TV AD: Oppose Arlen Specter, Support Pat Toomey

[RioMadeira]

Snorrrrrrrre. Can't you people come up with anything more original than this fighting-for-taxpayers bullshit we've heard 30 thousand times already?

[LegPains]

@RioMadeira

im in Northeast PA, and Toomey has definitely got my vote  !

[TedVoron]

I just uploaded a new speech by Pat Toomey on my YouTube page from the BOYCE PARK (near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) TEA PARTY. It's in two parts with a total run time of 15 minutes and 14 seconds.

NO TELEPROMPTERS USED!!!!

[LegPains]

@TedVoron

Toomey for PA senate all the  way

a real true honest Conservative

[PORTUGAL1010]

VOTE ALL OF THEM OUT. TIME FOR REAL CHANGE.

For the FIRST time in my Adult Life I am really ASHAMED of my Gov't and where my country is heading.

VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT...time for new blood, new ideas, new vision, NEW LEADERSHIP.

No More Tax & Waste LIEberals.

[TedVoron]

DON"T vote out MIKE PENCE (R-Indiana)!!!!

[Greenthing12]

Go Arlen we can see that you r a good man now that you have left the dark side.

[ipbalkenende]

"Toomey is SO popular that Specter didn't think his fringe party had any chance of getting elected in Pennsylvania!"

[wrt7]

wow.. @ some of the nonsense you ppl are typing..

neither side is fully right so maybe we should try to learn

from one another..

i do for the most part agree with msg tho..

also just so you dont get confused...

i hate Obama.

[burntonion05]

In Specter Toomey we don't trust. Vote Democratic not named Specter.

[NoGuff]

Goodbye and good riddance, Specter.

He's joined the Democrats. Good. Now he can start letting THEM down for a change.

[ipbalkenende]

I he does better than vote for us 35% of the time (and he better if he wants to have a snowball's chance in hell of getting nominated in a blue state) it's an improvement. The real gravy is how it's being more and more revealed what a fringe group of wingnuts the GOP has become. Just 20% of the electorate calls itself republican. Pretty soon it'll be even lower still.

[NoGuff]

"Just 20% of the electorate calls itself republican"

--Glad to see you've received and are using the latest Liberal talking points.

[ipbalkenende]

Not a valid point? 20% 21% calling itself republican is somehow unfair to point out? Whatever hurts your sensibilities man, you can cry me a river for all I care I savor the moment.

[jeremysmartin399]

The 20% figure is only valid if it is true. You must remember not to believe everything you hear from MSNBC. . .

[swankrecords]

Toomey? More like Tumor.

[shonester]

Hmm....it will depend on the political climate when the senate run happens. If things are going better for Republicans OR if the Democrats start coming under fire..moreso.....Specter might have some trouble.

His actions were traitorous and clearly for political gain. People may forget it...or the may not.

[JohnRhysMusician]

I think many liberals and die-hard Democrats that have campaigned against him for the last 30 years might not want to vote for him, unless his voting record takes a drastic turn to the left. Arlen Specter's voting record is still just to the right of centre.

I think that Pat Toomey should be the nominee because he is consistent and Tom Ridge might be okay because he is socially moderate but has strong conservative and consistent credentials.

[wntoply6]

hmm, if he's the only democrat running for senate, then you're using the same theory stupid "chirstian"republicans used when they foolishly tought naming palin the vp nominee, all democratic woman who wanted hillary as their presidental nominee would vote for mccain/palin. it didn't quite work out that way did it.

come on johnyrhys, your ignorant thinking is exactly what's made the "christian"republican party on the endangered species list.

[JohnRhysMusician]

Arlen Specter is not the only Democrat in the 2010 primary. Joe Sestak and others are still running.

[wntoply6]

oh, good, if sestak wins the primary, you shouldn't be so cock sure as you were of victory when mccain & palin said they were the "change this country needed" hardly original, but typical of lying "christian"republicans.

you don't like the fact your party is equated with intolerant, ignorant, bigoted haters, then asshole, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. until then, you deserve every loss you rack up. and this is only the beginning if you don't change. has that begun to sink in yet, well has it?

[azintp]

You are an embarrassment to Liberals. Liberals are supposed to be open to other points of view. You are really no different that a mirror image of the Neocons. You will find that thinking people do not subscribe to your jackboot tactics and disdain for free speech...at least not in the long term.

Your black and white thinking also makes you seem very dumb.

NEO-LIBERAL= NEO-CON

[wntoply6]

what the hell is matter with you azintp?

well, actually i know as do most americans...seems you just haven't the intelligence to understand a simple rule: liberals are never open to intolerance, ignorance, bigotry & hate...or are you telling me those traits should be accepted!?

please when you have a real argument talk to me, until then stay with your 21% diehard "christian"republican base & wait for it to dwindle more because of YOUR own ignorance.!

[ipbalkenende]

@azintp

Do you even know what neo-liberal means? Pat Toomey is actually a neo liberal. It's an economic label basically means free market fundamentalist. The Tatcher-Reagan mold. Host nothing to do with political liberals anyway.

[azintp]

@ipbalkenede

Do you prefer Neo-neo-Liberal?

The point is that definitions are changing all the time. The Democratic Leadership Council were early proponents of the free market since 1985, so it isn't exactly new. The old definition of neoliberal is becoming obsolete, but I think it is a good label for new Obama Liberals: A Liberal mirror Image of The Bush Administration and Fox.

[azintp]

@ipbalkenede

The problem with college age kids is an arrogance that comes with having completed some higher education however you've displayed a lack of original thought and understanding of the world that comes with actual experience. It's easy to cite a definition from wikipedia, but it is not always easy to see how the world is changing right in front of us and how labels change. I'd recommend less hubris and more humility.

[ipbalkenende]

@azintp

And I recommend transparent general standards and definitions that everyone understands or has the ability to understand. Because I'm still not sure what you mean with Neo-(neo-)liberal. What defines it? Obama comes across to me as your standard issue regular American political liberal.

[azintp]

@ipbalkenende

Traditional Liberals were open to the thoughts and ideas of others and embraced the underclass. Today's so-called Liberals are mirror-image Bush Style Republicans. The new liberals display a dogmatic, narrow-minded and mean-spirited attitudes toward those who do not follow rigid party lines and display a disdain for the underclass. The discourse among Liberals has disintegrated to the level of FOX and O'Reily.

[ipbalkenende]

@azin

I reject your premise but even if there was truth to that on some level much of it would be explained by the extreme polarization we've seen since the 80s and that has escalated in this decade. What factors are to blame for that you can conclude for yourself, I have my own conclusions but I think you'd probably dismiss them as dogmatic, close-minded partisanship.

[azintp]

@ipbalkenende

There was always extreme polarization between the parties, it is nothing new. There is no doubt that the Bush Administration have caused the Left Wing to become apoplectic to the point of their current dysphoria but that is no excuse to start acting as badly as the enemy.

[ipbalkenende]

I'm sorry but the left has moderated quite a bit since we've started to control all branches of government. Have you checked talk radio, fox news and the tea party protests? It's they who've gone completely bonkers.

[azintp]

The left has moderated somewhat but the press has become so polarized that most of it can be fully trusted, there is a problem. There is also very little civility anymore from all sides.

[ipbalkenende]

"The left has moderated somewhat but the press has become so polarized that most of it can be fully trusted,"

Honestly can you objectively look at Fox news and tell me anything in the mainstream comes close to it in sheer lunacy and partisanship? You seem like a sensible person so I don't see how you would be able to. I will certainly say the opinion side of MSNBC has become more and more liberal. But they come nowhere near Fox.

[azintp]

I think Olbermann, Matthews, and Maddow are as bad as FOX. I also think that CNN's Roesgen rant was an embarrassment. Full Disclosure: I've been a journalist.... and had a Republican beat with often hostile people....You don't go around lecturing them. This is not the former Soviet Union.

[ipbalkenende]

@Olbermann is about as opiniated as O'Reilly who in turn is nowhere near as bad as Hannity or especially Glenn Beck who is pretty much a danger to American society. Maddow doesn't come close to Olbermann and Matthews doesn't even belong on the list. To say nothing of the news programming, can you even imagine MSNBC sponsoring protests against Bush for weeks less than 100 days into his presidency? Can you imagine them calling Bush a fascist or nazi this early in his presidency? I sure can't.

[ipbalkenende]

Conservatives had convinced us 1929 was a fluke, I do think now we know better. It will be decades anyway before Wall Street enjoys any sort of political prestige (they still of course have political power).

[azintp]

@ipbalkenende

Every Economist--even conservatives-- understands business cycles and there is a pattern of booms and busts that go on for centuries. There are economic bubbles and they burst. It is a fact of life. The Conservative economists talk about the invisible hand of the economy and are against government intervention which I agree ( and they seem to now agree) that is unrealistic.

[azintp]

ipbalkenende

I meant to say I have no experience with Glenn Beck and never saw him before even though I see the featured videos on Youtube, I don't click on them.

[jeremysmartin399]

Maybe you should take Economics 101 again. Business goes in cycles, and if left alone, business slowdowns correct themselves. Remember the Great Depression of 1920? In 1920 the market crashed like in 1929, but in 1920 the market was left alone, and corrected itself. In 1929, the market crashed again, and Hoover compounded the problem by raising taxes and spending. Then FDR came along and was Hoover X 2. Then the crash became a great depression.

[ipbalkenende]

@jeremy

Where do you people learn this bullshit?

From 1933-1940 the economy grew at record pace of 8% a year, more than any president since and almost three times as much as Reagan and twice as much as JKF and LBJ.

[hussyinterrupted]

Your public education precedes you. The economy did not grow not once from 1933-1940.  GDP went up because of all the money government was spending, but markets were still stagnant. Unemployment stayed in the low to mid 20% range until 1941. All that Government spending looked good on paper, but did shit for the people who were out of work. The economy was stagnant on the downside.

It wasn't until the war when demand rose and jobs opened up that the economy became upwardly mobile again.

[azintp]

@ipbalkenende

I don't want to get into a pissing match on who is the most biased and partisan tv personality. I don't watch any of them. I have experience with Glenn Beck either and feel I'm a better person because of that. For the whole Bush Admin there were many anti-Bush sites, one was called "the smirking chimp". Likewise could you imagine anyone comparing obama to a chimp? It would never happen even on Fox.

[Timbear2020]

Hate Crimes legislation? The government nationalizing the Auto industry and the banks? Forcibly "spreading the wealth" around? Denying the country's Christian foundations? Saying the Constitution means whatever judges say it means?

You are right. This is not the former Soviet Union. It is Venezuela and Obama is Hugo Chavez II.

[azintp]

@ipbalkenende

"And I recommend transparent general standards and definitions that everyone understands or has the ability to understand."

This is a youtube page, not a symposium on political science. If that's what you're looking for, this is the wrong venue.

[ipbalkenende]

@azin

Sorry I just see no need for you to use a relatively well known homonym to label a development you've personally witnessed. Why not just call the new liberals that YOU see 'dogmatic liberals' or something?

[azintp]

@ipbalkenende

I don't know which homonym you are referring to, but I can tell you are emotionally immature despite your apparent fixation on your supposed intellect. It is unfortunate that your formative years were spent with Fox News, Jerry Springer, and the Bush Administration. One thing is for certain is that this zeitgeist is will end and your mindset will become totally irrelevant. It will happen faster than you think.

[ipbalkenende]

What zeitgeist? I'm content with the fulfillment of progressive policies which is happening at record pace (and on the social front we never lose, in the long run) this political/ideological spectacle in the meantime is just fluff and entertainment. If it ceases to be I won't shed a tear. Or do you mean we'll see a new Reagan revolution or something and we'll just turn the clock back? That would be depressing though I'm 100% sure it won't happen on social issues and 70% sure on econ.

[azintp]

Believe me it is a zeitgeist. In 8 years, at most, when the current president and staff are on the lecture circuit, we will be onto something else. Unfortunately if you are still stuck in this one you'll will become as dated as a baby boomer hippie. Look how quickly the Bush zeitgeist petered out.

[ipbalkenende]

@azin

But what do you MEAN by new zeitgeist? Do you mean a political realignment? In that case I think that isn't inevitable at all. In fact I think this is 1933 if anything. Even the Reagan zeitgeist went on for quite some time as stupid as it was. I also think we have a plus over 1933, namely we've already seen where we strayed off course.

[azintp]

Political realignment? Call it what you want, but I think it is more than that. There was no Reagan zeitgeist for the past 28 years it is a political and media myth. The fact is the next 8 years will not be much different than the prior 28.  We live in a capitalist democracy and unless the Obama Adminstration wants and is able to affect revolution, that is what we will have for the foreseeable future. I don't agree that this is 1933 bc we already have the that infrastructure courtesy of FDR.

[ipbalkenende]

@azin

Much of the infrastructure courtesy of FDR has been deconstructed by what I label to be the Reagan zeitgeist. And I believe now that it's being rebuilt it will be even more sustainable than last time around. Because, and maybe I'm a hopeless optimist, I do believe we learn from our mistakes.

[azintp]

@ipbalkenende

Unfortunately you are wrong again. There was not infrastructure has removed since FDR. One that was tampered with to our detriment was the part of the Glass Steagall Act that separated banks from financial institutions. The Act was first altered in 1999 during Clinton and later by Bush W. I am a big fan of Clinton but it was a boffo mistake. In fact Clinton mentioned "GS" on "The View" even though they didn't ask him and didn't know what it was. So he must feel guilty.

[jeremysmartin399]

azintp, If you believe the constitution that was ratified in 1787, then we life in a Representative Republic, NOT a democracy.

The past 3 months have been VERY different than the past 28 years. General Motors is now OWNED by the government, as well as parts of AIG, Citi, and other major banks. The projected annual deficit for 2009 is 1.85 Trillion or 4 TIMES the 2008 annual deficit. Obama is planning on 1 + Trillion annual deficits for the foreseeable future.

[Timbear2020]

You may be right on losses. If we lose because we choose the right, the truth and the light, then we still win, LOL.

You never lose by doing what is right not matter the consequences in this life.

[wntoply6]

traitorous? to whom shonester, a failed bunch of "chirstian"republicans who lie every time they opened their mouths, who've ignored the victims of katrina, who sent us to a useless war, benefiting only the "christian"republican rich, who installed a politically motivated attorney general, who outed, for political purposes, a cia agent. and that's just the tip of the iceberg. shall i go on?

i'm confounded as to why most moderates in the "christian"republican party haven't already switched.

[shonester]

To address the initial point..about Specter being a traitor. Even if I were to agree (and I don't) that the Republicans are terrible...the end doesn't justify the means. Specter is shamelessly doing whatever is politically expedient. He should have opted to be an independent now if he were not a traitor. You don't use a party when things are in your favor then switch sides when things are not. Specter had no problem proposing a ban on this exact thing in 2001 against Sen Jeffords. He's BS.

[wntoply6]

oh honey, the "christian"republicans aren't terrible, they're a bunch of incompetent, ignorant, intolerant bigoted liars. and that occurred when southern fundamentalist "christians" hijacked a once great party.

who are you, lord and master to tell specter what he sould have become? what's the matter after all the embarrassments your party has suffered in the last 8 years, why is this one so stinging...is it because the death knell is getting louder and louder and you're scard shitless?

[shonester]

I'd go into debating your ridiculous labelling of "Christian" Republican party..but I don't want to stay up all night. You clearly have very strong views on this and we will just butt heads.

But I am offended you label Republicans - when I don't label Democrats.

[wntoply6]

i welcome a debate with you re: the "christian"republican party. unless 1 knows the other debater, one must be careful in what he asks for. that is unless he doesn't mind getting totally emaciated, devistated & embarrassed.

& oh, we won't butt heads, no, you'll be knocked out! i have facts, while you have just lies from them "christian"republicans. why don't you smarten up, just dump the intolerant, ignorant, bigots & haters from your party...dump them "christians", you might begin to win.

[wntoply6]

tell you what, i'll be here till hell freezes over so we can drag this out forever...actually once your bullshit lies are revealed, it'll be over.

so how about it, let's talk about how a once honorable party was hyjacked by southern fundamentalists "chrsitians" & hasn't been the same since, what with it's ignorance, intolerance, bigotry & hate.

how quickly/convenitently you lying "christian"republicans forget, we have been called socialists, godless & unchristian by you for YEARS, remember?

[Timbear2020]

Yes, indeedy, LOL, we remember.

If opposing homosexuality means I am called bigoted for saying it is a perversion, so be it.

If saying abortion is murder, and crying out for mercy on the unborn and the millions of Down's Syndrome children who are murdered for convenience sake is seen and extreme, so be it.

If demanding that tax law is applied equally to all and not in an effort to equalize all is called insensitive, so be it.

I will not apologize for speaking the truth.

[govlastpeoplefirst]

contribute directly to Tomey - $5.00 will do. lets show them who is "out" of touch. I am tired of spend spend spend. Lets do a fly by in NYC, lets cut down America. Any I am really tired of Pelosi, Reid and the rest of them thinking they won b/c America wanted to be like Europe. I am an American - A capitalist. Obama won b/c "it was the economy stupid". McCain didn't know his butt from his head and admitted it.

[JohnRhysMusician]

Pat Toomey has a $10 minimum contribution rule. I am getting as many people as I can to donate $250.

Arlen Specter is too old and is out of touch as is Harry Reid. Who is wishy washy himself, pro-life and all.

[reneetp]

Thank you, you have said it all and I couldn't agree with you more. More people come into our country, (legally and otherwise), every day, than anywhere else in the world, so we must be doing something right if everyone wants to live here!

[DumpHarryReidNevada]

Who gonna vote for Benedict Arlen ? ...........lol

[SureHowDoYouKnow]

Go Pat Go! Good Job! Just compare what Toomey stands up for, and what Specter is willing to give in to! That is a winning formula!

[nstroo]

Raycheetah...can't we start at the top? LOL

[huxie1]

It came up as a black screen. I couldn't view it, though

I did contribute.

Norm Huxman

[Raycheetah]

Get rid of "Airport" John Murtha, too, while you're at it. =^[.]^=

[OurCountryPAC]

Stay tuned to our big announcement tomorrow!!! We agree with you about Murtha and are doing something about it!

[reaganrevolution]

and when will Massachusetts stop voting in idiots like Barney Frank.

[wntoply6]

when you "christian"republicans dump ignorant, intolerant "christians" bigots from you're party that's when.

seems to me you idiots, the real idiots in america, will let those lying bastards run your party into the ground before you get rid of them, oops you're almost there.

so if i were you reganrevolution, i would think once, then think 100 more times before you open your typically "christian"republican stupid mouth!

[Timbear2020]

"no timbear, ..YOUR...belief - is slavery!

i haven't -foggiest what your last point was, but i'm sure it was an inane as the oprevious two. "

Your defense of one's ability to choose stops when you drop your britches and conceive a child. The child's right to live outweighs your right to not be inconvenienced by its existence.

Abortion in case of rape, incest, or danger to the mother's life is an accurate and correct thing to do. Abortion just because of bad choices is murder. DEAL.