Dems and RINOs scraping the bottom of the dumpster again.
Okay, everyone. Close your eyes, calm your minds, and take a deep breath. Feel that? Try again. There it is. That faint, sweet tinge is the feeling of sheer p-a-n-i-c from the Left. They are on the ropes, and we're a single jab from a knockout.
At this point I think it's safe to say that the overturning of Roe v. Wade is now coming rather soon, and the Left knows it too. They can't get Bush out before 2009 no matter what they do. Once their "swing vote" is gone, that might be it for them.
After that, of course, it's not yet over. It will fall to the States, and some will undoubtedly vote to make it legal. Many of those states will be in the northeast, with a high percentage of Catholic populations and legislators.
I wonder which legislator will be the first to be excommunicated, and what the reaction of fellow Catholics will be.
Breathe deep. Feel the panic.
(Statement issued by Sen. Arlen Specter on Thursday, Nov. 18 [2004]. Specter's potential chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary committee is strongly opposed by conservatives, and he has spent the past week seeking the support of his Republican colleagues.)
I have not and would not use a litmus test to deny confirmation to pro-life nominees.I have voted to confirm Chief Justice Rehnquist after he voted against Roe v. Wade. Similarly, I have voted to confirm pro-life nominees Justice Scalia, Justice O'Connor, Justice Kennedy. And I led the successful fight to confirm Justice Thomas, which almost cost me my Senate seat in 1992.
I have assured the president that I would give his nominees quick committee hearings and early committee votes so floor action could be promptly scheduled.
I have voted for all of President Bush's judicial nominees in committee and on the floor. And I have no reason to believe that I'll be unable to support any individual President Bush finds worthy of nomination.
I believe I can help the president get his nominees approved, just as I did on confirmation of two controversial Pennsylvania circuit court nominees, when other similarly situated circuit nominees were being filibustered.
I have already registered my opposition to the Democrats' filibusters with 17 floor statements and will use my best efforts to stop any future filibusters.
It is my hope and expectation that we can avoid future filibusters and judicial gridlock with a 55-to-45 Republican majority and election results demonstrating voter dissatisfaction with Democratic filibusters.
If a rule change is necessary to avoid filibusters, there are relevant recent precedents to secure rule changes with 51 votes.
I intend to consult with my colleagues on the committee's legislative agenda, including tort reform, and will have balanced hearings with all viewpoints represented.
I have long objected to the tactic used in bottling up civil rights legislation in the Judiciary Committee when it should have gone to the floor for an up-or-down vote. Accordingly, I would not support committee action to bottle up legislation or a constitutional amendment, even one which I personally opposed, reserving my own position for the floor.
Specter doing the dirty work for the dems. Despicable.
Wonder if that pillar of rectitude, Chuckie Schumer, has Alito's credit report yet...
No, they don't! You must not have seen their unsigned editorials on the situation in France.
This whole idea of recusing oneself can be extended and extrapolated so that no judge could sit on any case anywhere...if taken to an extreme.
Vanguard gets nothing out of this. Only the creditors. So how does Alito having a Vanguard account have anything to do with the creditors?
These, on the surface, appear to be the actions of a defrauder, and the widow is attempting (if I understand correctly) to sidestep creditors and fraud on behalf of her husband.
Excuse me, the law is clear on these things. Stick a fork in it!