Priority 1: Remove Specter from the Judciary (Day 2)

11-4-04 | Always Right

[Always Right]

In Day One we established the need to remove Specter from the Judiciary. To sum it up:

1. Specter is in line to become Chairman of the Judiciary.
2. Specter yesterday showed he expects to obstruct Bush in nominating conservative judges.
3. Specter’s vision of a ‘balance court’ is the exact same rhetoric of Senator Kerry.
4. Specter will do whatever it takes to see the courts do not become conservative. Read his books.
5. Specter is a huge proponent of Rov v. Wade.
6. Specter was not elected President, but has threatened the President should he nominate conservative judges.
7. As Chairman, Specter has the power to kill Bush’s judicial nominations.

Now in Day 2, we must take action. Today’s goal is to create some BUZZ. We need to contact the conservative media, like Rush and Hannity and other radio talk shows. Contact FoxNews, Brit Hume, Tony Snow. Here’s an example:

Senator Specter’s remarks yesterday concerning Bush’s judicial appointments were disturbing. If nothing is done, Senator Specter is in line to be Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. We need a Chairman who supports our President and his judicial nominations in that position, not someone who is on record as wanting to obstruct the President’s judical appointments. This is a very critical position, and allowing Specter to become chairman would be no different than appointing Senator Kennedy. Specter’s vision of the court is 180 degrees off of President Bush’s. President Bush will have a difficult time enough getting appointments through, but it would be an insult if the biggest obstruction is getting past one liberal GOP Senator, especially one who Bush helped.

Also, provide them with links to yesterdays’s story, Specter warns Bush on high court nominations or the same story posted here on FreeRepublic, Specter warns Bush on high court nominations

We must not allow this back-stabbing liberal to veto President Bush’s victory.

[Tennessean4Bush]

I just contacted each Republican on the judicial committee sending them this email:

Senator Specter’s remarks yesterday concerning Bush’s judicial appointments were outrageous. I am sure you will agree, we need a Chairman who supports our President and his judicial nominations in that position, not someone who is on record as wanting to obstruct the President’s judical appointments.

As you know, conservative Christians turned out to not only vote President Bush back into office, but also helped Republicans sweep a number of seats across the heartland. Conservative judicial nominations are domestic issue #1 for us. While we know not everyone will agree with us on every issue, we do expect the Republicans to ensure that this vital issue is protected from the kind of strident ingratitude Senator Spector has promised.

I trust you will consider this message carefully as you weigh the important decisions facing our nation. Thank you.

[jern]

can you start putting the contact information in your main post, so we know who we need to contact each day?

[mwl1]

Specter will help Bush get his nominees through. He owes Bush, and he knows it.

I wish this clamor would stop. It helps no one but the RATS.

I'm not sure of the committee rules, but I bet that a 55-45 Senate means that the Judiciary Committee will also have one more GOP member and one fewer RAT member... instead of 11-10, the committee would go to 12-9 or 11-8. I think Sen-elect Coburn should get the freshman slot.

[r.d.neck]

I have said it before & I will repeat...It is way past time for this Howard Sprague looking clown to be discarded, what with his magic bullets & scottish law b.s..

[LincolnLover]

Nice thought, but it simply won't happen.

You have to look beyond Specter himself. Yes, he's a jackass and, yes, many of us here despise the man, but like it or not the GOP needs to not go out of its way to anger those few moderates that are in the majority (Snowe, Specter, not Chaffee, who'll do the right thing and switch).

I'm not talking about appeasing these few misguided moderate souls. The focus is on the words "out of its way" here; you preemptively strike against Specter, then the Olympia Snowes will rally around the guy out of self-defense, even.

Also, fiddling with the unwritten rule of progression to the chairmanship of a committee would be unsettling to alot of Senators.

Let him bloviate all he wants to appease his supporters; there are ways to work around his ass when necessary.

[mwl1]

Exactly. Specter's support of Bush nominees takes the fever out of MSM reaction -- it is very useful.

We are now the majority party, a big tent. Let's act that way and stop this internal bickering.

Specter will get the job done for Bush. In fact, I bet we'll see prompt action on stalled circuit court nominees.

[Brilliant]

senator_frist@frist.senate.gov

Dear Sen. Frist

I would urge you to NOT appoint Sen. Specter to the Judiciary Committee in light of his recent remarks that suggest he is going to try to block President Bush’s conservative judicial nominees. I realize that the alternatives are few, but I think that just about anyone would be a better choice than Mr. Specter, in light of his comments. Grassley would be a better choice, for example.

President Bush received a mandate in Tuesday’s election, and the polling suggests that the issue that is foremost on voters’ minds is the decline of morality, which unfortunately has been accelerated by an out of control court system.

The availability of abortion in this country does not depend on the survival of Roe v. Wade. For example, they don’t have a Constitutional right to abortion in European countries, but they do have abortion. In Europe, abortion is regulated by the State, and it should be similarly regulated here. More importantly, the Constitution does not guaranty a right to abortion. Judicial activists should not consider themselves free to change the Constitution by judicial fiat.

I fear that Mr. Specter’s appointment to the Judiciary Committee will only accelerate the decline of our courts, and I therefore urge you to appoint someone else.

[ninenot]

Emailed Bush, Sensenbrenner (Chair, House Judiciary) a few local Pubbie pols, and the two local conservative talkers.

More to follow.

[cicero's_son]

I agree. Spector, for all his faults, is the consummate insider. He got Clarence Thomas through, for crying out loud!

All that being said, it isn't such a bad thing to have a bunch of angry conservatives and Freepers making a big stink about it, either. It just adds to the illusion!

[Dawgreg]

Thanks Annie........just sent an email, will follow up with letters to my Senators and a phone call to Senator Frists' office.

[tallhappy]

Yes.

[Mr. Mojo]

We don't need liberal nutcases who encourage the appointment of these liberal nutcases

Yep, we don't need Republicans liberal nutcases who encourage the appointment of other liberal nutcases. Specter is a complete disgrace, a senile old coot, and an ingrate.

[elbucko]

Appointing Arlen Specter to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee is like putting Dathan in charge of the Exodus.

[anniegetyourgun]

Since you showed me yours, I'll show you mine!

[mafree]

Uh..who are those guys?

[cyn]

Thank you for ping and the suggested script, which was a helpful framework for my call. Thanks for posting this, Texasaggie. Is Repub party up at arms that Specter isn't a team player?

http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/carney/carney200411031005.asp

[B4Ranch]

I amde the call, spoke strongly against Spaector and gave the man my Zip code. He said Thank you about five times!

[Mr. Mojo]

Specter and McCain might still be recoverable < /wishfulthinking>

Those two live to screw the President. The latter is probably amazed (and disappointed) that his collaboration with his liberal friend Feingold to destroy the 1st Amedment didn't bring the President down.

[mafree]

Laura Ingraham started off her show this morning talking precisely about this. She suggested elevating John Thune to the Judiciary chairmanship since he made it one of the centerpieces of his campaign.

I likes the sound of that but won't they think Thune is "too new" for that postion? How much does seniority play into who gets what in the Senate?