THIS IS ABOUT INTEGRITY. SPECTER MUST GO.
Posted on 11/08/2004 5:26:23 PM PST by mdittmar
Sen. Arlen Specter pledged on Monday not to oppose Supreme Court nominees just because they are anti-abortion as the moderate Republican fought to keep alive his bid to head the Senate panel that oversees judicial nominations.
"Absolutely not, and it's not just what I'm saying — I have done it. I have not applied a litmus test, and have voted to confirm pro-life judges," he said in a television interview.
But conservative critics kept calling for someone other than the Pennsylvania senator to be Judiciary Committee chairman in the newly elected Congress, and other Senate Republicans said little or nothing in Specter's defense.
Specter, who favors keeping abortion legal, is in line to replace the more conservative Sen. Orrin Hatch, Republican of Utah, as chairman based on seniority.
Peterson Jury Urged to Keep an Open Mind N.J. Governor Delivers Farewell Address Moderate Senator Fights for Top Judiciary Post He angered conservatives last week by saying he thought it unlikely the newly elected Senate — even with its Republican majority expanded to 55 — would confirm a Supreme Court nominee who wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark case legalizing abortion.
The question of who wields the gavel in the Judiciary Committee is crucial. President Bush may make several nominations to the Supreme Court during his second term because Chief Justice William Rehnquist is ailing and other judges are thought to be close to retirement.
The Senate is expected to pick a chairman next week. First, the Republican members of the committee must nominate the chairman by secret ballot. Then, according to party rules, another secret ballot vote is taken by all Senate Republicans.
If they reject the committee's recommendation, the matter is sent back to committee with instructions for it to nominate someone else.
We've got Specter where we want him, on the record as "not going to oppose Bush's nominees.
Not the time for bloodletting IMHO.
Ai carumba! Spector is a LIBERAL -- why can't we get the democrat media to tell it like it is? "Moderate" -- sheesh!
Moderate?
Never, never, never, Specter.
ModerateLeft of center Senator Fights for Top Judiciary Post
Much more accruate title!
THIS IS ABOUT INTEGRITY. SPECTER MUST GO.
It's long past the deadline for Senator Specter to come on over to the "dark side". A Republican imitating a Democrat is really not a wholesome spectacle anyway.
After hearing Karl Rove on two Sunday shows,
I am all for letting the WH handle Specter.
Progressive=Socialist
Moderate Republican=Socialist
A moderate what? A moderate liberal maybe.
First off, Arlen Specter is NOT a "moderate." That's the Leftist media carrying water for him.
Second, if given the choice between letting Specter screw us AGAIN and kicking him off the Judiciary Committee, I'll opt for the latter. I'll never forget or forgive his squandering of the Clinton impeachment.
So, in the final analysis, TO HELL WITH SPECTER.
No, we don't.
He is still in the Senate.
This is exactly why RINOs ought to be bumped off in primaries, senority being a huge liability in this case.
There's an old saying which goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
I'm not about to let Specter fool us twice. Specter's got to go. Anyone who leaves him in place to slither out of the spot he's in is a fool.
I noticed that too.
"Moderate" is not correct.
He's an Eastern lib, with darn few GOP stances.
Law and order is all I can cite.
you've got to be kidding....he's a liberal...he lies....what he says on record means diddly.
let him do a Jeffords or give him some bs chair.
W and Rove and Santorum only supported him cause they feared Toomey would lose.
Let's look ahead a bit. Specter is a louse, but he's our louse. We don't have a big enough majority to toss him and let him drag Snow, Chaffey, Hagle, Collins and the other "moderates". Specter has given a pledge to support the nominees of the WH. The President and Rove are willing to work with Specter so should we.
Which of the senators are RINO's? (Republican in name only)
besides McCain and Spechter?
I'm just not a political junkie so I am not up on all this.
You can't kick him out of the Senate and what if the 4 or 5 other moderates decide they don't like how Specter is treated?
We do not have enough power to go on a witch burning spree right now.
I wonder if they regret that stance yet?
Absolutley, we can't kick him out of the Senate and what if the 4 or 5 other moderates decide they don't like how Specter is treated? What if they then decide to make trouble?
We do not have enough power to go on a witch-burning spree right now.
We can't kick him out of the Senate and what if the 4 or 5 other moderates decide they don't like how Specter is treated? What if they then decide to make trouble?
We do not have enough power to go on a witch-burning spree right now.
Bingo!!!
With a heavy heart, I have to agree with you.
No. I don't buy it. There are two many ways a Chairman can drag his feet and screw things up without actively opposing a nominee we want.
Specter is not to be trusted and we would be fools to hand him a gavel.
Specter must be senile to even make such a stupid statement. I can't ever remember a nominee saying he wanted to overturn Roe.
What Specter really meant is that he would consider any nominee who is pro-life to be objectionable even if he has never expressed an opinion on Roe.
Arlie Sphincter isn't a *moderate* GOPer; Sphincter's a liberal-demokkkRAT in GOP duds.
Throw his stinking ass out!
Hi woody!
Glad you agree.
Now I know I'm right. :)
No, Specter lies and deceives. He cannot be trusted, or taken at his word. This is far too important to take a chance.
you don't know that...you fear that.
two different things.
i never said "kick him out" btw...
i said give him a bs chair or let him jump with jim.
I understand but forcing him out may be much worse for us.
We can't overplay our hand right now. We do not have enough power. Everyone is just feeling their oats over the great election. You watch, the moderates led by the Mc-He-gar troika will be out soon taking Specters side.
"We do not have enough power to go on a witch-burning spree right now."
Krauthammer on Brit's panel mentioned just this point tonight. He said it would look terrible for the party. IMHO we would look very intolerant. In other words, we'd be just like the Dems.
Did you hear Specter on Sean Hannity today?
Turned my stomach.
Get him out. NOW.
And what if he takes 3 or 4 others with him? Would that be worth it? NO!!!
Bush wanted him to win in PA, I think that is enough. He won, he is in there, I think bloodletting power plays right now will back fire on us.
I say that he should not be nominated or given the Senate Judiciary Committee chairmanship. I say that the be voted out of that spot, and if he wants to stomp his feet and pout and change over to the Democrat party, that would be just fine with me.
He can keep Jumpin' Jim Jeffords company. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Agreed, once we take his knife, he can't stab us in the back. I would be foolish to let him keep it.
it made me uncomfortable...a renegade senator is worse than a dem senator...more complicated.
sometimes W and Karl do things like CFR and Dope for the Elderly and the Education bill which make little sense to me....not to mention their pro-migra outlook.
W got zilch capital from the dope or education fundings...ditto the afican aids initiative.
W can whip the raghead savages I know and have faith there....God put him here for that first.
What he does with judicial appointments will outlive all but the youngest freepers and I see Scottish Law as standing in the way.
Yes! Looks very, very bad and Specter could really stick it to us if we do it.
Our chance was in the PA primary. We got beat. End of story.
We elected 4 new pub Senators, with a 55 to 44-1 majority we should have a four seat edge on the committee. This is what the dimwits had when they were in the same position. Let us see how this shakes itself out.
More "what ifs"?
how long have you been a conservative??
we try to go on facts and empirical observations around here.
W has loads of political capital as he declared last week.
I hope he uses it.
Where does overturning Roe v Wade rank in your laundry list?
Very high on mine.
Maybe the WH strategy is to stay out of Senate business and rely upon us conservative Bush supporters to block Specter.
The Committee chairman can smooth the way through confirmation or allow an unending string of witnesses to Bork a nominee with spurious unproven charges that are repeated every night on the news for weeks and used by the Democrats to rally support from their extremists party members.
Snowe, Chaffee...there's another I can't recall...
Given what you know about Specter, do you trust him to do the right thing?
Moderate???? Specter is so socialist he makes Kerry look conservative.
What you said. :-)
Pretty much anyone that voted to extend the AWB ban. Spectre voted 'NAY', but he gets 'religion' when it comes time for his reelection bid. Since the AWB vote for S1805 was in 2004, and he knew it was time to face his constituency again, he found religion and voted against the reauthorization of the ban.
Then join us in opposing Specter. If he gets the chairmanship there will be bloodletting every time he lets the Democrats torture a nominee for weeks before sending the name to the entire Senate with a recommendation not to confirm.
Knowing Specter's record, do you trust him to live up to his pledge?
I do not understand why President Bush spent so much of his political capital campaigning for Spector, but my hopes are that for the President's generous efforts that Spector will return the favor with great magnanimity.
If, however, republicans have the chance to make a bold decision as to the Chairman of the Judiciary, please let it be a very fine, upstanding conservative and not some finger in the wind moderate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.