Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
I have long loathed Arlen Specter. He's pretty much a spineless jellyfish as a politician, a man who, over and over again, makes speeches full of bold principles and then votes against those same principles. And frankly, the Democratic party should have told him to go to hell when he decided to switch parties purely to get himself reelected (and go Joe Sestak, beat the hell out of him in next year's primary).
So why has my ire been raised against him again? Because as usual he is capitulating to right wing demagoguery, this time over this nonsensical "death book" bullshit. He's actually talking about submitting legislation to ban that book:
Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter said Tuesday he may introduce legislation to "prohibit" the use of a controversial end-of-life care guide used by the Veterans Administration that critics say sends a "hurry-up-and-die" message to injured troops.The guide, called "Your Life, Your Choices," was suspended under the Bush administration but has been revived by veterans officials in the Obama administration.
Specter, who sits on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, on Monday formally requested a hearing on the subject in a letter to Chairman Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, after telling "FOX News Sunday" that he would call for one.
He said he has also asked the Department of Veterans Affairs to suspend the use of the guide and take it down from its Web site pending an analysis of the document.
"That counseling memo is very tough on veterans and I don't think it's the appropriate counseling. I think we have to protect the veterans and encourage them," Specter told FOX News on Tuesday. "If the hearing shows what I think it will show -- that it's not desirable -- I will introduce legislation to prohibit it."
I notice that his approval ratings have dropped like a stone in Pennsylvania since he switched parties. Maybe people are finally catching on to the fact that the only thing that matters to Specter is protecting his career.
Politics
Comments
Elsewhere I read that the distribution of the guide was not suspended by the Bush administration although it was taken down from at least one VA hospital web site.
Posted by: bobh | August 27, 2009 9:38 AM
Sen. Specter's frequent unwillingness to fight for principle and his selfish opportunism is often falsely equated as a defining attribute of moderates. A charge that's levied by both the Left and the Right.
I therefore look forward to his defeat in the primaries in spite of my desire to see a Senate more populated with moderates than conservatives.
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 27, 2009 9:38 AM
Arlen Specter - why don't bite The Magic Bullet™ and grow a pair! - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | August 27, 2009 9:49 AM
Madonna has a spine! Maybe she could take Ted Kennedy's seat.
Posted by: Raging Bee | August 27, 2009 9:50 AM
I basically agree with your opinion of Specter, but there are advantages to having him in the Democratic Party other than just his vote. The Democratic Party has essentially become the party representing everybody, even the people who don't think it represents them: http://tinyurl.com/discordant-dems
Posted by: Greg Laden | August 27, 2009 9:50 AM
I heard the same as bobh. I believe a guest on an NPR show said that it was not suspended. She seemed to suggest that the source of the claim that it had been was that it was taken down from a single hospital's web site.
Posted by: MRW | August 27, 2009 9:52 AM
Ed himself, a few posts back:
That's where I heard it!
Posted by: valhar2000 | August 27, 2009 10:01 AM
Greg Laden wrote:
But those are benefits for the party. They have nothing to do with my analysis of Specter's attributes.
Posted by: Ed Brayton | August 27, 2009 10:01 AM
"Scottish Law" Specter, prior to the vote for the Military Commissions Act, noted that the bill would "set back basic rights by some 900 years" and was "patently unconstitutional on its face."
He then proceeded to vote for the bill.
Posted by: Johnny Clamboat | August 27, 2009 10:12 AM
Specter is done. It seems like he moved to the right to appease his Republican constituency when he was trying to beat Tomey.... and then stayed there... just to prove that he wasn't going to vote lock step with the Dems. (Except for the most part he has)
There's still a chance he'll win the Democratic primary but it gets less and less every day. Especially with his wishy-washy performances at his "health care" meetings....
I'm going to enjoy voting against him in the primary.
Posted by: BenA | August 27, 2009 11:10 AM
But c'mon, he's a real live Democrat, just ask Johnny Clamboat, the Democrats have a filibusterproof 60 seat majority and should have been able to pass health care reform without a single problem. [rolls eyes]
This guy is a hack, an unprincipled one at that. The only good thing that could come from his switching parties is if Sestak defeats him in the primary and wins the seat outright. Otherwise it could do more harm than good in the long run.
Posted by: dogmeatib | August 27, 2009 11:12 AM
Absolutely. I still remember Anita Hill.
Posted by: Jim | August 27, 2009 11:50 AM
If Specter win re-election he would be nearly 86 by the next time he faced the electorate. In other words, there would be little to stop him from re-emerging as a Republican once the dirty deed was sone.
Posted by: tacitus | August 27, 2009 12:00 PM
The more I think about it the more I'm starting to see the brilliance of health care reform opponents' strategy. One of their main objections is that more government entanglement in health care will lead to inferior quality. Now they're proving it by making sure anyone on a government plan will receive inferior care.
Next they’ll prove that government grants for soup kitchens are a bad idea by pissing in the all the broth.
Posted by: Abby Normal | August 27, 2009 12:26 PM
Sadly, I would have to say that Specter definitely belongs in the Democratic party. He is the perfect archetype of about 80% of our elected Democrats -- out of step with the reality experienced by 99% of Americans.
I say this as a life-long Democrat for whom the year 2009 continues to be a savage disappointment.
Posted by: xebecs | August 27, 2009 12:53 PM
"If the hearing shows what I think it will show . . .
Okay, just so we're clear: Specter is interested in a pamphlet. He wants to know what's in it. And the way he plans to find out is . . . hold a Senate hearing.
Does Specter not know how to read?
Posted by: Molly, NYC | August 27, 2009 2:07 PM
I agree that Specter is a self-serving hypocrite, but I am really glad he switched parties and voted for the stimulus on the condition that the Democrats introduce the largest-ever increase in funding to the National Institutes of Health. There is one instance where his self-interest (finding a cure for cancer, I guess) matched mine (grant money for really cool science).
Posted by: Chuck | August 27, 2009 4:06 PM
"That counseling memo is very tough on veterans and I don't think it's the appropriate counseling. I think we have to protect the veterans and encourage them," Specter told FOX News on Tuesday. "If the hearing shows what I think it will show -- that it's not desirable -- I will introduce legislation to prohibit it."
Good. Matters of morality and life and death should not be put in the hands of unelected bureaucrats. Anyone who opposes the centralization of power in the executive branch should applaud it going to Congress.
Posted by: tom van dyke | August 27, 2009 5:17 PM
tom van dyke, #18: Matters of morality and life and death should not be put in the hands of unelected bureaucrats.
And the pamphlet in question doesn't put matters of morality or life and death in the hands of any bureaucrats. It keeps it in the hands of the patients. It merely gets the patients to think about their own feelings of life and death and morality and how to express them to the people who will make the decisions when the patient is incapacitated.
Because you know, tom, if the patient never informs the right people of their feelings about the matter in a legally binding way, then these matters of life and death end up in other peoples' hands anyway.
Giving people control over their own fates is a good thing.
Posted by: Chiroptera | August 27, 2009 5:29 PM
I'm not discussing the merits of the pamphlet here, although I did in a previous thread. The "unelected bureaucrats" I'm referring to are the ones who wrote it and the ones who would have it distributed.
I prefer some congressional oversight here.
Posted by: tom van dyke | August 27, 2009 5:34 PM
For pete's sake, Van Dyke, it's always bureaucrats who write and distribute these things. It's an executive branch function! Not that there's anything wrong with legislative oversight, which should always be a given. But writing pamphlets like this is not a legislative function.
Posted by: James Hanley | August 27, 2009 5:44 PM
Not that there's anything wrong with legislative oversight, which should always be a given.
Good, especially in this case.
Posted by: tvd | August 27, 2009 6:28 PM
My ag extension publishes a pamphlet that suggests apple varieties that will thrive best in my climate. Unelected bastards, trying to impose their decisions on me. Matters of fruit should not be put in the hands of unelected bureaucrats. If I want my apples to die, or be withered up little mushroom caps like Arlen Specter, then I'll put that decision in the hands of my senator, where it belongs. Simply put, the government should take its experts, its science, and send it back to Russia where it belongs.
ice
Posted by: ice9 | August 27, 2009 6:47 PM
I never really understood the whole LOL thing until I read the handle on #24. Now I'm scrubbing seefood off my screen. zow.
ice9
Posted by: ice9 | August 27, 2009 8:53 PM
ice9:
You've not met Runtyforeskin? He, like Mr. Von Dink, is a concern troll of some sort. Things must be getting lonely for them over at the sewer they usually live in.
Posted by: democommie | August 27, 2009 9:30 PM
@ 24 - Pure genius.
Of course since I support the initiative I guess I could just email them my copy.
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 27, 2009 9:53 PM
I just looked up the "booklet" online. The pdf is at http://www.ethics.va.gov/YLYC/YLYC_First_edition_20001001.pdf
It's a 1997 publication.
Cover page says:
Your Life, Your Choices was officially retired from use in
VA in 2007, and an expert panel was convened to review
and comment on an online module version of this document
that was under development at that time.
The Your Life, Your Choices online module is currently
being revised based on suggestions from the expert panel
members and from chaplains representing eight different
faith groups. The revised online module is scheduled to be
released on the My HealtheVet Web site in the spring of
2010.
Please note that portions of this document have been
interpreted by some to be negative in tone and
insufficiently balanced. The revision process is addressing
these concerns. Also note that some of the links contained
in the document are no longer active.
Posted by: Gerry L | August 28, 2009 12:15 AM
It appears to me that the pamphlet's intention is to help people in making a free, informed decision. But the critics can't comprehend why anyone would possibly choose not to fight every moment to stay alive, and thus they think the book must be manipulating people.
Reminds me of some pro-lifers I have met who believe that no woman could possibly freely choose to undergo an abortion, therefore any who do choose thus must be under the manipulative control of men.
Posted by: Suricou Raven | August 28, 2009 5:05 AM
[Eddie Monsoon explaining why she goes on diets to her daughter]
Perhaps, Ed the rejoinder could equally apply to this thread's headline.
Posted by: DingoJack | August 29, 2009 4:12 AM
Hey Ed, how 'bout:
"Arlen Specter: an idiot for all seasons." ?
or
"Mrs Specter didn't raise no fools. Arlen's motley all his own work." ?
or maybe
"Arlen Specter still hopeful of an injection of brain cells, via 'Magic Bullet'*." ?
I'm sure you, and others, can come up with much, much better! :) - DJ
-------
*Too soon?
Posted by: DingoJack | August 29, 2009 4:47 AM
DingoJack:
And here everyone thought Phil was the deranged Spector.
Posted by: democommie | August 29, 2009 6:58 AM
Demo - LOL.
Arlen the idiot and Phil the deranged, sounds like something the Brothers Grimm would have written. :) - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | August 29, 2009 7:16 AM
As one of those unelected bureaucrats in VA that helps distribute Your Life, Your Choices, I would ask Mr. Van Dyke one question - Every non-VA hospital in the US (including military hospitals) provides its patients with information regarding advance directives, living wills and end of life care. This is mandated under federal law, and has been since 1990. If VA did not provide this information to veterans would you be howling about the unfeeling unelected bureaucrats in VA who refuse to educate veterans about their choices?
Posted by: Mike56 | September 4, 2009 1:48 PM