[ZULU]

What you are stating is true, BUT the Founders never intended that the Courts legislate from the bench, especially when the laws they generate are not in keeping with American history, tradition, or historic interpretation of the Constitution.

This Country is approaching a major crisis of moral identity, and our very survival in the form in which we have historically existed is dependent upon the compositon of the Courts.

Specter is a loose cannon, a far left-wing liberal with a track record of lying to his constituency and to others in public life.

His position in the Chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee will allow him to do inestimable harm to the President and to the nation. And he will fully avail himself of that opportunity. Even in the very act of attempting to explain away his indefensible comments, he equivocated.

This is not a purely partisan issue, its a survival issue. And Specter is our enemy.

[JohnnyZ]

His position in the Chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee will allow him to do inestimable harm to the President and to the nation.

It's not like Specter can be any worse than Orrin Hatch, the man who recommended Ruth Bader Ginsburg as a good Supreme Court choice.

[Cold Heat]

Oh, I certainly agree that Specter's socially liberal views are the issue, and I have sent my concerns via E-mail as have many others.

Specter weathered these assaults before, and unfortunately will again, in my view.

But, the redeeming thoughts on this are that he has been officially put on notice.

All that is required, is that nominees pass through the committee to the floor of the Senate.

If a appointment is made for a judge like Keyes,for example, I would not expect that Specter or many others would support the nomination, but I do expect he will support, albeit luke warmly, a nominee who has supported in writing a right to life issue as long as the man or woman is not an activist.

Frankly, I do not support activists of any persuasion on any court, and I suspect this is what Specter alluded to in his comments. Specter was positioning himself as a mediator.

Specter shot himself in the foot with those comments. He also has a poor history of understanding strict construction view points. He is one of those who believe the Constitution is a living document. But as a mediator, he may be of some value, and I believe this is what the Senate believes to be true.

I would much prefer he was not heading the committee. But Senate rules have put him in that post. The Senate will likely follow it's rules and not bow to pressure. I don't want a Senate that bows to pressure either.

It is a catch 22 and a half!