Replies

I must disagree. If you look at it simply from the perspective of who wins in November - Specter or Hoeffel, yes, however, that is not the end of the story. The residuals of the following 6 years in office of the candidate who wins(regardless of under which party umbrella either is running), is the key. Should Specter prevail in November, he then (as he is next in line) becomes the Chair of the Judiciary Committee. We already know we cannot trust that Specter can be counted upon to stand for the principles of conservatives. His voting record proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt. It is not only possible, but probable, that he will affect the appointment of the next justice to sit on the Supreme Court bench. The ramifications of that appointment [going by the issues Arlen supports, pro-choice, human cloning (creating human life to use in labs with the intent to kill these babies when they are no longer useful), and the many other positions he takes that are not in line with conservative, moral thinkers] will live long after Specter is gone not only from the US Senate, but from this world. Effectively, his choice(s) will be on the bench for 40-45 years, maybe more. The damage that can be caused is mind-boggling.
In the alternative, voting in November for Hoeffel will then place (R) Senator Kyl of Arizona as next in line for the chairmanship. Kyl is a strong, proven conservative and would be a far better representative of the moral majority. Hoeffel then, being a freshman senator, would have little power to cause long-term damage. Any potential damage is far more containable. In 2010, the next time this seat is open for election, we then place another strong, conservative candidate in the race (hopeful that Pat Toomey will agree to run again), we can, with far less opposition that in the current election (and recent primary), prevail and re-gain this seat for republicans in the House.