Posted on 11/04/2004 9:57:49 AM PST by Syco
Dear Senator Frist,
After a long and contentious fight to retain the White House and expand our majority in both houses of Congress, I am extremely dismayed by comments made by Senator Specter regarding the President's right to choose his own candidates for the nation's judiciary. After several years of stonewalling on the part of Democrats in the Senate Judiciary Committee, it is incredibly distressing to see a member of the Republican party attempting to block excellent and qualified judges from the bench because of their conservative ideology.
I am a partisan. I will continue to work for our party's success because I believe that we embody the principles that are best for the nation. But make no mistake, conservative members of the Republican party will not continue to support the GOP if a very small minority of our Senators refuse to give a fair hearing to judges who agree with the party platform.
The last election should be a wakeup call to party leadership. The single most important issue to voters was "moral values". The party did a masterful job of getting Evangelical and other Conservative voters to the polls - voters who stayed home in 2000 - largely because of the moral issues facing the nation. It would be disastrous for the party and country if these voters felt betrayed and did not return to the polls in 2006 and 2008.
Renegade judges have been legislating from the bench for decades and have recently accelerated a dangerous experiment in social engineering - whether by redefining marriage, tinkering with the Pledge of Allegiance, or ruling against late term abortion restrictions. The American people recognize this judicial tyranny for what it is, and we look to you and other members of the Senate to put a stop to it.
Senator Specter and Democrats in the Senate say that the President should not nominate candidates with a conservative ideology because they are "outside the mainstream". If that is the case, most of the country must be outside of the mainstream. The vast majority of Americans support some limits on abortion, and clearly Tuesday's results in the states voting on Marriage Amendment should prove that this country will not accept gay marriage as a government supported institution.
In light of all of this, I am writing to you to urge you to take action to remove Senator Specter from the Judiciary Committee. The idea that this man, who won a tough primary fight only with the help of the White House, could be the next Chair of the Judiciary Committee is truly frightening. Please take steps to ensure that he does not aid liberals in continuing to block the President's agenda.
I understand that this move could lead to Mr. Specter defecting to the other side. In reality Senator, he made that defection long ago. Please do what is right and help President Bush and the majority of the American people in seating solid judges, without forcing them to pass a liberal litmus test. As our majority leader, we are counting on you.
But Specter prevented the borking of Thomas.
Bork's view that the Ninth Amendment does not give the federal government power to enumerate all the rights of citizens is still hated to this day by most people. Though it is true.
You make no sense. Give me one good reason to allow Specter to be in charge of the Judiciary Committee. This is dumber than making Brady the head of the NRA. I don't think you grasp what is going on here.
"No, but here's Frist's Phone No.: 202-224-3344"
I called. The women on the other end listened and then when I said I was concerned about Sen Specter becoming chairman, that I preferred Senator Kyl, she said
"oh, well why dont you call Senator Specter's office?"
I fell out of my chair and tried not to laugh and then said "well I think he wants to be Judiciary chairman.
But I dont, and I hope Senator Frist does something to gently move him aside. I dont think he is right for that position."
I tried using soft language which I regret. She seemed clueless as to my point, which suggests - NOT many are calling her! Should have used stronger language like "I AM VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO SENATOR SPECTER ...."
Not that I doubt you, just curious about just what he said (and anyway a politicians actions are more significant than his words).
He can be our ally in the abortion fight. How you say? Inquire within.
Just keep in mind I am not arguing abortion with you -- I am arguing tactics and how to ultimately win on the abortion issue. Very different things.
The MSM is not your friend.
"Bork was borked."
My point is that Specter was one of the Borkers.
If Specter hadnt done what he did, Bork would likely be on the Supreme Court.
"But Specter prevented the borking of Thomas."
After what he did to Bork, Specter got h*ll from conservatives, and did what he needed to get back in good graces for the 1992 election.
Just ask Paul Weyrich. He helped Specter out in 1992, thanks to Clarence Thomas, then got the brush-off after 1992.
The danger NOW is that Specter is getting old. Old enough
for retirement - WE HAVE NO POLITICAL LEVERAGE ON HIM NOW.
He serves without any care for the voter between now and 2010 and then retires. For most other Republicans, I'd say "great", but for him - be very afraid.
Spector and his record were re-elected.
As a representative government, Spector is a representative of the people. Like it, or not.
If you think you and others should start a blitz against him, have at it.
That capital will be needed in January to change the rules so judges can't be filibustered.
That is where the battle for pro-life judges will be won or lost.
That's odd-the young woman who answered ny call said she would refer my comments on to the Senator.
Spector = Specter
The fillibustering issue is another important one but having a moderate, pro-choice Senator as head of the judiciary committee will NOT help matters no matter how you look at it.
I'm convinced that Specter could change his party affiliation to Democrat and without changing any of his views, handily win another election. That should tell you something.
We'll have to see what the transcript says but it is interesting that whatever it says, so many people can believe the original news story without question. Don't get me wrong, if Specter comes out with a transcript that says something entirely different, I'll believe him over some reporter. However, that does nothing to erase his actions in the past.
Remember his invocation of 'Scottish law'? That was the point at which it was clear to me that this guy had lost it.
This whole exercise with Spector is a waste of hard earned political capital. The MSM is trying to get the conservatives to spend early and waste what they have earned.
Winning is the goal, not arguing. Bush has already laid down the marker. he will appoint judges who interpret the law not rule by their opinion.
What is needed is strategy. The old in your face one has not worked and simply feeds the MSM with the ammo they use to blast us with.
I come to win not just waste my time playing the MSM game.
No I don't have his book, but I have read several articles that have excerted from it. What is your point anyways, that Specter is a good guy and would make a great Chairman of the Judiciary? Or let's just not piss off the liberal wing (3 Senators) of the GOP? Are you denying that Specter is staunchly pro Roe v Wade? It makes no sense to bow down to Specter, Snow, Chafee. Specter is not the right man for the job.
ROTFL, I think you need to find out a little bit more about Specter. He is our biggest enemy on the abortion fight.
What we need is strategery not reaction. "
This is NOT reaction!
Specter is UNFIT FOR COMMAND of the Senate Judiciary Committee. WE MUST STOP IT IF WE CAN.
If you are uneducated as to how bad Specter is, then FIRST get educated and THEN join us. Go read Carney's NRO article. Quit lecturing your betters... within 2 weeks these assignments become done deals, now is the time to stop the train.
"The MSM is just simply trying to get us to waste political capital before we have the chance to figure out a winning strategy. Sometimes the direct approach isn't the best."
If you have a better strategy to stop Specter from becoming Judiciary Chairman please propose it.
Why does it expend political capital to put the best man in the chair of the judiciary committee?
The only downside I can see to doing that would be if Specter revolted by getting even more liberal, perhaps even switching parties. Putting a true conservative like Santorum in the chairman's seat would accomplish a lot. It will also act to set him up for bigger and better things. I'm convinced that this is Specter's last term.
Snooker,
WE WON! If we don't do anything with our victory it will be hollow and meaningless!
"That's odd-the young woman who answered ny call said she would refer my comments on to the Senator."
She said the same thing to me, at the end... it jus took me a while to get my point home to her.
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.