Posted on 02/04/2005 2:22:09 PM PST by cpforlife.org
CHICAGO - Pro-lifers here have been engrossed in a book issued two weeks ago by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich which may point to a solution to woes social conservatives have with the federal judiciary. Gingrich was a dependable pro-life vote when he served in Congress, but never exactly a champion of the movement. Yet in his book Winning the Future (Regnery, Washington, D.C., 2005), he outlines probably a last-ditch, nuclear strategy that can restore the balance between Congress and the judiciary that the founders intended.
The book is ostensibly tied to his possible run for president in 2008: That he entertains even the slightest hint of running for president involves a great deal of chutzpah. Given his track record as speaker, there is little doubt that, brilliant as he is, a President Gingrich would be the same disaster he was as speaker.
He is unsurpassed when it comes to molding issues to fit a strategy, but he cannot stand political prosperity. After victory he messes up by applying arrogance and disdain to his followers. In the early 1980s he designed a battle plan to win a Republican majority in the House that will forever be a model for those seeking victory.
Once he became speaker, however, he kept key allies in the dark on his quick changes of mind in mid-legislative battle; boldly sought to tame President Clinton by shutting down the government, then lost his nerve; allowed his personal goals to overshadow the , speakership; ran the risk of ethics censure from a lucrative book and: teaching deal; permitted his noisy objection over not getting a preferential seat on Clinton's plane to distract from news coverage of his program.
These things and his being married three times, the latest to an ex-staffer with whom he conducted a tumultuous affair which erupted during the Clinton impeachment, revealed his weaknesses. With ex-allies turning against him, he resigned his seat for a lucrative sinecure as a lecturer and TV commentator.
But Gingrich's failings as a leader do not subtract from his brilliant conceptual grasp of politics. Despite his manifold errors, he built a majority that survived him, having achieved the rust tax cut in 16 years, welfare reform (reducing those on welfare by 60%), the first four balanced budgets since the 1920s, the first financial audit of the House in history and term limits for committee chairmen.
More than anyone else, Gingrich resembles Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton was a renaissance man: excellent scholar, soldier, cunning lawyer, self-taught economics wizard, rhetorical genius. While he reported to George Washington, a man of superb judgment and common sense, Hamilton had no peer. Relying on his own judgment, he soon allowed bitterness and quarrels to defeat him. A sexual scandal caused him to retreat to the backroom.
Similarly, when Gingrich had Dick Armey (R., Texas) and Bill Paxton (R., N.Y.) to test his ideas on, he followed a prudent course. Once elected speaker he relied upon no one but himself and went bottoms up. So the good that comes from Gingrich stems from his ideas, not from him in the role of presidential candidate. Two vitally important chapters in the book are "The Centrality of Our Creator in Defining America" and "Bringing the Courts Back 'Under the Constitution". He does not elucidate on pro-life as such, but draws an eloquent battle plan for taming the federal judiciary.
As pro-lifers know, article IlI, section 1 of the Constitution gives members of the Supreme Court lifetime tenure during what it stipulates as "good behavior." Also, Congress has the power to withdraw certain legal subject matters from Supreme Court review, in section 2, subsection 2 which reads: "In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction both as to law and fact" - and here is the key phrase -- "with such exceptions and under such regulations as the Congress shall make."
The power given Congress over the courts is outlined in The Federalist, nn. 80 and 81, written by Hamilton. And it has been used before: by liberals with the Norris-LaGuardia Act in the 1930s and by conservatives in 1996 with the Anti-Terrorism and Death Penalty Act, limiting the Supreme Court's power to review death penalty cases involving terrorists.
A scant majority in the past has kept Republicans from doing it with respect to abortion. Gingrich attests that the time may well be at hand to utilize it on behalf of the; Creator, citing the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that the phrase in the Pledge of Allegiance "one nation under God" is unconstitutional. A possible Supreme Court agreement by a 5 to 4 vote endangers our Judeo-Christian heritage, he says, as indeed it does.
The wonder of it all is that Gingrich, a truly revolutionary thinker, has not prescribed the tactic for pro-life: but he has not. One reason may be that in his philosophy he is heavily libertarian. Now with the subject of the Creator he has come aboard.
The National Anvil
Gingrich's proposal is as simple as it is radical. Congress passes a bill which the president signs into law that describes the legitimacy of "our Creator" in undergirding American rights. If the court finds the legislation is unconstitutional, Congress finds those justices who so believe as falling short of "good behavior," the constitutional requirement for judges. You can imagine the liberal insurrection that will occur when the Congress does this.
Will we be antagonized unendingly by impeachment trials? There's a quick way which is as old as the public purse. Congress should simply eliminate the judgeships and thereby cut their pay. "Thus," he summarizes, "much of the 9th circuit could find themselves without a court to serve on." That is the brilliant Gingrich who has become a priceless national resource.
For many of us, Gingrich (Ph.D. history - Tulane) has an overabundance of imperfection – but it is in idea implementation, not with the ideas themselves. In the coming years he will serve as an excellent hammer with which to pound out ideas on the national anvil. The sparks from that forge should serve the nation well.
>>
OK.
Shnitzs
I retract the insult to you.
Jeepers, Tarp, give it a rest. I'm sure the Admin Mods are perfectly capable of defending their own honor, if they feel it needed. If you're not careful, you'll come down with a critical case of umbrage.
Why don't you just comment on the subject of the thread: Gingrich's ideas vis-a-vis the Federal Judiciary?
Newt Gingrich ping.
Alright Tarp,
I’m back and will waste a few minutes on you defending myself against your unwarranted and vicious attacks:
By post 7 it was over. Jim and I had exchanged very nice freepmails and all was fine. Jim was good, the mods were good and I was good. Then you JUST had to butt into business that was/is of no concern to you. You’ve been here since November and have badgered me like this before. Now with this thread I hope it will end—permanently.
I run 5 Christian Pro-Life websites. I’m adding two more CPC websites to that within weeks and look at a lot of screens.
When I first saw the changed title I opened a second window, went to the thread and refreshed. It was there in its shortened version. I closed all windows logged off the net, ran window washer came back and it was still there.
THEN I PINGED Jim and the Mods.
As I had just scanned the article using OCR Optical Character Recognition to save typing time, I had it there and quickly scanned it as an image, posted it to show, for the record the official title.
I NEVER EVEN IMPLIED THAT ANYONE WAS LYING. And I don’t think anyone was.
I just “upgraded” to Win XP Pro Media Edition 10 days ago and the system has crashed a few times. Maybe the browser was spazzzing out. I can’t explain it and it didn’t matter, cause it was over, untill.........
But you tarp, post for the entire world to read, that in your words, I am a “liar” and a “charlatan”. You make the claim that I somehow did this for a “publicity stunt”? Hillarious. You are dead wrong and have no basis to make such vicious attacks.
You spit fork-tongued compliments at me like "Your motives are great, but you methods are not."
Should I take you at your word that you are even Pro-Life? You all but ruined this thread, distracting from it’s substance with this rubbish. On several threads I have pinged you to you just berate me for no reason. You asked to be on my list and that was fine. Not anymore.
I deal with abortionists who kill kids for money. I deal with clergy who lie to my face that they are doing all they can to fight abortion. I deal with "Christian" parents who drive their daughters to abortion mills to kill their grandchildren.
LOL--And you assume to think you're criticisms of what and how I post actually matter. Get a life lady, please.
You say "Your motives are great, but you methods are not." I don't care what you think. I guess you are just more penance for me. You are but a very tiny fraction of the little thorn in my baby toe.
Look around lady. You are the only one badgering me about a point that was over when you started. You are a busy body who has to butt in to matters not yours, which were fixed long before you arrive.
If you are Pro-Life you sure don’t know how to work on a team. You certainly present that way on this thread.
Since you are new YOU have to prove yourself. IMO--As of now you’re failing—badly.
I think the best thing at this point is for you and I to NEVER POST TO ONE ANOTHER-—EVER AGAIN.
As I suspect you must, please take the last word and in the name of all that which is good please just say OK. And let it end there.
LOL--If you do, in fact end it there you can have that last word, and all will again be at peace in Freeperville.
BTTT!
bttt
Yet the mod says that the title was never changed.
Post the freepmail. Prove it.
I haven't heard anything about We the People Act (HR 3893.) What can we do to assure it is passed it into law?
Denny Crane: "There are two places to find the truth. First God and then Fox News."
Tarp-
Get over it!
Begone...
Gingrich should be the head of the RNC---FOR..EV..ER!!...
Reestablish, yes. That would be neat.
First, welcome to FR.
"I haven't heard anything about We the People Act (HR 3893.) What can we do to assure it is passed it into law?"
A few important things will be required.
1. We must contact our US Reps and the President, and tell them we are in support of it and want them to sign on.
2. Tell as many friends and family to do # 1.
3. Read and understand what it is and be able to explain in basic terms what it is.
4. Promote it everywhere: On-line, at churches, Pro-Life groups, PTA, wherever we can and tell people to do # 1.
Buzz off, sh!tfly. You've shown yourself to be nothing but an agitprop.
Troll!
Troll: someone who trusts the moderator over cpforlife.org.
Thanks!
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.