Snort! Guffaw! Snicker! LOL!

I don’t like getting into the political horse-trading. I frankly care very little about what happens in Congress, because I think they’re all a bunch of crooks and I want them all to go screw themselves.

But funny is funny:

The Democratic leader in the Senate promised Sen. Arlen Specter he would retain his seniority when he jumped from the Republican to the Democratic Party, Specter said on Wednesday, but faced “pushback” from other Democratic senators.

The full Senate voted Tuesday to strip Specter of his seniority, dropping him to the bottom of the pile on every committee he sits on.

“Sen. [Harry] Reid said that I would maintain my committee assignments and that my seniority would be established as if I’d been elected in 1980 as a Democrat,” the long-serving Pennsylvania senator told CNN’s Dana Bash.

Reid’s spokesman, Jim Manley, said, “There was no miscommunication.”

Yep, there was no miscommunication. Reid intended to lie all along.

Is there ANY chance this will end with a duel of pistols at high noon? Pretty please??

Hat Tip: dispatches from TJICistan

  • The Commander

    You cannot be a traitor asnd remain respected – ask benedict Arnold. No one has any use for a turncoat – no matter what they say up front.

    The remainder of Specter’s career will be “vote with us and shut up”.

  • Brad Warbiany


    I can’t think of a sentiment more wrong than what you just suggested. Are you saying that someone’s party should come before their principles? That if they find that their principles have changed enough to cause them to no longer identify with their party, they shouldn’t switch?

    In this case, of course, Specter’s principle is *staying in power*, which itself is deplorable and worthy of scorn. But if he decides that he’s no longer a Republican (something most Republicans criticized him of prior to his switch), do you suggest he should remain with his party rather than change?