[mrsmith]

Well, as someone who has generally opposed this campaign (after all Specter did not threaten Bush as claimed) I have to confess you all probably did some good. Specter has been put on a tighter leash than I thought he would be.
And that's a good thing!

BTW: here's the public statement he made:
November 19, 2004

"...If a rule change is necessary to avoid filibusters, there are relevant recent precedents to secure rule changes with 51 votes. "

[Always Right]

"...If a rule change is necessary to avoid filibusters, there are relevant recent precedents to secure rule changes with 51 votes. "

Thanks for posting that to this thread. I hadn't seen his final statement yet, and that is a positive sign. That statement is going to raise the fur of some Democrats. I am convinced that Specter will hurt us a couple years down the road, but over the short term things look good.