[Revolting cat!]

Such a bald head lie, as if Toomey would not have supported Bush’s choices!

[Jim from C-Town]

Toomy would not have been the head of the judiciary committee. Spector is not a trustworthy witness of any kind. That being said, the support for Spector, though asked by both Spector and GW Bush, was politically damaging and stupid for Santorum.

[BloodAngel]

Supporting and getting moderate democrats to cast their vote are two different things.....

[svxdave]

I remember this as it unfolded. Specter was head of the Judiciary Committee and there was concern that Bush’s judges couldn’t be approved. Like it or not, Spector was a key to getting those judges.

Whatever back room deals were made, those judges did get approved.

[TBP]

Specter isn’t exactly known as a truth-teller. Several sources have reported that Specter made this promise, not only to Santorum, but to the GOP leadership.

The difference was that Specter was chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

I still supported Toomey (and then Jim Clymer, the Constitution Party nominee against Specter), but I can understand why someone would want to make sure the Judiciary Committee chair was fighting for the President’s nominees. And he did fight hard for Clarence Thomas.

[Nifster]

Toomey (whom I supported) would have been a freshman and would not have been the head of the judiciary committee.....

[dangus]

>> Such a bald head lie, as if Toomey would not have supported Bush’s choices! <<

Santorum acknowledged that Toomey would have; he argued that Specter was ale to carry several Democrat and moderate Republican votes with him.

[HamiltonJay]

Now, I admit I am not a Santorum fan, for many reasons... But, am I going to take Spectre at his word either??