[Anti-Bubba182]

Hope Specter pays for what he did.

[Always Right]

Great article, lots of good information. Get Involved!

Priority 1: Remove Specter from Judiciary (Day 6)

Urgent!  Committee Assignments are being made THIS WEEK!  There are spots on the Judiciary Committee to be assigned.  Tell Sen. Frist and Sen Kyl we need Conservative members on the Judiciary and NO Arlen Specter!

Specter's in line for Chairman, but it can be Challenged!  It has happened in the past.  Moderate Lugar challenged the Great Jesse Helms for Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.  A Challenger will have to come forward with the GOP members of the Judicial Committee meet on November 17th!  We need to find a member with the Courage to Challenge.

[Quix]

I think we need to keep the pressure up and increase it.

I think we need to communicate persuasively with Kyl, Grassley and Graham.

Disabuse these characters that Specter can be trusted to wipe himself well.

His record and recent statements make VERY PLAIN that he's a vigorous enemy to our values and goals.

THX.

[ExSES]

Hope Specter pays for what he did.

Specter has long been a "RINO", if he is humiliated in his quest for the chairmanship, he will perform a "Jumpin' Jim" act and switch parties! He would really have little difference in his PA support base and he has six years before he faces re-election!!!

[iconoclast]

1) I fervently hope the article is right.

2) I'm not nuts about Hatch either.

When you're lookin' for tough, articulate, stand-up guys in the Republican Party, you're sortin thru thin pickins!

[Political Junkie Too]

Currently, there are 10 Republicans on the Judiciary Committee... Republican leadership hopes they can get 11 GOP members on the committee after reorganizing the Senate.

Why do they hope?

They have a 55-44-1 majority. If the committee structure represents the overall Senate breakdown, they should be demanding at least one more member, not hoping for one more member.

When will they start acting like a majority, and a majority with a mandate.

-PJ

[r9etb]

It's a real indictment of the American political process that so many people use a pro-abortion stance as the SOLE criterion by which to judge a judicial candidate.

It's obscene.

[diamond6]

bttt

[dead]

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), also on the committee, has gone on the record about the situation telling the New York Times, "The original comments attributed to Senator Specter were very unnerving…. His statement clarifying his position is reassuring, and I hope we will work our way through this."

Toughen up there, Lindsey.

You had some balls once. See if you can locate them long enough to vote against Specter.

[Texas Federalist]

for later

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

Hold your friends close.
Hold your enemies closer.

[TADSLOS]

Adios, backstabber.

[John Lenin]

I listened to Specter on Hannity and he basically telegraphed that he will stonewall W's picks for the bench. It will be a major embarrassment for the GOP if they put Arlen in charge.

[Happy2BMe]

Senator Specter has an Agenda — Liberal Judges

“President Bush ran forthrightly on a clear agenda for this nation’s future, and the nation responded by giving him a mandate.” – Remarks by Vice President Cheney introducing President Bush for his victory speech, Ronald Reagan Building, November 3, 2004.

President Bush’s margin of victory proves that we “have a narrowly divided country, and that’s not a traditional mandate…the number-one item on my agenda is to try to move the party to the center.” – Sen. Arlen Specter, November 3, 2004.

Senator Arlen Specter's shocking comments the day after President Bush's decisive re-election raise troubling concersn

• SIGN THE PETITION

  Specter denied the legitimacy of President Bush’s historic mandate.
  
  
• Specter announced a pro-abortion litmus test for the president’s judicial nominees. Specter claims that Roe v. Wade is “inviolate” and insists that “nobody can be confirmed today who does not agree with it.”
  
  
• Specter’s illegal litmus test would disqualify all constitutionalist nominees from serving on the Supreme Court of the United States and the lower federal courts.
  
  
• Specter’s illegal litmus test demands that all nominees violate the canons of judicial ethics by announcing or pledging how they will vote in a particular case.
  
  
• Specter will not promise to support the President’s nominees. Instead, he merely “hopes” that he can support them. The day after the election, when a reporter asked Specter if he would support the president’s nominees, the senator hesitated and equivocated: “I am hopeful that I’ll be able to do that. That obviously depends upon the president’s judicial nominees. I’m hopeful that I can support them.”
  
  
• Specter criticized President Bush’s first-term judicial nominees: “The nominees whom I supported in committee, I had reservations on.”
  
  
• Specter insulted Janice Rogers Brown, president Bush’s nominee to the important U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Specter referred to Brown, a distinguished conservative and the first African American woman to serve on the California Supreme Court, as “the woman judge out of California” who he had reservations about.
  
  
• Specter insulted the entire Supreme Court of the United States, including Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Scalia and Thomas. When a reporter asked Specter “Are you saying that there is not greatness” on the Supreme Court, Specter replied: “Yes. Can you take yes for an answer?”
  
  
• Specter’s comments reveal that, like Sen. Kerry and Sen. Daschle, Specter favors judges who follow politics and popular opinion, not the Constitution and the rule of law.
  
  
• Specter accused President Bush of ignoring the Senate’s advise and consent role: “The Constitution has a clause called advise and consent, the advise part is traditionally not paid a whole lot of attention to, I wouldn’t say quite ignored, but close to that.”
  
  
• Specter wants to encroach upon the president’s appointment power. Obstructionist Democrats filibustered ten of President Bush’s appeals court nominees. Now Specter wants the Senate to become MORE involved in judicial appointments: “My hope is that the Senate will be more involved in expressing our views.”

Specter's record over the last 20 years demonstrated a pattern of very troubling conduct on Judiciary Committee issues

• SIGN THE PETITION

  Specter fought against the distinguished Judge Robert H. Bork, betraying President Reagan and his fellow Republicans.
  
  
• Specter voted against Judge Bork on the judiciary committee, and against Bork’s confirmation on the Senate floor. By joining liberal Democratic senators and radical left-wing groups in their opposition to Judge Bork, Specter gave those groups aid and comfort, and was instrumental in Judge Bork’s defeat.
  
  
• Judge Bork warned Americans that Specter does not understand the Constitution and that Specter, along with Senate Democrats “professed horror at the thought that a judge must limit his rulings to the principles in the actual Constitution.”
  
  
• President Ronald Reagan called the left-wing assault against Judge Bork “an unprecedented political attack” on a Supreme Court nominee and “a tragedy for our country.” Specter rebuffed President Reagan’s plea to support Judge Bork.
  
  
• Specter helped defeat the nomination of conservative Jeff Sessions for a federal judgeship.
  
  
• Specter warned filibustered appeals court nominee William Pryor that just because he voted for him on the committee did not mean that he would vote on the Senate floor for his confirmation.
  
  
• The “National Review” exposed Specter as “The Worst Republican Senator” in a prominent September 1, 2003 cover story. According to “National Review,” Specter “is not a team player…is an abortion rights absolutist, a dogged advocate of racial preferences, a bitter foe of tax reform, a firm friend of the International Criminal Court.”
  
  
• Specter refuses to support the elevation of Justice Clarence Thomas to Chief Justice: “I’d have to think about that,” Specter equivocated. Ditto for Justice Antonin Scalia: “I’d have to think about that too.” Specter once slandered Justice Thomas as a “disappointment.”

The Chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee must be someone devoted to the Constitution as written and the rule of law

• SIGN THE PETITION

  The situation is urgent. Chief Justice Rehnquist is gravely ill. A Supreme Court vacancy is imminent.
  
  
• President Bush may be called upon to nominate a Supreme Court justice within the next several weeks.
  
  
• Court watchers predict as many as three Supreme Court vacancies during President Bush’s second term.
  
  
• President Bush will likely have a historic, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to return the Supreme Court to constitutionalist principles.
  
  
• The President needs as chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee a loyal, reliable, conservative partner who will shepherd his nominees through the confirmation process.
  
  
• Under intense political pressure, Specter tried to recant portions of his post-election statements the day after he uttered them. That means nothing. His 20-year record of party disloyalty and tormenting conservative nominees means everything.
  
  
• As chairman, Specter will act as a vexatious intermeddler, second-guessing President Bush’s Supreme Court and lower court nominations. This imperils the President’s legacy.
  
  
• Under the Senate’s seniority rules, Specter is slated to take over the Judiciary Committee, but under Senate rules and procedures, he can be stopped from becoming committee chairman.
  
  
• The window of opportunity to stop Specter is limited. Once he becomes chairman, it will be impossible to unseat him.

[TonyM]

I told Frist that he won't get another dollar from me if Specter gets the judician chair.

[InvisibleChurch]

thank you, AlGore, for the internet

[F16Fighter]

"Crumble"??

I was hoping Specter's campaign "shattered" into a million pieces.

RIP Arlen Specter.

[sport]

Bump

[lonestar]

Sen. John Cornyn better get decided and quick!