Archive for the ‘Hoeffel’ Category

Fluff Coverage

October 11, 2004

The Post-Gazette attempts to summarize the Senate race.

The number of paragraphs that mention…

  • Specter: 34
  • Hoeffel: 29
  • Clymer: 7
  • Summers: 2
  • Toomey: 2

There is a lot of attention paid to Specter’s liberal-moderate past, very little on his Senate record, and absolutely nothing about the past six years.

Based on the article, you’d think that Jim Clymer didn’t want to be in the debate and was only there because Joe Hoeffel pressured him into it. What was the Specter campaign’s opinion? Why not write that they fought it? Or did they encourage it too? If so, why not mention it?

Most importantly, the article focuses on biographical differences and completely ignores any policy differences. It actually serves to confuse the issues, because it emphasizes Specter’s humble beginnings and Hoeffel’s prep school education, giving the wrong impression about what kind of policies the candidates actually support.

If you’ve got a moment, write to the P-G and let them know we are running out of time to see some more substantive campaign coverage.

Every Sex but Female

October 2, 2004

On the email list, Rebecca documents the relative clout of Arlen Specter and Joe Hoeffel:

I was in the crowd of 50 or so who welcomed Joe outside Pittsburgh’s WTAE-TV this morning where the debate with Arlen Specter was being taped. Long after we arrived a tiny contingent of Specter supporters appeared.

Their 15 or so members covered the age spectrum from 20-24, included every sex but female, and every ethnic group but black, asian, or hispanic! (Apparently only the local chapter of College Republicans could be bothered to show up.)

You can watch the debate at 7 p.m. tonight if you get PCN (Cable) or at 11:30 p.m. tonight on WTAE (Broadcast channel 4). Other times and stations are listed on Hoeffel’s website.

Specter attacks Hoeffel

September 28, 2004

Arlen Specter once again shows his true Republican colors by airing an attack ad which distorts Joe Hoeffel’s record on — what else? — national security. Specter thinks Hoeffel is weak on security because he didn’t vote for superfluous amendments to spending bills.

While the amendments have regularly passed in the House, Hoeffel has voted against them every time.

“The president has never asked for the authority to use the armed services domestically,” the Democrat said. “If [the Joint Chiefs of Staff] or he did, I would certainly consider it and support it if circumstances warranted.

“What I have voted against is catchy little amendments that [Congress] members offer to get publicity. They pass because members are afraid of TV ads like this.”

Such amendments to defense appropriation bills have not been introduced in the Senate, but Specter does support deploying the military along the borders, according to his campaign manager, Christopher Nicholas.

Hoeffel has yet to run a negative commercial. The challenger’s only television commercial to air so far deals exclusively with his own record.

This is appropriate for Specter, since the message of his campaign is that, since he is so old, he has the “clout” to direct more pork to Pennsylvania. (Hoeffel is never hesitant to point out that it’s not much help to get federal money to renovate the bridge that goes to where your local manufacturing plant used to be.)

Specter is not Pro-Choice

September 14, 2004

In an article about County Coroner Cyril “Alien Autopsy” Wecht‘s endorsement of Arlen “Single Bullet Theory” Specter, we learn of an interesting remark at a fundraiser:

After receiving the coroner’s endorsement, Specter went to the Duquesne Club, where fellow Sens. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and Gordon Smith, R-Ore., appeared at a $1,000-a-person fund-raiser for the four-term incumbent.

Craig, who is anti-abortion, reminded the audience that a re-elected Specter would become chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, just in time for the nominations of as many as three new Supreme Court justices.

“Wouldn’t it be wonderful … if the man who chairs that committee … were Arlen Specter? That’s why I’m here,” said Craig, also a Judiciary Committee member.

Specter, though, is pro-choice.

Can anyone explain to me why anybody believes that Specter is really pro-choice? He approved every single one of Bush’s judicial nominees. He may be a voice of moderation on other issues, but voices of moderation in today’s GOP are ignored.

Folks, just because Specter says he is pro-choice doesn’t make him pro-choice. Voting with NARAL only 21 percent of the time does not make you pro-choice.

Arlen Specter is not pro-choice.

Joe Hoeffel is pro-choice. If you want to learn more about Joe, visit your nearest Hoeffel Meetup tomorrow.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.