Sen Pedro Espada just cut a deal with the Republicans and he is now the Senate President and the GOP controls the Senate.

Are you the same one who in 2006 ranted about Casey Jr. becasue of the abortion issue and said they preffered Santorum over Casey, Jr.  If so I am not sure where you are coming from anyway if not you sound alot like him.  Any way Ridge is out he just announced so if Specter is to run opposing him would be long shot.  The only folks who have the money to make a run would be one the the Heinz's but I think the all backing Specter anyway as are Biden Obama, Reid, Rendell and Casey, Jr.  I do not think any one living the state can self fund a race against him, and which is what Ned Lamont tried to do and even he fell just short of being a Senator in 2006.  So my guess is in the end Sestak will choose to run for re-election and see what opens up at a later time.

"But most Americans no longer support the religious right agenda."

Actually from what I have seen parts of their agenda has always been supported by the American people and still and parts have never been supported by the American people not now or then.  What happend in 1993 and 1994 the GOP was able to convince a group of people who were associated with the religous right but still considered themselves Democrats that their future was in the GOP.  They did this by promising these such folks they, the GOP, would take up the cause they believed in, even the unpopular one's.  But they never did, I contend they never intended to, they simply planned to become the lesser of two evil party and keep thier votes.  It may have worked had this White House followed by the blind loyalty of the party hacks, not so badly mismanaged the war, and the economy at the same time.  Somehow the party hacks will follow a White House who at best badly mismanged both things at worst they may be criminal, while at the same time break their word to these relgious voters, who are not asking for a "payday" just to honor the agreement they made.  Yet the GOP is showing just how dihonorable they are, and you are blaming not the one's who are dishonorable but the one's being dishonored, oh well.

The folks I know as the "Religious Right" which my wife and inlaws are, are not what is detroying the Republican party, unless you count the fact their chief concern was not the Republican party to begin with.  In the 2000 election both John McCain and Pat Buchanan had pointed out the rank and file voters in the movement were being ignored by the party and they never really intended to do much to help them anyway.  

In short the GOP used the religious right voters to keep them in power and the leadership of the religious right went along with it so they, the leadership, could have a seat at the GOP table, but somewhere in the mix the average religious right concerns were ignored and they, the rank and file, were fed up with it.  So who destroyed the GOP those who made the promises they never intended to keep or those who tried to see the promises would be kept.  

The GOP leadership lied and mislead them them and when the GOP is in troulbe they blame the rank and file religous voters on their plight.  and you believe the GOP, Oh well.

The problem was I blamed the house and to a lesser expent the senate for in 1993 and 1994 for trying to push legistlation which was bad for the party and something the country was clearly not in support of.  It is my hope the administration and the congressional leadership does not try to push legislation that way, ortherwise who can blame the bluedogs for standing against it.

The problem of why young Jackson may have cost himself the Senate Seat this round was the way he persued it.  I have never in my life seen anyone publicly lobby for a vacant Senate Seat the way he has.  Because he is most likley candidate #5 at best it means he was just in wrong place at the wrong time, which had he not tried so hard to be the apointee I doubt he would be in this kind of politcal troulbe, though it would appear he does not face any legal trouble over this, because if he did I think he would have already been indicted.  

He is most likley going to remain in the house for the near future and perhaps his political life, but considering what goes on in the real world its not so bad a life.

What really sucks is when you take a job for less money than you are qualified for but you need the money so you take the job.  But I feel for you.

Whats happens who knows, but my guess is there is not even going to be an up or down vote on the chairmanship.  If there is a vote at all it will be some kind of compromise giving the Senator a chair of a committee perhaps keeping homeland security in exchange for something Reid really wants, but what that is who knows.

I think you are closer to being right than most realize, I used to work in a Senate Office and Lieberman is pretty popular with his fellow Senators, moreover I will bet he cut a deal with Ried before he backed McCain, who is also very popular with fellow Senators, and if Lieberman sticks to his end of the deal Ried will also, though what the deal is I am not sure.

While anything is possible for the Sen Lieberman, I think the chances of him staying in the caucus in 2009 are much greater than most on the blog community realizes.  As someone who has worked in a US Senate office, I have come to understand just how important deal making is up there.  As long as Lieberman sticks to his end of the deals which he has made, and as long as he informs the leadership of his plans in advance then they are not likley to expell him no matter how badly the blogs want him out.

To answer you,

I am pro-life, I do believe the health insurance reforms that began in 1996 are an improvement, but we have a long way to go, I am opposed to single payer though, the Bush Admin made a huge mess in Iraq and while I would like to see us get out, but we need to it the right way and I do not think just leaving without a plan is the right way, a war with Iran does not exite me and I hope it does not come to it, but the whole subject of Iran freightens me, becasue I fear at some point we may have to stand up to them, I just hope it does not lead to war.

I am a Democrat who is leaning toward voting for McCain if Obama is the nominee.  I have not made up my mind yet so it is not out of the question that I could vote for Obama just right now I do not think I will.  Either way be it McCain or Obama I will vote very qietly and will not vocally support either one of them.  I have no problem though voting for and vocally supporting the Democratic candidates for county commisoner, US, House, US Senate, Governor, Lt Governor ect.  My father before my voted for Nixon in 1972, he never regretted it, and has voted for the GOP nominee for President ever since.  He stayed a Democrat though, and supported the party in down ticket races, this year he voted for Hillary in the primary and would have voted for her in November, but I bet he will vote for McCain now.  Perhaps I am becoming like my Dad, oh well.

"This probably isn't all that significant, but it clearly shows that there are still a lot of Republican voters who are registered Democratic in Mississippi."

If you would do more research you would learn Mississippi has no party registrations, every voter who votes in a primary delcares when they vote which primary they wish to vote in.  But no voter is a registered Democrat or a Republican.

 The last three were in 1971 Ogden Reid of New York switched.  Two years later Don Reigle of Michigan made the switch the next switch would be in 1999 when Michael Forbes of New York, no relation to Forbes 500 family made the switch.  

"And, I believe he was the "Freedom Fries" guy, wasn't he?"  Yes he was though he has long since admitted that was a mistake and the Democratic party does not seem to care.

"I wonder if he is hesitant to change parties because he doesn't want to expose himself to being beat up for being a Bush Dog Democrat.

He doesn't sound too dis-similar from other conservative Dems, but looking at how we activists treat them, I'm not sure I'd sign up for that either."

He would be a blue dog Democrat but his district is the kind a blue dog would do well.