Posted on 11/12/2004 11:22:21 AM PST by ImpeachActivistJudges
Specter: It was not a warning but a statement of political fact that since the Democrats have filibustered so much in the past that that could be a problem in the future. With respect to my own position with respect to pro life nominees I have made it plain over the years that I have no litmus test and I back that up by voting for pro life nominees. When Chief Justice Rhenquist came up for confirmation in 1986 he had already voted against Roe vs Wade in 1973 but I voted to confirm him. I voted to confirm Justice Scalia and Justice O'Connor and Justice Kennedy and you may remember I led the fight to confirm Justice Clarence Thomas that almost cost me my seat in the US Senate. So my record is obvious and I have no litmus test and I have never blocked someone who is a pro life nominee.
Interviewer ~Would you vote to confirm Justices in the mold of Thomas and Scalia?
Specter: Well I voted to confirm Justice Thomas and Justice Scalia, so the answer is obviously yes.
Interviewer: Bork?
Specter: Well Judge Bork had a very different judicial philosophy. He articulated a view of original intent and I thought that was not a part of the judicial continuuum. Let me be very specific. When the equal protection clause was adopted by the US Senate in 1868, the senate galleries were segregated. Now that was the intent of the Senators who voted for the equal protection clause. We certainly couldn't have segregation today.
Judge Bork did not believe that the equal protection clause applied to women and we have seen equal protection applied. He did not believe in "substantive due process". I met with Judge Bork for more than 5 hours one on one in my office and I questioned him at length. Listen he was defeated by the biggest majority in history 58-42 and there were many Republicans that voted against him. It wasn't just Arlen Specter.
Interviewer: What are other senators saying to you?
Specter: Well I have been talking to my colleagues but I think it is a bad idea to talk about what they have said. Each one of the senators should speak for himself and some of them already have. Sen. Judd Gregg cane out in support of my nomination. Sen. John Cornyn said that when I say publically for the record what he and I have discussed that would be satisfactory.
Interviewer: White House?
Specter: Well I know that Carl Rove has said pubically that the President is satisfied with my assurance that there will be very prompt hearings and that they will be voted out of committee to go to the floor for an up or down vote. And Carl Rove said Arlen Specter is a man of his word and we take Arlen Specter at his word. Nobody has ever doubted my integrity.
Interviewer: ~ You said ther is an urgent need for balance in America.
Specter: I think that it is factual. I do not believe that any one group can take credit for the election of President Bush; it was a combination of many many factions within the party and certainly the religious groups were very instrumental. The President could not have wonthe election without them. But there were others that contributed as well. You have about 50% of the Republican party that are pro choice. What we really have is the pro choice Republicans not being very vocal. I believe that it is a basic fact of life that the Republican party has to have balance. We can't be a regional party of the South and West if we are to be a national party and there are many independents and many Democrats who look to see what is happening with the Republican moderates. It is very important for our party. I think that it is a fact.
Sen. Specter did support Justice Thomas; however, that was because he was up for reelection and he always moves to the right before the election. This time Sen. Specter will not be running for reelection and there will be nothing holding him back from voting his own liberal views.
Sen. Specter continues to equate original intent with racism. He does not think the original intent is a judical philosophy within the "judicial continuum". He supports "substantive due process" under which unelected judges impose their personal policy preferences on us and call it a "procedural decision".
Sen. Specter seems to think that 50% of the Republican party is "pro choice" and is asking them to raise their voice. Perhaps he wants the pro choice Democrats to call in for him just as he asked union members to switch parties for the primary and then switch back for the election.
Carl Rove also said "if Arlen Specter is elected" implying that he might not be. He didn't offer much support for Sen. Specter.
The President needs someone to chair Judiciary who supports his nominees. Arlen Specter is clearly not the man for the job.
Sen. Jon Kyl will support the President's nominees and is next in line for the chair after Specter. Judiciary Committee members are not required to vote based upon seniority. This situation calls for passing over Specter.
Call the members of the Judiciary Committee and your senators and ask then to oppose Specter and support Kyl.
Let Sen. Gregg know what you think of his support for Sen. Specter.
Bork specter!
Snarlin' Arlen is a lying RINO schmuck. JFK death lies. Bork lies. Scottish law lies. He can never be trusted to tell the truth.
He doesn't get out much, does he? Isn't this the very core of the objections to him?
So Specter is saying as Chairman he would be a puppet and just let the Dem play him?
I'm glad he points out to US how unqualified he is.
Now it is being portrayed as a Christian right fanatics movement and attitudes are hardening. Specter will be chairman thinks to Dobson.
He articulated a view of original intent and I thought that was not a part of the judicial continuuum.
By all means get rid of "original intent" and declare the U.S. something other than what the founders envisioned. That is the liberal view and that is Specter's view. We should be intent on ridding the judicial committee of Specter who is a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Bork the Specter!
Specter is trying a charm offensive and the MSM lackies (those in fox too) are working double time to save him.
Specter serves at the pleasure of the people NOT the MSM illterati.
The White HOuse PUBICALLY said that? What IS going on there? Is Clinton back?
So Spectre's saying he was advising the President to surrender to the fillibuster?
Huh?
He's a scumbag
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.