Specter Blames Both Parties for Impasse

AP on Yahoo ^ | 2/24/05 | Jesse J. Holland - AP

[NormsRevenge]

U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., gestures during a news conference on Capitol Hill Thursday, Feb. 24, 2005 on his chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee (news - web sites). (AP Photo/Dennis Cook)

[Darkwolf377]

What a wuss.

[sauropod]

"Caption this pic."

[NormsRevenge]

Thank FRist. ;-)

[OldFriend]

If I am not mistaken, FRist is out of town AGAIN.

He's turning into another Edwards. Think's his presidential aspirations supercede his senate responsibilities.

[You Dirty Rats]

Bush can solve the problem by consulting with both sides before making a nomination, he said. "You need to bring the country together on this nomination if you possibly can," Specter said. But that is Bush's call, Specter said. "Taking advice is not too hard as long as you get to make the final decision," Specter said. "And the Constitution doesn't say the president should do more than take advice."

It appears that Specter is taking the Schumer claim that "advice and consent" means that the President should ask for advice BEFORE making a nomination. The process has never worked that was in the past and it is ridiculous to think that after 200 years the process should change now.

Then again, with Specter you don't know what to believe from day-to-day.

And as far as "blowing up relations in the Senate" if the nucular option is employed, how would that be any different than what we have now? Not much collegiality going on there lately that I can see!

[TheGeezer]

Why did the Republicans allow this cryptoDemocRat to chair the Judiciary committee? They allow this schmuck to confuse the real reason the nominees are blocked: reactionary DemocRats! SHEEESH!

[gulfcoast6]

Spector is a mistake, a big mistake.

[Aetius]

I'll be interested to see is Specter repays to Senator Santorum the same loyalty and support that Santorum showed to him during the primary that he came close to losing last year, when Santorum runs next year for reelection.

[BillF]

FYI.

[gulfcoast6]

I sure would not count on it.

[sport]

I can understand Spectre's train of thought.

If the Republicans would only give in to the Democrats, there would be no impasse.

Well, you don't always get what you want but you always get what you deserve.

[Fledermaus]

More proof Republicans cannot govern, have no business in power and are cowards.

If they aren't going to use the power of the majority (as the Dems did for decades) then why bother?

[GreenHornet]

Actually, I have to agree with Specter on this one.

The Democrats are to blame for their obstructionist tactics. The Republicans are to blame for letting them get away with it.

[smokeyb]

Thank FRist. ;-)

Don't forget to thank Bush and Santorum first.

[Digger]

More proof that Washington does not have a division when it comes to the very important issues. When the American people have to fight the elites in this "TWO-PARTY CARTEL" the people always lose. You see the elites would make sure that these pols never got re-elected but the sheeple keep re-electing these idiots at a 98% rate.

[Fledermaus]

It's no better in the states either. The GOP here in Tenn last election took over the state senate and voted back in the old, Dem good 'ol boy network to keep running things.

Sickening.

[Bogolyubski]

You nailed it. Exactly why we can all look forward to President Hillary Clinton in four years. There was a major outcry against this useless socialist piece of garbage taking the chair of the Senate judiciary among rank and file Republicans after his brazen admission last November that as chairman he would see to it there were no pro-life judges seated on the Supreme Court.

Did Bush, flim-flam-Frist, and the other leadership pay attention? Absolutely not! Specter makes an empty promise to behave himself and promptly hires two Demo-Marxist lawyers as the JC staff attorneys.

This is part of a clever strategy by the Rockefeller Republicans running the show to keep leftists (whose agenda they share) in control of the judicial branch. While most pols like Frist would never dare to support some abomination like gay marriage publicly, they can conveniently arrange to keep the courts packed with leftist ideologues who will impose the agenda by judicial fiat. Most of the voters are way too ill-informed to understand he shell-game. When the pols run again for their political fiefdoms, they can then posture themselves as pro-life, as social conservatives, etc. and blame the out-of-control judges that they are heroically trying to reign in. Not a dime's wort of difference!

[gogeo]

One of Lyndon Johnson's favorite sayings was, "I'd rather have him inside the tent pi$$ing out than outside the tent pi$$ing in."

[Soul Seeker]

Sure.

We're the ones preventing good justices from a constitutional vote because they will follow the constitution and, oh, they are pro-life or Christian or both. Let us not even get into those memos from the Dems about objections of minorities to the court....