Posted on 11/09/2004 11:21:20 AM PST by GeneralHavoc
Reagan-era Supreme Court nominee Judge Robert Bork blasted Sen. Arlen Specter yesterday as a "deceptive" liberal who won't fight for President Bush's judicial appointments if he becomes chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Specter was one of the few Republicans to oppose Bork's nomination in 1986 - an act that has become a central focus of complaints that the Pennsylvania liberal would likewise turn his back on Bush's picks for the court.
On Monday Sen. Specter told ABC radio host Sean Hannity that he was one of 58 senators who opposed Bork because he was "outside the constitutional continuum on what he had to say about original intent" and "did not believe in due process." Minutes after Specter's interview was over, Bork responded in an improptu call to Hannity's show.
"Specter is particularly deceptive," he fired back. "He votes in a very liberal fashion until he gets close to an election. And then he begins to vote in a conservative fashion."
Bork suggested that Specter's recent pledge not to apply a litmus test to pro-life nominees was influenced by the fact that he's "up for election, in a sense, for the chairmanship of the judiciary committee."
He warned that Specter would do the same thing to Bush's court nominees as he did to Bork 18 years ago.
"I think you can expect a vicious liberal opposition to any good appointments Bush might try to make, because [the courts are] the one stronghold the liberals still have," the Reagan appointee said. "And I think Specter will cooperate with them."
When Hannity noted that, in comments to him, Specter said he'd be "inclined to support" Clarence Thomas should Bush tap him to head the high court, Bork was skeptical.
"Well, that's interesting," he mused. "Because Clarence Thomas has exactly the same judicial philosophy as I do. I have said publicly that I thought Clarence Thomas would be a fine chief justice."
Beyond scuttling Bush's judicial appointments, Bork said Specter could cause trouble in other realms. He told Hannity that the Pennsylvania pol "was one of two Republican senators who voted to subject American servicemen to the International Criminal Court, under a treaty which we have refused to sign."
Asked if he would encourage the growing movement in Congress to head off Specter's ascension to his committee's chairmanship, Bork said, "Oh, yeah."
"I'm not doing anything," he added. "I'm not writing letters or taking any active part in that, but I certainly think the movement's a good one."
Bork said he'd rather see the Senate term limits relaxed so Sen. Orrin Hatch continue as chairman, or see Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona get the post.
Specter Borked!
The rumor in Utah news outlets is that Hatch is being considered for the AG spot replacing Ashcroft. If so, Former Utah governor Mike Leavitt (presently head of the EPA) is odds on favorite to replace Hatch in the Senate.
Let's skip Hatch and go straight to Kyl.
After taking SOROS money Specter should be run out of the Republican Party
imo
Specter is a snake. It has been proven over and over again.
Judge Bork should become more active in the campaign to unseat Specter from the Judiciary Committee. He's too nice a guy though, and wouldn't want to appear to be vengeful. Nevertheless, maybe he can finesse his connections, behind the scenes.
Too late, Orrin, Hillary already got your FBI files.
Orrin would not be a good DOJ head. We need a no-nonsense, tough conservative with a good background in law enforcement, not a WaPo-hugging politician.
Get some, Judge.
Spectre is a hack attorney/politician. For him to play "constitutional scholar" during his questioning of Bork, one of the most illumined legal minds of the century, was outrageous. Spectre sucks. If Bill Frist allows him to be appointed, any presidential aspirations Frist has will be up in smoke, for I and many others shall remember when it comes time to vote. And let's not forget Spectre helping out the murderer from Philly (the guy who put his dead girlfriend in the trunk) leave the country. I can't remember the guy's name off the top of my head - sure some PA Freepers will know who I am talking about . Joel something I believe.
Let me supply my own answer, how about Chris Cox?
I think this is an excellent idea. It only takes a majority vote of the GOP caucus. Extend the term limits 4 years. That gives Arlen the hope of being chairman the last 2 years of his term, if he plays ball, and doesn't constitute a slap in the face to Arlen if it applies across the board.
Payback's a B!TC#, and she's in heat again.
In the course of his infamous interview last week Specter complained that there were no "giants" on the current SCOTUS. He said he wanted to get justices of the intellectual stature of a Brandeis, a Frankfurter, or a Cardozo on the court.
Any conservative who knows his constitutional history will be alarmed by those names. They are indisputably ranked as great justices in American legal and academic circles. However, the talking heads who define opinion in American legal and academic circles are notoriously liberal. While these justices were undeniably brilliant and penned some of the most significant opinions in the history of American jurisprudence (Cardozo's opinions are arguably the most clear and beautifully written opinions of any American justice), they were all judicial activists and political progressives.
Perhaps alone among the current SCOTUS justices, Scalia demonstrates the same qualities of concision, clarity, and brilliance in his decisions as the progressive justices lauded by Specter, albeit as a conservative strict-constructionist. However, Specter detests Scalia and has said on more than one occasion that he would not support the appointment of any more justices like Scalia.
I agree with Rove. I believe Specter is a man of his word. He has said before he will stonewall Scalia-quality justices, and I fully believe him.
Bush is going to pay a dear price (and so will the American people) if he does not start lobbying Senate Republicans that Specter should not be considered.
WOW! That's Ted Kennedy/Barbara Streisand Liberal!
That is clever.
The religious right has been carrying water and "playing ball" for several decades, now, to hand control of the Senate, the House, and the presidency to the Republican party. An in-your-face betrayal of all that we thought we were working for would definitely cost the Republicans all three power bases within the next election or two. Demoralizing and de-energizing your base ain't good politics.
I didn't know Spector was pro-ICC. That's one more strike against him. He made me sick during Bubba's impeachment, when he couldn't seem to abide by the Constitution, preferring instead to dig up his "Scottish roots" to coyly vote Not Proven. No one who indulged in this sort of nonsense should be leading the Senate Judiciary Committee. (IMO he should not even be in the Senate, but that's another argument).
It can't hurt, and may well help keep Arlen Specter from the Chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee. Write Senator Frist to help make the courts more conservative!
http://frist.senate.gov/
Says it all!
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.