"Then you will remember your evil ways and your deeds that were not good, and you will loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and your abominations."
Ezekiel 36:31
Posted on 11/13/2006 4:26:15 PM PST by wagglebee
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Now that the elections have given them control of the Senate, leading Democrats on judicial issues have a message for President Bush. They don't want him to send up for confirmation any judges who would be hostile to legalized abortion or they plan vote down or filibuster them.
Democrats now have 51 votes in the Senate and will likely have a slim one vote majority on the Senate Judiciary Committee when Congress starts its new session in January.
Though they technically have enough votes on the panel and in the Senate to defeat any Bush judicial pick, they may still have a tough time keeping their caucus together as some moderate Democrats joined a group of Republicans in making sure filibusters weren't used to hold up nominees.
But leading pro-abortion Democrats tell Bush he needs to pick someone without a record opposed to abortion in order to get judges -- especially for the Supreme Court -- confirmed in their Senate.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, told Newsday that Bush should nominate only "consensus" nominees.
Sen. Charles Schumer, of New York, was more strident and vowed to block any nominee he feels is too extreme on abortion.
"We will do everything in our power to see that that happens," he told Newsday, saying filibusters should be expected. He added that Bush "will have to negotiate with us, because we'll have the majority."
There are no current Supreme Court openings, but pro-abortion Justice John Paul Stevens, who was the subject of retirement speculations shortly before the elections, is 86 years-old and battling significant health problems.
Ruth Bader Ginsberg, another abortion advocate is 73 years-old and has her own health concerns.
Had the GOP kept control of the Senate, the liberal judges may have waited to retire, but they could step down feeling that the chances they would be replaced by a less conservative judge are higher with Democrats heading up the chamber.
How Bush reacts to Democratic control may be seen in whether he chooses to re-nominate six conservative appeals court judges who have yet to be confirmed.
Should a Supreme Court opening develop closer to the 2008 presidential elections, that may put more pressure on Senate Democrats to hold off on confirming a replacement until afterwards.
I can. Any other time in history, I would agree. But not now, not with radical islam spreading like a plague. Innocent American lives that will be lost in terrorist attacks are not worth a protest vote. That is the epitome of insanity.
Ping
So much for the pro-life blue-dog democrats.
The nuclear option would make no difference in the new Senate.
Democrats are the majority.
"Many Democrat "Catholics" don't object to abortion either."
They are Hell-bound apostates.
They are owned by the left. Robots. And they will do what they are told.
All the more reason to pray fervently for President Bush. God is greater than the democrat party.
No. Recess appointments aren't permanent.
Great post, SaltyJoe!
It is time ALL Christians stand up, and start speaking the TRUTH!
I know exactly what you mean. I was just being sarcastic to prove my point.
For Bush study I Samuel 29 & 30. Look at I Sam 30:5 especially.
I Samuel 30: 5?? That doesn't seem like the verse you meant..... Can you check again?
"Then you will remember your evil ways and your deeds that were not good, and you will loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and your abominations."
Ezekiel 36:31
Verse 6 I'm sorry.
President Bush doesn't have to send anyone up if he thinks they will just be rejected so I guess the seats will stay vacant.
This is exactly the path the President needs to take. He would win this hands down. If the Dems were against judge after judge after judge, with the Pres, and all the Pubs on TV night after night, doing pressers on the steps of congress, the Dems would cause such a impression of extremism, it would be bad on them, real bad.
The Pubs should call them extreme and give the personal stories of those like Janice Rogers Brown on TV, over and over, asking "what's wrong with this accomplished black woman?"
This would put the Dems in such a bad light with the American people that they wouldn't be able to investigate anything about the war without looking like they're extreme again. "Out to get the president".
Congress could very well go back to the Pubs again in two years, just on this issue alone, if the Pubs and the President are in unison and unrelenting.
It would work.
We'd still have our majority.
The good news is that Harry REid claims he is pro-life. If he blocks judges based on abortion, we can use that to convince Nevadans he is too liberal and take him out in 2010.
I hope the foolish conservatives who stayed home to "punish" the GOP will have learned not to say home at the next election.
Yes.......the Democrats are bitter in spirit, for sure, and President Bush must find his strength in the LORD his God.
This is the most critical issue of the day, Darth........perhaps in the history of the country. We have GOT to keep praying every moment of every day for God's leading!
(I know you know that!)
Amen! We would, because we would have had LEADERSHIP from the Republicans.
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.