Talk:Jean Schmidt

message: Rep. Schmidt was exposed on video on Labor Day, 2009 telling a constituent that she shares the belief in the conspiracy theory that President Obama is not a U.S. citizen.  This needs to be included in her page under "Controversies".
Here is the source of the story: http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0909/Rep_Schmidt_whispers_I_agree_with_you_to_birther.html
From the Politico article:
::Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio) may be the worst stage whisperer in recent American political history.
::At a Labor Day tea party event in Cincinnati, Schmidt was approached by a slightly unhinged constituent who wanted to know why she wans't  demanding to see President Obama's birth certificate. ThinkProgress happened to have a tracker hovering nearby, who recorded the exchange, which captures the wink-wink game some GOP pols are playing with the birther fringe.
::"You can't be a president..." the woman shouts as a Schmidt supporter tries to get in between the camera guy and the participants.
::Schmidt them tries to get her attention by saying "M'aam, m'aam."
::When the woman stops talking, Schmidt leans into her ear and whispers -- loudly enough to be picked up by the mike: "I agree with you, but the courts don't."
::Schmidt is referring to a string of recent court decisions throwing out birther lawsuits.
Here's the link to the YouTube video in which Schmidt agrees with a Birther constituent: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YshG_Ok8idc&feature=player_embedded
Somebody should add this to the controversy page, the story is notable enough that multiple news outlets have picked it up.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.118.70 (talk) 03:10, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Birtherism"

message: How is it appropriate to predict a future election result, especially without citing any poll information? 
I think its appropriate to cite Schmidt's advantage, based on the political makeup of the district, but to say she is widely expected to win is not a netrual position.  
Besides the makeup of the district, what other source can you reference to bolster this opinion? Schnu
Q: What's the source of NRCC assertion?  Don't see it in google news.  PedanticallySpeaking 19:20, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
An Answer: To be honest, I did not attempt to confirm it.  I just believed that it was not vandalism but rather someone's honest contribution.  It seems there are a lot of mentions of this on some of the bigger left-wing blogs: .  I think that all the polling is internal to the parties and thus it isn't something that will come out in the formal news.  Maybe it would be best to wait until a non-partisan source does a survey -- or wait a few days until August 2. --Ben Houston 20:02, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
:It's been stated that the NRCC poll result was leaked from within the NRCC "by a Republican who is part of a group that doesn't see eye to eye with Schmidt on certain issues."   Of course, as an asserted anonymous leak, it's not high-quality information.  The objective component is the heavy influx of Republican Party campaign funds to Schmidt, which is consistent with a poll showing she's in trouble, but it's also consistent with the hypothesis that this is a special election with no other race competing for attention.  At this point, the poll doesn't seem to me to be worth including. JamesMLane 23:46, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Prediction

message: "Hackett's fellow Dems in the blogosphere got so desperate at the end of the campaign that they began to accuse her campaign manager of being a closet S&M freak."
:Agreed.  It was inserted at two places, then removed from one.  I've removed the other.  JamesMLane 23:49, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see it in the article anywhere right now.  If it resurfaces, you don't need to sound the alarm here.  Just click "Edit this page" on the article to call up the edit window, and delete it. JamesMLane 08:18, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  This quote does not represent neutral point of view 

message: This has been added as it is a standardised infobox included on almost all FA articles about a person. - Ta bu shi da yu 01:47, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: I've added a sentence, with reference, regarding the uproar she caused in the US House with her attack on Rep. Murtha. I believe it to be in the most relevant place, POV-Neutral and documented. (I wasn't logged in when I added it, but the 216.103.80.214 entry is mine). Snowhare
PedanticallySpeaking  edit of 15:01,
19 November 2005 is good, but it lacks footnotes/references that back the
additional information. The CNN article does not contain any of the retraction
information. I've added a reference for it. Snowhare 15:52, November 19, 2005 (UTC)
The expansion of material is far too much for the event.  One paragraph, as before, was sufficient.  This would be more appropriate for an article on Hunter's resolution rather than here.   And in the expansion, the redefinition of taking down words was made incorrect.  PedanticallySpeaking 17:39, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Corrected some errors in the section (e.g. it was a call, not a letter), narrowed the focus to Jean's actions and the immediate response, added a link to the video, added a picture, grouped her congressional sections together, etc. Rillian 19:40, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Iraq War / John Murtha

message: "They think I'm a hottie," she said. "Of course, I denied all of them..." 
:Does anyone else find this a little... unfortunate? I had to reread it because at first I thought she was denying she was a hottie, which of course wasn't the case... Which grown woman calls herself a hottie anyway?! - Ta bu shi da yu 07:48, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Jean Schmidt evidently doesn't have a grasp of who she is, and I say that taking into consideration Wikipedia's policy of assumming good faith to such a degree that it isn't even funny. Hopefully, she'll be defeated in the up coming election and the Congress will be cleansed of her evilness. Stude62 14:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

text: It's an interesting quote, I don't read the papers much so I didn't see it first hand.  However, if she said this it demonstrates more than anything that she has poor judgement.  The article should make it clear (if this is the case) she turned down the marriage proposals and offers for dates.  It's a weird statement for a person in Congress to make.  They are supposed to be elected for other reasons.  Have there been congressmen (or congresswomen) in the past who have made similar statements?  I doubt it.  I suppose in the end she is terribly embarassed by what she said and probably was trying to justify it by indicating approval from other sources.  Maybe she would understand, she made a mistake, and after the apology she would have been better off, when asked, to achknowledge it was a mistake or else give a no comment.  You have to wonder why she would want to state publicy "...they think I'm a hottie..."  LOL Mfields1 02:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Errr... 

message: The Plain Dealer reports on its website that Schmidt may not have earned a college degree she claims.  I am asking for confirmation from the University of Cincinnati and will note this in the biography when I find out more.  PedanticallySpeaking 16:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The story on WLW-AM's site is here.  I confirmed with the University of Cincinnati she did not earn the second degree listed in her official biography on her campaign web-site and which I had listed in the Wikipedia article.  I have accordingly deleted it here and noted the false claim in the article.  PedanticallySpeaking 16:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Questions About Degree

message: I have removed the NPOV tag and reverted the article to what it was before recent edits by 138.162.5.7. That reversion removes the NPOV tag. I have also made minor edits to the article because I agree that the wording could be improved to make it more NPOV.
I note the following:
* This was a wikipedia featured article; in this case, a lot of people spent a lot of time on it; to label the entire article as not NPOV (or to propose a debate on that issue) is potentially insulting to all those people, and to the wikipedia featured article process, which is designed to ensure NPOV for such articles.
* The changes that I reverted were made were to the top (summary) part of the article; the details, below, were unchanged.  If the article is truly not NPOV, those details should be the first place where changes are made.  (And if the problem with NPOV is limited to the top summary, don't tag the whole article.)
*One statement that was added -- "Democrats had predicted victory, but despite their loss ... " --- is FALSE.  I suspect the confusion comes from claims of "victory" afterwards because Schmidt won by only 3.5% points.  There is absolutely no support in the article for anyone predicting that Schmidt would lose to her Democratic opponent; saying that "Democrats had predicted victory" means they said, BEFORE the election, that Schmidt would lose.
*The article provides the following information: "The district was reliably Republican, the Cook Political Report calling the Second District the fifty-seventh most Republican in America. The district had been in Republican hands for all but nine years since 1879, and no Democrat had held the seat since Thomas A. Luken's narrow loss to Willis D. Gradison in 1974."  That doesn't make the district "overwhelmingly" Republican, perhaps, but the matter shouldn't be ignored by simply deleting "overwhelmingly".  So I changed it to "reliably" in the article.
If, after my changes, someone feels the article is still biased as a whole, please list the MANY things that make it so.  If it only has problems with a few sentences, then make reasonable edits and avoid characterizing the entire article as problematical.  John Broughton 22:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV tag 

message: I was pleasantly surprised by how NPOV this page is, considering the bias that I perceive in the articles for other Republican politicians.  But I do have one question: What is the point of the "Saturday Night Live" paragraph? It seems to me quite irrelevant and somewhat predjudicial. Kardreader 03:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since: no one has posted a response or objection to my note above, and, I see that another editor previously questioned the SNL paragraph, and, no source is cited for that paragraph, and, it seems to me irrelevant, un-encyclopedic, and somewhat predjudicial: I have removed the "Saturday Night Live" paragraph. Kardreader 05:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Saturday Night Live" 

message: I removed these from the reference section because they are not directly tied specific sources, some aren't linked, and this excessive list takes up a lot of room. See Wikipedia:Footnotes for proper referencing method. Arbusto 00:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References --Sept. 2006 

message: Some of this is awfully duplicative of what's in Ohio 2nd congressional district election, 2006.  Should we trim here and/or move stuff over there? -- Sholom 18:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move info to the election page 

message: The intro to the article states that Schmidt called Murtha a "coward" on the capitol floor. This is technically not true, as she did not directly call him a coward. Many people have interpreted (probably correctly) her statement as "calling Murtha a coward," but it violates NPOV for Wikipedia to state that. Just state the facts.209.247.23.129 01:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: I deleted a section, once title "Armenian issue", because it had been originally copied from a partisan website. If this lawsuit is significant we should be able to find mainstream reliable sources for it and we should write fresh text summarizing them.   Will Beback  talk   20:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armenian issue 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Jean Schmidt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060509223015/http://news.enquirer.com:80/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060428/NEWS01/604280402/1077 to http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060428/NEWS01/604280402/1077
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:35, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 19:39, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Jean Schmidt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120307193922/http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/03/jean-schmidt-loses-house-seat-in-major-gop-primary-upset.php to http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/03/jean-schmidt-loses-house-seat-in-major-gop-primary-upset.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061101211219/http://www.lcv.org/images/client/pdfs/LCV_2006_Scorecard_final.pdf to http://www.lcv.org/images/client/pdfs/LCV_2006_Scorecard_final.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060826013627/http://www.c-span.org/guide/congress/glossary/wordtake.htm to http://www.c-span.org/guide/congress/glossary/wordtake.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20060428%2FNEWS01%2F604280402%2F1077
*Added  tag to http://media.www.ssuchronicle.com/media/storage/paper1252/news/2009/10/14/Opinion/Jean-Schmidt.Must.Go-3804594.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100721/NEWS0108/7220343/Schmidt-creating-lawsuit-fund
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120405152514/http://www.citizensforethics.org/mostcorrupt/entry/Jean-Schmidt-report to http://www.citizensforethics.org/mostcorrupt/entry/Jean-Schmidt-report
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:38, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Jean Schmidt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110110051030/http://www.lovelandmagazine.com/2009/07/jean-schmidt-not-a-birther.html to http://www.lovelandmagazine.com/2009/07/jean-schmidt-not-a-birther.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120405152514/http://www.citizensforethics.org/mostcorrupt/entry/Jean-Schmidt-report to http://www.citizensforethics.org/mostcorrupt/entry/Jean-Schmidt-report
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:54, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Jean Schmidt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061110132310/http://borgman.enquirer.com/weekly/daily_html/2005/06/061605borgman.html to http://borgman.enquirer.com/weekly/daily_html/2005/06/061605borgman.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080810145701/http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/jean-schmidt/ to http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/jean-schmidt/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080614093741/http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/rep_jean_schmidt_the_ohio.php to http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/rep_jean_schmidt_the_ohio.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070822124822/http://www.cleveland.com/weblogs/openers/?%2Fmtlogs%2Fcleve_openers%2Farchives%2F2006_03.html to http://www.cleveland.com/weblogs/openers/?%2Fmtlogs%2Fcleve_openers%2Farchives%2F2006_03.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071126214508/http://www.cincinnatirighttolife.org/newsletters/april2005.pdf to http://www.cincinnatirighttolife.org/newsletters/april2005.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070906030502/http://www.ehealthconnection.com/regions/Cincinnati/content/show_facility.asp?facility_id=31 to http://www.ehealthconnection.com/regions/cincinnati/content/show_facility.asp?facility_id=31
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050608235324/http://www.jeanschmidt.com/ to http://jeanschmidt.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:21, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jean Schmidt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080227235516/http://www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/ElectionsVoter/results2006.aspx?Section=1849 to http://www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/ElectionsVoter/results2006.aspx?Section=1849
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:50, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians, 
As of this writing, our article shows Schmidt's middle name as being "Mary". However, I am having a hard time verifying that it is "Mary" as opposed to "Marie". 
This book, Encyclopedia of Women and American Politics by Lynne E. Ford, lists her as Jeannette Marie Hoffman Schmidt. Other sources that are not necessarily definitive list her similarly.
This House of Representatives page does not give any middle name. 
A Google search for "Jeannette Mary Schmidt" did not bring back a lot of promising results; Most of the results related to Congress were mirrors of WP. 
Any thoughts or observations on this from anyone? Thanks KConWiki (talk) 00:11, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Middle name - Mary vs. Marie