By Roger J. Stone, Jr I wrote in the STONEzone only weeks ago that if Arlen Specter was still alive - which I fully expected him to be - he would be the only man reelected to six terms in the US Senate from Pennsylvania next year. Specter currently holds the records as being the only Pennsylvanian to serve five terms in the Senate. Now I reiterate that view. Specter did everything possible to broaden the Republican Party and make it more inclusive including founding the Big Tent PAC to support centrist Republicans to working with Evangelical Christians for abstinence programs in the public schools and against the persecution of Christians and Jews throughout the world. Without the leadership of Arlen Specter as member and chairman of the US Senate Judiciary Committee, America would not have Clarence Thomas, John Roberts or Sam Alito on the US Supreme Court. Specter's leadership was crucial to the confirmation of all three conservatives. Specter was an early sponsor of the Kemp-Roth tax cuts, voted for the Reagan tax cuts and introduced the first Flat Tax bill in the US Senate. Specter was also a reliable vote on foreign policy and defense issues. Statistics show that Arlen Specter voted with his party in the Senate 70% of the time - not enough for GOP purists. When the Republican Party became narrower and a litmus test began to be given to candidates on the basis of social issues, it was only a matter of time before Specter, along with thousands of suburban moderates who tended to be fiscal conservatives, left the GOP. Those who argue that the Republicans lost the last election because we were not conservative enough are wrong; we did not lose the votes of voters between 18 - 35, Hispanics, Suburbanites and self described moderates because we were not right-wing enough. Specter campaigned loyally for Republican presidential candidates Nixon, Reagan and both Bushs, helping attract Jewish and moderate voters. Arlen even ran for the nomination himself in an attempt to ensure that moderate and pro-choice Republican voters, who are of substantial numbers in New Hampshire, had a choice. Those who just dismiss Specter as an opportunist who switched only to save his own hide are only partially right. Specter is no opportunist, but he is a survivor. If he was only interested in doing what would get him reelected, why did he sharply question Professor Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas Confirmation Hearings knowing that the political backlash in Pennsylvania and across the country would be disastrous for his reelection bid? If Specter were only interested in his own reelection, why would he choose to oppose the Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork, knowing it would inflame Party conservatives, anger the Reagan White House and make formidable opposition in his reelection primary a certainty? If you ask Arlen Specter what his best job in public service was he will quickly tell you it was being District Attorney in Philadelphia. It is my theory that Specter is a cop rather than an ideologue. He is neither a liberal nor a conservative but a pragmatist more interested in results, a law enforcement man interested in seeing all the evidence. He sees things in stark terms of right and wrong. He is not rigid and is willing to compromise to get things done. He recognizes that ideological purity breeds gridlock. He also looks at issues one by one without an ideological framework of predisposition. Democrats who expect Arlen Specter to be a rubber stamp for the Democratic majority will be disappointed. Harry Reid is about to find out what Mitch McConnell, Trent Lott and Bob Dole all learned before him; Specter is an independent thinker and it would be unwise to assume his position on anything until he declares it. In terms of Specter's party switch being an act of survival, Specter's critics are right. With Pennsylvania losing almost 220,000 moderate suburban Philadelphia Republican voters who switched to Democrat to vote against Hillary and for Obama, Specter's chances of surviving a primary were slim. What politician do you know who is not interested in reelection and does not act in the best interest of their prospects in that future contest? To understand Specter and his zest for political combat, persistence and tenacity one must review his entire political record. Specter lost races for Mayor of Philadelphia, lost reelection as District Attorney of Philadelphia, lost a race for Governor of Pennsylvania, and lost a race for US Senate before winning the Senate seat he currently holds in a competitive Republican Primary and then in the 1980 General Election. Through all those defeats he came back through hard work and persistence without ever losing his resilience and love of campaigning, fundraising and striving. Specter's political skills have been honed by both victory and defeat. Only Abraham Lincoln's track record of losing elections before his ultimate political success, rivals Specter's. Though all his illnesses, his capacity and fervor for the job has never waned. At 79, he is vigorous, energetic and sharp of mind. He is not ready to retire because he is still fully capable of doing the job. Whether it is fighting for Stem Cell Research funding, against violations of civil liberties by the Justice Department including warrantless wiretaps or determining whether we are using torture, Arlen Specter will continue to ask the hard questions and seek the truth in an effort to do the people's business. With the support of President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, I expect Specter to beat spirited but underfunded opposition in the Democratic Primary and beat former Congressman Pat Toomey like a drum in the November 2010 election.