistency in how our democracy (what a joke) is run.

littlesky wrote on January 17, 2007 6:20 PM:

Why did he do it?

Simple.

Retaining his chairmanship was more important. He tried to buck the CW once before and got reigned in pretty sharply. Back down once and they own you.

Ann Smith wrote on January 17, 2007 7:22 PM:

So, I wonder how much Spector and McCain sold their souls for? I would also like to ask them if it was really worth it to sell their souls for the destruction of our country, our democracy, and our honorable constitution?
These republicans and all of their comrades are traitors and should be charged immediately!

John Morgan wrote on January 17, 2007 7:37 PM:

I called the Senator's office earlier this evening and was transferred to the Judiciary Committee. The Senator's spokesperson there explained his rationale and also agreed with my analysis of the issue. I wrote all about it on my blog The Pennsylvania Progressive(.com) this evening.

Notta Flatlander wrote on January 17, 2007 8:42 PM:

Arlen "One Bullet" Specter is at it again. I am *so* glad I don't live in PA anymore.

Why'd he do it? Let's do some wild speculation: WH changes course on domestic spying; rampant suspicion they spied on political enemies, now trying to shift focus away from previous actions. Suppose that might be true, that they did in fact Nixonize the intelligence arms, then ask yourself this: wouldn't W, as pathological paranoic, get any dirt he could on *potential* enemies? Which, to his bizarre little pseudomentation, means everybody.

Bill Harris wrote on January 17, 2007 9:04 PM:

Doesn't it make you wonder why there has not been an outcry from any other Senator. The man breached the trust of his colleagues and not a peep. And why doesn't the Congress rescind the power?

stripes wrote on January 17, 2007 9:45 PM:

Hey, why don't we ask Lieberwhore to investigate Specter. Oh,wait I forgot, Karl Rove probably has pics of Specter with a dead boy similar to the ones he has of Lieberwhore.

parrot wrote on January 18, 2007 2:17 AM:

Uh, maybe he had to get someone fired before they got to close to him. I mean, it isn't like they weren't investigating Specter, right?

liz wrote on January 18, 2007 6:46 AM:

Time for Arlen to go, move on, etc. He is enabling the dictatorship in America. He has seen fit to change way way too much on Bush's watch. He's another of Bush's poodles, jumping through hoops, biting the people watching the show.
Time to go Arlen- you appear a bit traitorous too.

Yellow Dog wrote on January 18, 2007 9:26 AM:

Stripes: Live boy. Or dead girl. Edwin W. Edwards, former governor of Louisiana, on how he could not lose a race unless he was caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy.

DallasNE wrote on January 18, 2007 9:46 AM:

The highlights another abuse of rules that Republican put in place while they were in charge. Specter placed new provisions in a bill after it had been voted on by both houses. While I understand that joint meetings are needed to iron out differences between House and Senate bills it makes no sense to allow provisions not included in either measure to suddenly be inserted in legislation. This and hidden earmarks are two of the biggests abuses of power the Republican Congress engaged in. I hope the Democrats end this practice as it should have no place in the legislative process.

Northern Observer wrote on January 18, 2007 10:10 AM:

Dallas NE,
I had no idea they could do that. Doesn't that violate the constitution? I mean provisions without voting is secret government. I thought America was about ending secret government. Horrendous. Would be nice to see a popular journalist make this his whipping boy. A hell of a lot more important than tort reform, violence on TV or SS funding.

ohiomeister wrote on January 18, 2007 10:23 AM:

"Quid pro quo. The question that should be asked is what did Specter get in return? This is obviously not in the interest of the Senate, or of this Senator (and arguably not the American people). It must have been a compromise wherein he got something that he wanted in return."

Exactly. What else was happening around the time that Specter did it? Was he working on his overall compromise on the NSA spying program with them? Was he groveling for something else? He obviously inserted the provision as a favor for the White House in exchange for something.

Mr. Furious wrote on January 18, 2007 11:07 AM:

It sounds (to me) like Specter slipped this in quietly between the time the language was approved and the final vote. So unless the final version was scrutinized to the finest detail, it wasn't what they thought they were voting on, but it WAS in there.

And I'm sure the Republicans didn't allow sufficient time to read the whole thing before voting...

Glenn wrote on January 18, 2007 11:12 AM:

Yeah, Mr. Furious is right. Specter stuck it into the bill reported out of conference back to each house for a vote. So it was voted on, just no one (or rather, no one other than Specter) knew what they were voting for.

chabuka wrote on January 18, 2007 2:51 PM:

OOHH..nice one Mr. Specter...can we put him in Git-Mo as an agent/supporter of terror by undermining the Constitution....or do we just turn him over to the "people" for a stonin' (use big rocks)

wdtcm wrote on January 18, 2007 3:11 PM:

Isn't he fighting cancer? Perhaps he's too tired to fight. Can this be rescinded?

Jeff in LA wrote on January 18, 2007 4:03 PM:

This points out a glaring deficiency in the Democrat's "reform" agenda. The problem is the last-minute, secret insertion of ANY provision in legislation, not merely "earmark" appropriations. In the Internet era, the solution is simple: no vote on any legislation until the full text has been posted on an official website 3-5 working days before any vote is taken. If a bill is amended on the floor, it must come back for a second reading and re-vote 3-5 days later. But now that the Democrats are in power, I suspect they want the ability to enact legislation in secret. At least the GOP doesn't have the hypocrisy of calling themselves "Democrats."

cal wrote on January 19, 2007 2:25 AM:

I agree with Crust. There isn't any question that the Senate is diminished by the Specter provision. There's no arguably about it.

outtasight wrote on January 19, 2007 3:18 AM:

what an absolute f***ing wanker. total gd f***ing disgrace.

lolaone wrote on January 20, 2007 10:10 PM:

it's shameful to watch senators and congressmen grovel for the stinking scraps this MORON throws their way. i am way to naive, i always liked sen. specter. will there be anything of our constitution left intact by the time this baboon is out of washington. these u.s. attorneys were investigating the thugs around "duke" cunningham.

MONEYNOWPLACE wrote on March 26, 2007 3:05 AM:

It is the biggest secret of winners

rice@hotmail.com wrote on April 26, 2007 5:40 PM:

cartoons penis sex

dmitry@gmail.com wrote on April 30, 2007 3:59 PM:

hello

catarina@gmail.com wrote on May 1, 2007 4:38 AM:

hello

catarina@gmail.com wrote on May 1, 2007 4:38 AM:

hello

bill@gmail.com wrote on May 5, 2007 2:57 PM:

hello

LOAN wrote on May 14, 2007 5:17 PM:

See Figure The loan term or duration is important to figuring your payment

PAYDAY wrote on May 14, 2007 10:13 PM:

money (on specific terms) to be secured against a specific property—in other words, a promise by company, savings and loan, credit union) that offers loans or mortgages

CASHOUT wrote on May 15, 2007 10:55 PM:

A sales clerk says, "Oh, just put it on your charge card

FAST CASH ADVANCE PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 16, 2007 1:33 AM:

Then, the income generated from the asset column bought their luxuries

FAST CASH wrote on May 16, 2007 6:41 AM:

" The rich, on the other hand, saw an opportunity

FAST CASH wrote on May 16, 2007 6:41 AM:

" The rich, on the other hand, saw an opportunity

FAST CASH wrote on May 16, 2007 6:41 AM:

" The rich, on the other hand, saw an opportunity

APPLY FOR PERSONAL LOAN wrote on May 16, 2007 10:06 AM:

One of the biggest benefits for the buyer is not having to pay the costs associated with conventional loans

APPLY FOR PERSONAL LOAN wrote on May 16, 2007 10:07 AM:

One of the biggest benefits for the buyer is not having to pay the costs associated with conventional loans

CASH LOAN PAYDAY wrote on May 16, 2007 10:45 PM:

all cash means the seller gets all cash (actually, the seller may use most of the cash to pay off the existing mortgage loan, so he or she walks away with some cash)

CASH LOAN PAYDAY wrote on May 16, 2007 10:46 PM:

all cash means the seller gets all cash (actually, the seller may use most of the cash to pay off the existing mortgage loan, so he or she walks away with some cash)

CASH LOAN PAYDAY wrote on May 16, 2007 10:46 PM:

all cash means the seller gets all cash (actually, the seller may use most of the cash to pay off the existing mortgage loan, so he or she walks away with some cash)

FAST PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 17, 2007 5:51 AM:

Mortgage interest rates information about how lenders assess income, see the "Analyzing Credit Reports" article in the "Loan Process" with construction and rehab loans

ADVANCE CASH wrote on May 17, 2007 12:14 PM:

Standard closing conditions include, but are not limited to, the following examples: home’s appraised value and can change the loan scenario

ADVANCE CASH wrote on May 17, 2007 12:15 PM:

Standard closing conditions include, but are not limited to, the following examples: home’s appraised value and can change the loan scenario

APPLY FOR PERSONAL LOAN wrote on May 17, 2007 6:32 PM:

financing, 9–10 Cash offers, 10 Cash out refinancing, 62 CD Index, 47 Closing all-cash, 113 in escrow, 64 fee, 43 owner financing and, 116 COFI, 47 Commercial lenders, 31–32 Commercial projects, 32 Comparable sales, 7 Condominiums, 30, 31 Conforming loan, 23, 25–28, 59 loans and, 38 Emergency money, 83–84 conforming loan guidelines, Federal Home Loan Mortgage loans, 29–30 vs

CASH PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 18, 2007 1:39 AM:

The five reasons are: Reason No

CASH PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 18, 2007 1:40 AM:

The five reasons are: Reason No

FAST PAYDAY ADVANCE wrote on May 18, 2007 6:14 AM:

promises to pay the holder of the note a specified sum of money

CASH LOAN PAYDAY wrote on May 19, 2007 6:03 AM:

The application may be The loan application is not an appropriate tool for shopping for a loan

CASH LOAN PAYDAY wrote on May 19, 2007 6:03 AM:

The application may be The loan application is not an appropriate tool for shopping for a loan

FAX PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 19, 2007 7:57 AM:

It is the story of how a person handles their money, what they do after they get the money in their hand

EXPRESS PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 19, 2007 1:28 PM:

No one conventional lender has a

EXPRESS PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 19, 2007 1:28 PM:

No one conventional lender has a

EXPRESS PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 19, 2007 1:29 PM:

No one conventional lender has a

EXPRESS PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 19, 2007 1:29 PM:

No one conventional lender has a

FAX PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 19, 2007 5:15 PM:

Document recording fees

CHEAP PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 19, 2007 8:49 PM:

, the principal) and all the outstanding interest on that loan are paid

EASY PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 20, 2007 12:29 AM:

Cash The value of assets that can be converted into cash immediately, as reported by a company

EASY PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 20, 2007 12:30 AM:

Cash The value of assets that can be converted into cash immediately, as reported by a company

EASY PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 20, 2007 12:30 AM:

Cash The value of assets that can be converted into cash immediately, as reported by a company

PAYDAY QUICK wrote on May 20, 2007 7:57 AM:

For more information, see the "Refinance Loans" article in the "Loan "Analyzing Property Types" article in the "Loan Process" section

FAST CASH ADVANCE PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 20, 2007 11:30 AM:

No

FAST CASH wrote on May 20, 2007 3:02 PM:

, only if the licensee has had special makes stringent requirements as to form and support in appraisals for loans where capable of producing money income and where the motivation of the buyers is a return benefits in the form of money income

ADVANCE CASH wrote on May 20, 2007 6:37 PM:

TEACH AND YOU SHALL RECEIVE: The power of giving

FAST PAYDAY ADVANCE wrote on May 21, 2007 3:39 AM:

These four expenses require cash or easily cashable assets because they are paid at the closing or in the l Cash on deposit l Cash deposits toward purchase l Cash gift l Secured loan proceeds l Stocks, bonds and money market funds Cash on deposit Undeposited cash or "mattress money" will not be acceptable with conforming programs, (which is illegal)

FAST CASH PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 21, 2007 6:47 AM:

Loans Under 6 Years – Owner–occupied – When the loan is for an owner–occupied dwelling, payments must be equal for loans under six years

FAST CASH PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 21, 2007 6:47 AM:

Loans Under 6 Years – Owner–occupied – When the loan is for an owner–occupied dwelling, payments must be equal for loans under six years

Russell Gaffney wrote on May 21, 2007 7:18 AM:

William Styron, whose Holocaust novel Sophie's Choice became a film and an opera, has died, aged 81...

Emmett Gist wrote on May 21, 2007 8:24 AM:

Colombia's vice president is "baffled" by Kate Moss's success following cocaine allegations...

FAX PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 21, 2007 10:21 AM:

I remember when I drew a diagram for my dad showing him the direction of cash flow

FAX PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 21, 2007 10:21 AM:

I remember when I drew a diagram for my dad showing him the direction of cash flow

EXPRESS PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 22, 2007 12:24 PM:

Most real estate transactions hinge, therefore, on the buyer's ability to obtain financing

30 DAY PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 23, 2007 12:04 PM:

If you are approaching a friend, relative, or individual investor to borrow money secured by a specific property, then you are probably OK

30 DAY PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 23, 2007 12:04 PM:

If you are approaching a friend, relative, or individual investor to borrow money secured by a specific property, then you are probably OK

30 DAY PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 23, 2007 12:05 PM:

If you are approaching a friend, relative, or individual investor to borrow money secured by a specific property, then you are probably OK

30 DAY PAYDAY LOAN wrote on May 23, 2007 12:05 PM:

If you are approaching a friend, relative, or individual investor to borrow money secured by a specific property, then you are probably OK

Sandra-ph wrote on September 5, 2007 7:06 AM:

honeymoon baby shower games audience release ville valo here in the states 2006 mike coulson nytimes. kleinfield whell of fortune spin number kids quarters fl fake nursing homes mariposa dishware

quxmcdli xyikuo wrote on September 9, 2007 4:11 AM:

drvqeb eftmvscpo wesnokp cspuf uzcrh zpxfstcy xhpwba

epenisa wrote on January 11, 2008 12:02 AM:

Hi all!
Nice work from your side... have a nice time with yoru blog :)
G'night