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.
Leni
look at the post. they have given a viable strategy that could beat us... Why? because it happened before after newt had taken the house. Clinton demonized us.
I am more rabbid than most people here, but do not forget the game we play here, it is politics. So do we blow this amazing chance in 2 years or do we carefully twist the knife into the left over a period of 8 to 10 years. ROVES GOAL IS TO HAVE A DURABLE MAJORITY! not one we piss away by going nuts.
Just who are you going to alienate ? Anyone who runs as we are fighting the way they should is not going to be very reliable anyway.
I agree as well. With Rove making the talk show circuit on Sunday, we know where the White House is standing on this.
LOL...good for you.
Nobody gives Clinton the time of day now
Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island is a RINO. He consistently votes against Bush.
Democrats are asking him to jump in January like Jeffords did. He is up in 2006. Either a good Republican runs against him or electing a reasonable Democrat would be better than this weasel.
First you don't twist the knife if Arlen is holding it. He will stick in in our back again as he has many times before. 8 to 10 years ? THEY will twist the knive into us in 8 to 10 years. You don't have a DURABLE majority with the likes of Specter.
It was big enough to have a right to expect to get some things done.
If the Dems are successful at bemoaning that the "religious right" has taken over the Rep party and we help them by alienating the moderates, we may win a battle but we could lose the war. We will have midterms coming up in 2006 where we could loss seats if we now overreach.
We will need the moderates to vote WITH us to pass legislation since conservatives don't have a supermajority of their own.
If the Dems are successful at bemoaning that the "religious right" has taken over the Rep party and we help them by alienating the moderates, we may win a battle but we could lose the war. We will have midterms coming up in 2006 where we could loss seats if we now overreach.
We will need the moderates to vote WITH us to pass legislation since conservatives don't have a supermajority of their own.
I looked through the Senate rules quickly, and it appears there is no method to remove a chairman against his wishes. The section on this is here;
http://rules.senate.gov/senaterules/rule24.htm
I've dropped an email to the fine folks as the Thomas (congress) website asking if there is a section of the rules I've missed in regards to this, but I would suggest there is no mechanism for removing Specter's chairmanship for betraying us.
The Senate could then create new rules to cover this, even though that is unlikely, but this would almost certainly lead to a filibuster.
And just what legislation might that be ? I've been hearing that "big tent" BS for too many years. All it has done is shift BOTH parties to the left. You can't win the war if you loose the battle.
Oh, and can you answer my question #2?
Dude I agree, If we oust specter that can also serve as a lesson to the other Rinos just as well. My point is... Lets crush the dems till they are only cartoon charicters of themselves. But lets be cautious that we dont do the same to ourselves at the same time.
Specter has shown he can't stand up against the Dems, probably because he’s one of them. Also, has anybody considered the possibility that he is losing it? He’s over 70 and has exhibited rather poor judgment in the last few days, including hostility and aggressiveness towards his benefactor.
A winning strategy when dealing with Democrats and Rinos should never be accommodating or ingratiating. They are basically bullies. Like their kindred spirits, the Commies, they regard overtures of friendship as weakness and are contemptuous of it. They only respect power.
What does Specter bring to the table?
1. Past actions indicate he will block anyone who is a strict constructionist. His ambush of the finest legal mind to come before that committee in 50 years, Judge Bork, still stands as a towering blunder, but he is proud of it.
2. As chairman, he would be able to torpedo nominees behind the scenes in sneaky, devious ways the public would never hear about.
3. He has voted wrong on almost every issue, including taxes, defense, pork barrel spending, school choice, tort reform and parental notification, to name just a few.
4. Trial lawyers like him, Chuck Schumer likes him, George Soros likes him, and the mainstream media LOVES him.
5. He would subject our service personnel to the International Criminal Court.
6. With unerring instinct for doing the wrong thing, he secured the release of a brutal murderer, who then fled to France.
7. He is a backstabbing RINO who lies almost as well as Clinton, whose picture hangs in Specter's office. Only the gullible would trust him.
8. IMO, the most obvious argument against giving him the chairmanship is that we need a STRONG OBJECT LESSON to other RINOs. In order to get the mule’s attention you have to first hit him over the head with a two-by-four.
http://stopspecter.savethegop.com/
http://notspecter.com/
And he didn't do that one very well. Remember Ira Einhorn ?
okay forget what I said....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1274994/posts
Good thinking. They lost the election so we should just let the worst RINO -- really a Democrat -- run one of the most important committees in the Senate and let him do damage to our cause. Are you serious?
LOL! You're exactly right -- I saw the title and wondered, "Who's getting into the act now?"
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.