Here is a follow-on to the Specter self-preservation story, some of which reiterates a piece I posted a few weeks ago, but it's worth updating in light of recent events.  A few weeks ago, a local political staffer named Evan Kreiner published an Op-Ed article in the Sunday Patriot-News entitled, "Alienating Specter Accelerates GOP's Ride to Obscurity."  The thesis of Mr. Kreiner's article was that Arlen Specter is the kind of moderate Republican with appeal, especially here in Pennsylvania, which he describes as "increasingly becoming a blue state," to the moderates who are the ultimate swing votes in elections.  According to Kreiner, if we Pennsylvania Republicans nominate a reliable conservative like Pat Toomey, who almost took the nomination from Specter in 2004, his "prospects  in the general election against any credible Democrat would be grim."

Well, we now know how this turned out.  Specter is no longer a Republican, forced to change parties to have some chance of retaining his Senate seat.  But is he now one of those "credible Democrats" himself, and what, in 2010, will constitute a "credible Democrat?"  Forget for the moment the credibility of any politician who switches parties to ensure his political survival.  The Democrats are wrecking the economy with unprecedented gargantuan overspending which will cause stagflation reminiscent of the late 1970s, a fact which should be painfully obvious by 2010. 

And, speaking of the late 1970s, when "human rights" instead of national interest was the driving force in U.S. foreign policy, naive Dems are offering the olive branch to terrorist-sponsoring states such as Iran, ignoring the obvious consequences of appeasement.  Of course, in the 1930s, the Houdini-like FDR continually convinced the American people to reelect him and his discredited party, in spite of the fact that unemployment seldom went much below 25% until World War II came along,.  And maybe Barack Obama is, as Joe Klein of Time and other news reporters think, the reincarnation of FDR, at least in that respect.  But the political landscape is much different in the 21st century, with conservative watchdogs ever-vigilant in pointing out the obvious failures in liberal policies.

And what will a credible Republican look like in 2010?  Well, I'm betting fiscal conservatives like Pat Toomey will look more and more credible, as their predictions of the dire consequences of the Obama Administration's economic finagling become obvious to all but the most dyed-in-the-wool lefty.  Compromise can be good - sometimes - but compromising with people who are so very wrong will cost Specter the Democrat in 2010 as Pat Toomey, Tom Ridge, or whoever wins the nomination, will have credibility himself.  And in 2012, if all goes well (for conservatives, but, unfortunately, not the country), we'll see a repeat of the 1980 election, when American's voted against malaise and for greatness. 

I don't think that Evan Kreiner is old enough to remember the late 70s, or he surely wouldn't predict that the likes of Arlen Specter is the future of this country.  On the other hand, if Kreiner is the RINO he appears to be, I can understand that he's nervous for the party, because he believes that compromising with people who are wrong is O.K.  But it's not O.K., Evan, which is why ridding the party of Arlen Specter will accelearate GOP's rise to ascendancy, an ascendancy it justifiably enjoyed for almost 30 years beginning in 1980.  As for the 1930s of FDR, more on that in my next post.