Specter promised to stop Bush picks

WorldNetDaily ^ | November 9, 2004 | Art Moore

[TommyDale]

Made vows to 2 Pennsylvania papers before election

In two newspaper interviews before the election, Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter promised to block pro-life and "extremist" judges appointed by President Bush, apparently contradicting claims he is making now amid fierce opposition to his becoming chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

[TommyDale]

I think his days are numbered now.

[Area51]

When this is all over with he'll truely appreciate the irony to his "Single Bullet" Theory.

[Principled]

Another poster opined that Specter will get the chairmanship after rules are changed so that any nominee with a majority of votes of Juiciary comte are guaranteed a full floor vote....

I think this is likely.

[blackie]

Bork Specter, now ~ Bump!

[Bluegrass Federalist]

Unless we have more than a one-vote majority, can't Specter still block them in committee by voting with the Rats?

[blackie]

Have you seen what the GOA says about him:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Contact Your Senators -- Ask them to oppose naming anti-gun Sen. Arlen Specter as Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 http://www.gunowners.org

Tuesday, November 9, 2004

You would have thought John Kerry had won an astounding Electoral College victory, rather than George W. Bush.

But, within 24 hours after the presidential results were in, there was the Senate Judiciary Committee heir-apparent, Pennsylvania liberal Republican Arlen Specter, warning Bush not to make conservative nominations to the U.S. Supreme court.

The “code words” used by Specter centered around abortion, but the message was clear: “No pro-gun conservatives need apply.”

Said Specter:

That is my view, now, before, and always. ... The president is well aware of what happened, when a bunch of his [conservative, pro-gun] nominees were sent up, with the filibuster... I would expect the president to be mindful of the considerations which I am mentioning...”

Yes, this is the same Specter who GOA opposed in the Pennsylvania Senate primary earlier this year, when he was being challenged by an A-rated congressman, Pat Toomey. (GOA was the ONLY national gun lobby to support Toomey.)

This is the same Specter who has opposed your gun rights over the last several years. To be sure, this is the Specter who:

* Cosponsored legislation in 1991 to make it a FELONY to possess any magazine that holds more than 15 rounds (S. 635).

* Voted FOR the crime bill (HR 3355) which contained the Clinton semi- auto ban in 1994.

* Voted FOR the Incumbent Protection Act in 2002 to prevent groups like the NRA and GOA from criticizing public officials in the electronic media up to 60 days before an election (HR 2356).

This is also the same Specter who voted AGAINST arming the nation’s pilots in September 2002. Amazingly, he was one of only SIX senators who voted against this bill. Even anti-gun Senators John Kerry and John Edwards voted right!

Specter has shown his true anti-gun colors over his career in the U.S. Senate, and now he is next in line to be the chairman of the all- powerful Judiciary Committee which controls judicial nominations -- not to mention gun control legislation.

The last thing we need is for pro-gun Supreme Court nominees to be blocked by a Republican Chairman.

But there is good news: There is no Senate rule which guarantees Specter the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee -- where he can block Bush’s nominees from even getting a Senate vote. The new chairman will be chosen, first, by a majority of the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and, then, by a majority of all Senate Republicans.

Thus, it is well within the rights of Senate Republicans to award the Judiciary Committee post to current-chairman Orrin Hatch, Iowa’s Chuck Grassley, Arizona’s Jon Kyl, or Alabama’s Jeff Sessions. Any of these men would presumably support Bush’s conservative pro-gun nominees, rather than opposing them.

ACTION: Contact your Republican senator(s). Ask him or her to vote against naming anti-gun Senator Arlen Specter as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Please visit the GOA Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm and look up your Senator(s) contact information. Just plug in your zip code under “Elected Officials,” and then use the pre-written message below to call, fax or email your Senator(s).

NOTE: Because committee chairmanships are effectively decided by the majority party, only Republican Senators need to receive this letter below. Newly elected Republican Senators are not yet included in the GOA Legislative Action Center, however, you can contact them using the following information:

FL -- Mel Martinez, fax: 407-897-8595 or 305-443-3611
GA -- Johnny Isakson, email: ga06@mail.house.gov
LA -- David Vitter, fax: 202-225-0739
NC -- Richard Burr, email: richard.burrnc05@mail.house.gov
OK -- Tom Coburn, fax: 918-294-8380 or 580-353-1978
SC -- Jim DeMint, fax: 202-226-1177
SD -- John Thune, fax: 605-221-1021 or email: info@johnthune.com

----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Senator:

Less than 24 hours after the presidential election, Arlen Specter was warning George Bush not to nominate pro-gun conservatives for the two to four anticipated slots expected to be available on the U.S. Supreme Court.

The last thing we need is for pro-gun Supreme Court nominees to be blocked by a Republican senator who votes like a Democrat.

Please do what you can to stop Arlen Specter from being named as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Sincerely,


--- You may unsubscribe from our mailing list at any time by visiting http://capwiz.com/gunowners/lmx/u/?jobid=47014173.

[Principled]

Yes - but we'll have more than a one vote majority by house rules IIRC

[Noachian]

Besides the abortion debacle Specter has gotten himself into he's also deeply in political debt to trial laywers including his son's firm.

I can't imagine him supporting any Judicial nominee who's in favor of tort reform which is high on Bush's agenda.

It looks like Specter's agenda includes blocking more than just anti-abortion judges.

[Tempest]

Remember you're an extremist if you have a different opinion than the MSGestapo. . . I mean MSM-edia.

[bayourod]

A promise to let every nominee get a full floor vote isn't much of a concession. Specter can still put a nominee through a living hell of unending witnesses making slanderous unfounded charges.

Specter can rig the committee process in favor of the feminists, environmentalist, homosexual etc.. organizations that can use the hearings to rally their members to put pressure on Senators to vote no while using the publicity to increase membership and raise contributions for use in other battles.

After weeks of headline electronic lynching Specter can send the nominee to the floor with a recommendation from the committee that he be rejected.

Specter is a weasel. A stupid weasel who shot his mouth off too soon, but still a weasel.

[Principled]

I agree with everything you've said - only that I think it's likely to turn out with him still there... sadly.

[sergeantdave]

Specter's statements are all over the map. I don't trust him. Reminds me of Kerry.

Give him a case of scotch and a ball of yarn and make him Chairman of kittens and sweaters.

[Logical me]

Specter should not be appointed head of any committee for maybe a year or two. He should prove himself a Conservative Republican, not a turncoat before we should trust him. Making foolish statements was dumb.

[Bommer]

I think his days are numbered now.

Oh please! We are talking about the Republ-I-Can'ts. They may have a majority but they are still testicleless!

[Bull Man]

Has anyone considered the possibility that this whole Specter hullabaloo is contrived to set him up as a more "reasonable" spokesman in the eyes of the MSM? In other words, establish him as an independent "moderate" voice, and then use him to sell the nominees? Too tin-hat?

[blackdog]

The extent to which politicians are now getting their feet held to the flames is something new to them. They used to just reboot on any position based on who was listening. Fortunately the checks and balances on what they say and do over time, mostly thanks to the internet, is hitting them square between the eyes like a two by four.

Any career politician has an awful lot to hide from. This phenomenon may itself become term limit legislation by default. There are only a handful of legislators who have a record they can stand on today. The rest are toast. James Inhoff is one and so is Orrin Hatch. Not perfect by any stretch, but quite principled and consistant.

[blackdog]

Kittens and sweaters.....Priceless! I thought he should head up a UN senate investigation taskforce on fraud. He'd get lost in that one for decades.

[GraniteState]

Do you notice how he keeps saying that he supported the President's nominees thus far? Well he could do that because he knew the Dems would block the controversial nominees. I do not trust anything he says and neither should the White House.

[Salvation]

Catechism of the Catholic Church and what it says about those who support abortion

What does this say about Senator Specter?

[Askel5]

=== I think his days are numbered now.

It's still a marriage of Convenience, if you ask me.

If Bush were poised to lose Pennsylvania anyway, what's the point of backing with vigor for the length of the election the guy who's publicly announced he's going to block Bush on the Right to Life?

Doesn't make sense, sorry.