I defer to you oh wise one. I just don't agree with you.
Sometimes the path to success is not straight up the hill. You obviously want to go up the hill, I will call for the ambulance to stand by.
Posted on 11/05/2004 6:28:01 AM PST by Always Right
Specter Retreats: Specter denied yesterday that he threatened Bush on judge nominees. Don’t buy it. Specter knows that he got too arrogant and stepped into a hornets nest. Specter’s statement that, “I have never and would never apply any litmus test on the abortion issue,” just is not true. Specter has made it clear that he considers Roe v. Wade as Constitutional as the First Amendment. When the rubber hits the road, this is a litmus test for Specter. A few token votes to save his behind doesn’t change that a bit. Never forget what he did to Bork. In words and actions, Sen. Specter is no different than President NON-elect Kerry.
The BUZZ on this issue was outstanding. Discussions were all over talk radio, cable TV, and the internet. Several reports of phone calls flooding Senators offices were made. Reportedly, Sen. Frist grilled Sen. Specter on this and told him flatly that the Judiciary Chairmanship is not guaranteed. Folks, this is winnable. We can not let this issue die.
Today’s goal is to STRATEGIZE. Things we know:
1. Sen. Hatch must resign the Chairmanship because GOP rules forbid him to hold it for more than 8 years.
2. Sen. Grassley is next in line, but because he is Finance Chairman he is forbidded to have both.
3. Sen. Specter is next in line, followed by Sen. Kyl who would make an excellent Chairman.
4. Seniority on Committee gives priority, but it still must be voted on. We need to find out the when, what, where, and how behind this vote.
There is an effort to try to persuade Grassley to resign his Finance Chairmanship and take the Judiciary. I support this. It’s a clean way to resolve this without changing the rules or ruffling of too many feathers. But having Grassley give up the coveted Finance Chair is a big if.
Let’s keep in mind the real goal here too as we strategize. We want Bush to appoint good conservative judges who will not go along with the judicial activism that currently runs rabid in our courts. There are two obstacles to this.
1. Democrat Filibusters.
2. Specter as Chairman of Judiciary.
The next 60 will determine how big the obstacles will be. In my opinion, what happens over the next 60 days are the most critical. We need to establish a clean path so Bush’s appointed judges can get voted on the full floor of the Senate. We must keep up the pressure on our Senators. If we let it die now, nothing will be done and we will have lost the best opportunity of our lives to make a difference in our Courts.
There is a preliminary petition at that is being worked on here. Please review it. Pro-Life Petition to Block Sen. Arlen Specter.
Rehnquist will be a wash, O'Connor will be a gain, Stevens will be a gain. That gives Scalia 5 votes to work with. That has effects on Roe v. Wade, on issues involving separation of church and state, on criminal justice and the death penalty, on civil rights and reverse discrimination, and a host of other things near and dear to liberals hearts. They CANNOT let this happen, and the battle will commence with the first nominee. Every Rat special interest group will be going ballistic and DEMANDING that the Senators filibuster. There will be phony witnesses, a la Anita Hill, that will give dissenters something to hang their hats on. There will be daily, relentless pounding by the NYT and WaPO, CBSNBCABCCNN.
They may know it will hurt them in their races back home, but to go along with the end of their judicial power will be the end of all they have worked for since they began their deconstruction of American society in the 1930s. They will fight, and we cannot let them have some tools that will allow them to win. Advice and consent means 50 votes, not 60. We better understand what is at stake, and what the Rats will do before we waltz into 2005 all arrogant and confident.
Called Gregg and Sununu today.
Sure, keeping the heat on is terrific.
I could also be dead wrong on the outcome of this. I just do not believe that the caucus is gonna deny a chairmanship to a member of the caucus who is next in line to get that appointment.
Moreover, I think the worry is overblown. I think Frist and Specter will get the job done for the President. In fact, because they are deemed to be of suspicious nature, they may be more inclined to move nominations even faster to prove their loyalty and good faith.
As noted previously, Frist's presidential ambitions are on the line, as well. Specter has to deliver for Frist.
Scalia was confirmed 98-0 in September 1986. Many of the senators who voted for his confirmation will have to hold their noses and vote for his elevation to chief justice.
The point is to get this done with as little controversy as possible.
We can put Specter in charge of the henhouse, and we can keep the filibuster rule intact, but that imperils to a great extent, far more than our cities are imperiled by al qaeda, the approval of the President's nominees.
How we respond to this peril will demonstrate how serious we are in accomplishing our goals. We can continue with a "go along" attitude and HOPE that things turn out all right. Or we can spend our "political capital" and ENSURE that things will turn out all right. That decision right now is up to Frist, Senate Republicans and the President.
The President is a good strategerist, but sometimes he is too willing to avoid conflict. It cost him some accomplishments in the last obstructionist congress, even after he won back the Senate, and it cost him a lot of votes in the past election. He should have won going away, but he never went after Kerry like he should have. Anyway, characterize it how you like, but they have 2 choices and I would vote to ENSURE success.
Thanks for riding herd on this particular issue, AR.
Here is the email I just sent to Senator Inhofe:
Dear Senator,
We join our voices with the many others who are outraged at the thought of Arlen Specter being the chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
We will never forget the part he played in creating the verb now known as "borking." We will never forget how unreliable he was during the Clinton impeachment procedings. He is, in our view, just not reliable enough to count on being helpful in getting our mandated President's judge nominees through.
Please use whatever influence or power you have to prevent this from happening. We have been grateful constituents of yours for years. Please know that you have our support for any action you take in this regard.
Sincerely,
Mr and Mrs TEXOKIE
If someone can provide an email link to our new senator-elect Coburn, I'll email him too.
I defer to you oh wise one. I just don't agree with you.
Sometimes the path to success is not straight up the hill. You obviously want to go up the hill, I will call for the ambulance to stand by.
Arlen is squirming ~~~~~~~ Like the Worm that he is
Arlen is squirming ~~~~~~~ Like the Worm that he is
Specter is too much of a pompous idiot to squirm.
I understand your point of view. We'll just have to see how it plays out, I guess. I don't view what I want to do as charging up the hill, but as a prudent use of resources that have been put in the charge of the GOP for the next 2 years. To let Specter in the henhouse would be the risky charge into the unknown.
Let's remember to be glad that we are discussing the chairmanship of a larger majority in the Senate for a GOP president, and that we never have to hear the words "President Kerry".
Dump the Spector bum or my vote for GW is diminished by 33%. Judicial appointments are (almost) eternal and GW will do better, will learn from his dad who appointed duds like David Suter.
Well, maybe, maybe not. I think we have a real chance to succeed. However, even if we should fail, Specter will be forced to make so many promises to other Senators to get this Chairman position. Specter may not make good on those promises, but it will make it harder on him to stab so many of his colleagues in the back.
FRiends, I appreciate your efforts to moderate these discussions and provide some balancing perspective and information. Please understand that for me and for many others here, judicial appointments are the #1 issue. Everything else (war, economics, abortion, character, etc.) is secondary.
I have communicated already with my own senator (Frist) and with the office of every Republican senator presently on the judiciary committee (except for one whose phone just keeps ringing). I have calmly and respectfully asked them to consider preventing Sen. Specter from serving on the committee or at least to prevent him from becoming chair. I think it is vital that we all do this. He needs to sweat this out.
Nevertheless, at the end of the day, we need Specter in our caucus and we even need his floor votes on judicial nominees, cloture, etc. I don't want to anger or alienate him. I do want to scare him. I want him to know that for millions of voters all over the country, the chairmanship of the judiciary committee is a sacred trust.
I don't care if he wants to be independent-minded or whatever, as long as he truly ends up playing ball and not presenting ANY real obstacles to prompt confirmation of the President's nominees (including ammunition to the other side). I will understand and accept the political realities of the situation if Specter becomes the chairman. But if he even sneezes in the direction of any of the President's nominees, there will be hell to pay, and I do not mean only for Sen. Specter.
I am willing to trust Frist, Hatch, the President, and others if they can be convinced that Specter will truly deliver for us. But I am not willing to be duped and stalled again and again. It is time to get some real judges on the bench and now.
I should have said "the chairmanship of the judiciary committee is a sacred trust, not an entitlement or a procedural certainty."
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.