Arlen Specter - Dead at last

[dgs49]

From all indications, Arlen Specter was a "good" senator, in that he worked hard to help Pennsylvania and its people. He was brilliant, hard working, well rounded (a pretty fair athlete, even into old age), and successful.

But one would be hard-pressed to find another successful politician who was less "liked" or likable than Snarlin' Arlen.

He first ran for DA on the Republican ticket while he was a registered Democrat. In Philadelphia, as in Pittsburgh, the Republican party is a small social club that never gets anyone elected. He only joined the Republican party after he won the election.

In the race when he won the Senate seat, he ran against a former Pittsburgh mayor, Pete Flaherty, who had absolutely worn out his welcome in his home city and county. Specter won by a small margin, but it was noteworthy that in Philadelphia where Specter was best known, Flaherty won, and in Allegheny County, where Flaherty was best known, Specter won.

Specter was blessed with a string of the worst imaginable opponents in his subsequent Senate elections, thus facilitating his 30 years in office. Despite this, I voted against him every time.

He perversely gained notoriety as a "centrist," but for those who were paying attention, this was merely because he would not take a position on any controversial issue until all the shouting was over and he could see which way was politically more opportune. If it was better for him to go against the Republicans he would do so; if it made no difference he would go with the caucus. He conspicuously voted against Bork's nomination to the Supreme Court, but waited until the issue was decided before announcing which way he would vote.

Ironically, he took a great deal of heat for carrying the ball in the questioning of Anita Hill, but I watched those hearings and he did nothing more than point out that Ms. Hill's actions flatly contradicted her accusations. So what? This got him branded as a misogynist by many, but clearly he did not deserve this slander.

His late "conversion" to the Democrat party was completely consistent with his entire career. He was convinced that he could benefit by a switch (not that anyone embraced him when he did it), and there was nothing even plausible to claim that he was doing it based on any "principle" other than protecting his long-held sinecure in the Senate. Happily, even the Dems rejected him the first time they had the opportunity to do so.

There is also some irony in the fact that Senator Santorum's support from conservatives completely evaporated when he supported Specter against Pat Toomey in '04. Although Rick would never admit it, he rues the day he supported Specter, and will never live it down. That pretty much tells you what Republicans thought of Specter; supporting him aainst a real Republican was an unforgivable sin.

I've heard stories that Specter's security staff hated him when he travelled overseas. He demanded to be treated like a potentate (more so than other Senators), but I don't have any details, and don't want to speak ill of the dead, eh?

[Lord Jim]

and don't want to speak ill of the dead,

Little late for that, ain't it Dave?

[Econoline]

Well, he did stop after only nine paragraphs...

[RayThom]

... after a long, intense, yet widely contested investigation, it has been agreed that Arlen Specter's death was most likely due to a "magic" single cancer theory.

And who will ever forget the crème de la crème, yet now infamous, quote forever connected to Arlen Specter, spoken by the Honorable Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas, "Who left their pubic hair on my coke?" A legacy so rich that it may never come our way again.

Of course, I don't want to speak ill of the dead so I, too, shall refrain.



Obama / Biden... 2012

[MajGenl.Meade]

ahem... you mean spoken by Ms. Anita Hill.

But let's not allow facts to get in the way of a good yarn. I certainly don't.

Meade

[RayThom]

They are both Coke drinkers and everyone has pubic hair except, maybe, someone suffering from alopecia areata universalis.

But what does it all matter, Arlen Specter is still dead.

[dales]

Anyone heard from Alan Cranston, lately?

[Sue U]

As a constituent, I contacted Arlen Specter's office prior to his vote on the appointment of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court, urging him to vote no. I am glad to say he took my advice.

However, despite a couple of opportunities to do so, I never voted for Specter. Of course, notwithstanding my and dgs49's failure to vote for him, he succeeded in winning reelection in 1986, 1998 and 2004 by thumping margins of 13.5%, 16.5% and 10.5%, respectively. In a state as closely divided as Pennsylvania, that says a lot about voter satisfaction. His narrowest reelection came in 1992 (by a 2.5% spread), depsite the fact that Clinton won Pennsylvania overall by a spread of 8 points over Bush I.

[dgs49]

Sue, as I implied, I think it says more about the Dem's inability to field a viable candidate.

Of course, maybe they perceived that Arlen was so popular that running against him would be politically suicidal.

I guess there is some benefit to being a faux Republican, like David Brooks. Esp in a state like PA.

[Gob]

They are both Coke drinkers .

Oh. that sort of coke! Boy was I getting some funny ideas there....

[Lord Jim]

I contacted Arlen Specter's office prior to his vote on the appointment of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court, urging him to vote no. I am glad to say he took my advice.

Wow Sue, I'm impressed....

I had no idea you had that kind of pull....

[Gob]

Arlen Specter? Wasn't he the "Wall of sound" guy?

[Sue U]

Sue, as I implied, I think it says more about the Dem's inability to field a viable candidate.

Of course, maybe they perceived that Arlen was so popular that running against him would be politically suicidal.

I guess there is some benefit to being a faux Republican, like David Brooks. Esp in a state like PA.

I think Bob Edgar and Joe Hoeffel, at least, were pretty respectable and viable Democratic candidates; their greatest disadvantage was that they had represented districts in Sotheastern PA and therfore did not have sufficient name recognition in the western counties. But the truth is that Specter reflected the "moderate" to center-right views of most Pennsylvania Republicans and -- more importantly -- independents. Because if neither you nor I voted for him, apparently everyone in between us did.

I contacted Arlen Specter's office prior to his vote on the appointment of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court, urging him to vote no. I am glad to say he took my advice.

Wow Sue, I'm impressed....

I had no idea you had that kind of pull....

For the last 25 years I've been telling everyone that Specter was just waiting to hear from me before he decided which way to go.

[Sue U]

Arlen Specter? Wasn't he the "Wall of sound" guy?

Nah, you're thinking of Bear Stanley.

Either him, or Ernst Stavro Blofeld.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Arlen Specter? Wasn't he the "Wall of sound" guy?

Nah, you're thinking of Bear Stanley.

Either him, or Ernst Stavro Blofeld.

Pretty sure it was the Spectre.... ruined a perfectly wonderful Leonard Cohen album, very singable.

[dales]

Arlen Specter? Wasn't he the "Wall of sound" guy?

Close, but no cigarello!

[rubato]

ahem... you mean spoken by Ms. Anita Hill.

But let's not allow facts to get in the way of a good yarn. I certainly don't.

Meade

Anita Hill was unfairly slandered, she never made her testimony about Clarence Thomas public, she made them when interviewed by the FBI. Nina Totenberg made the accusations public and it was after that that the committee asked about them.

As history has proven he is one of the weakest, if not the very weakest, addition to the SC.

yrs,
rubato

[MajGenl.Meade]

Way to evade. Smoke screen.

You said that Clarence Thomas spoke those words. Wrong. Anita Hill spoke those words. She said he said.

Just sayin'

Meade

PS can one be 'fairly' slandered? I'm not sure

[rubato]

Way to evade. Smoke screen.

You said that Clarence Thomas spoke those words. Wrong. Anita Hill spoke those words. She said he said.

Just sayin'

Meade

PS can one be 'fairly' slandered? I'm not sure

WTF?


Anita Hill did not voluntarily publicly accuse Clarence Thomas of anything. She was INTERVIEWED by the FBI who asked her questions about Thomas and she answered them. The material from the interview was not made public until Nina Totenberg made them public at which time Anita Hill was subpoenaed by the committee and questioned.

Professor Hill was in all probability telling the truth, and thus slandered wrongly, because there was no plausible reason for her to lie to the FBI at the time of the interview. The conduct of her life before and after those events suggests she was telling the truth.

The attacks on her and the fact they are repeated by unthinking people are merely further examples of Republican misogyny.

Thomas' failure as a justice speaks adequately for the poor judgement of Reagan in nominating him and the poor judgement of the Republican party in confirming him.

yrs,
rubato

[MajGenl.Meade]

And who will ever forget the crème de la crème, yet now infamous, quote forever connected to Arlen Specter, spoken by the Honorable Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas, "Who left their pubic hair on my coke?"

I apologise rubato - it was not you that said Clarence Thomas "spoke" those words (as you see above). Anita Hill spoke those words, alleging that she was quoting Clarence Thomas.

I initially replied to RayThom but when you weighed in I forgot that it wasn't you who'd told the fib in the first place.

I am still awaiting clarification on how a person can be "fairly" slandered? Obviously if you aver that there is such a thing as "unfair" slander, there must be the corollary also.

Meade


ed to add one word "am"