Talk:Arlen Specter

End of Senate Career

Please stop changing the end of Specter's Senate career to the innocuous "His career in the Senate ended on Jan 3, 2011. He was succeeded by Pat Toomey." That implies that he simply retired and didn't run again. He DID run, and he LOST a re-election bid. It happened. I'm sure some of Specter's supporters don't LIKE that it happened, but it still happened, and thus absolutely deserves to be mentioned right where it is. It's not fair to either Pat Toomey OR Joe Sestak to ignore this fact.

Yes, I'm well aware that this is covered in the 2010 Campaign section, but it's BARELY covered, and the details are much more concerned in that section with his switch from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party (as it should be.) Timber72 (talk) 17:37, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Jewish

Why is the only mention of him being Jewish a small line on the infobox. As a Jew I think this should be mentioned in the article itself, maybe some mention of just how religious he is, how it may have influenced his more liberal or conservative views, how has he felt about the social Christian conservative movement in the Republican Party, does the fact that Judaism allows abortion influenced him on that issue, what about death penalty. Is there a reason any of that hasnt been looked into and added? Has someone already thought about all that and didnt find any sources on any of it?Camelbinky (talk) 18:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

First, it is also clearly mentioned in the narrative, in the "Early life" section where we tend to include such things in our biographies. Secondly, if there are reliable sources that discuss his religious beliefs and how they have affected his views I think that would be quite welcome in this article - at least I would argue in favor of it. I don't see anything in the article's talk archives about any discussion of this, so it isn't that sources were presented and rejected as far as I can see. If you find appropriate material, sourced in an acceptable way (see WP:RS), by all means bring it here and let's see how it fits - either directly into the article or here on Talk. I am interested in the subject as well, and will see if I find anything too when I have a chance. But please do look into it. Tvoz/talk 19:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Note, though, that of course I don't mean original research or synthesis - we need sources that make the connection between Specter's personal religious beliefs and his political positions, not speculation that "since Judaism allows such and such, and Specter is Jewish (or and Specter is an observant Jew if he is), then therefore Specter's position on such-and-such is a result of his religion." Unless reliable sources are making the connection, we can't include that kind of speculative statement. Tvoz/talk 20:04, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I hadnt noticed that one sentence mention that he was raised Jewish. And to clarify I did not mean to seem like I was promoting OR or any type of synthesis, I just thought it was strange that nobody ever seemed to have researched (I use the word research for finding references and sources, not OR, some people jump down my throat for that). The Republican Party is not exactly known for having alot of Jews and IS known for Christian Conservativism, so I just assume that it mustve come up at some point in his career, his electorate is the same as that which voted a majority for Rick Santorum. I just was curious if anyone had looked and simply didnt find anything on the web or in newspaper archives. I'm too busy working on getting other articles I care more about up to GA level so I dont have time, but I hope others read this and think, "oh yea, that's a good thing to research" and then have the time to do it. Good luck!Camelbinky (talk) 22:27, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Spector's external links didn't previously have a section for "critics" as David Barton's entry does, which entry has Spector's false accusation, making him a false Jew.75.139.214.136 (talk) 11:27, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

nitwit?

First time editing, but i've noticed that in the first sentence it said "american politician, senator, and nitwit." I've removed the "nitwit" portion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ireallyneedanewsn (talk • contribs) 00:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Ntwitt seems valid89.241.78.114 (talk) 15:27, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism

This page has been vandalized. The entire text now reads variations of "Wait a minute", an obvious reference to yesterday's town hall meeting in Pennsylvania. I have no idea what to do about this, so I thought I'd just state the obvious. StanHater (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I've reverted it. Brothejr (talk) 19:00, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Great. Thanks. StanHater (talk) 19:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Junior or senior

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/06/new-democrat-specter-loses-commitee-seniority/

So does that mean he's a junior senator now? I'm a little confused about what all this means. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amn12 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

The term "junior senator" refers to the senator of two representing a single state who has served in the Senate for less time. Pennsylvania's two senators are Specter and Casey. Since Specter has served in the Senate longer than Casey, Specter is still "the senior U.S. senator from Pennsylvania."

Furthermore, senators have at least two other kinds of seniority -- seniority within the Senate as a whole and seniority within his or her own party caucus. By changing parties, Specter doesn't lose his seniority within the Senate as a whole, but in order to keep committee assignments/chairmanships/etc., he had to negotiate with the Democratic leadership what his seniority would be in the party caucus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.79.35.227 (talk) 18:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

less enthusiastic

"in recent years has been less enthusiastic about weakening consumer protection laws than many members of his party" - I don't see any source for this and am curious what "less enthusiastic" means. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.100.250.85 (talk) 19:42, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Arlen Specter seemed enthusiastic today when he told conservative Rep. Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota to "act like a lady." Heatonbb (talk) 04:37, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Introduction

Should "Specter is engaged in a competitive Democratic primary in 2010 against Congressman Joe Sestak. In general election polling, Specter has been shown to face a competitive re-election bid against former Republican Congressman Pat Toomey. Arlen Specter was treated for Hodgkin's lymphoma in 2005 and 2008. He is currently in remission" be in the introduction? They would be more appropriately placed in the body of the article. Myownworst (talk) 05:31, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to remove the aforementioned parts from the introduction for the time being. If anyone thinks it should remain, please respond to me here. Myownworst (talk) 04:44, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

"Controversial" single bullet theory

I removed the word 'controversial' from the statement concerning the senator's authorship of the single bullet theory. Although it may have been a controversial theory at the time or among a specific subset of the population, I don't know that this concern is widely held enough to justify the blanket declaration of controversy. If you want to allude to controversy, perhaps we could do so in a separate sentence with more elaboration concerning who finds this theory controversial; ideally, have citations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.102.132.205 (talk) 18:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I removed the sentence that said that the single bullet theory was crucial to the lone assassin thesis. I know it quoted a book, but I have Bugliosi's page 456 in front of me and it certainly says no such thing! Actually, the author repeatedly points to the observation made by the WC that the single bullet is *not* crucial to the conclusion that all the shots came from Oswald's position (even though Bugliosi has zero doubts about the SBT). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.251.19 (talk) 01:40, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Badly written

The following sentence is very badly written.

Specter is a Democrat, but was a Republican from 1965 (when he changed parties in order to challenge the Democratic district attorney of Philadelphia[2]) until switching back to the Democratic Party in 2009.

I suggest that break it into two sentences and remove the parenthesis. -- A. L. M. 12:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Personal life

I dont think his Hodgins Disease deserves its own section. I suggest combining it with the early life section and making it a "Personal Life" section. Triggafinga (talk) 03:59, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Initiative to bring Saudis to court over 9/11

On December 26, 2009 Specter introduced legislation that would revoke the ban on litigation against Saudi Arabia for complicity in the terror attacks. There are several news stories detailing this. I found this at Current.com. Isn't this significant enough to warrant presentation in our article? __meco (talk) 09:49, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Ira Einhorn

Is it not worthy of mention that Mr. Specter was instrumental in getting Ira Einhorn, the "unicorn killer," released on bail (which he skipped) shortly before taking his Senate seat? 72.94.101.34 (talk) 23:49, 24 April 2012 (UTC)