Egomaniac Arlen's View Of The Situation
Posted on 11/12/2004 2:27:51 PM PST by swilhelm73
A conservative member of the Senate Judiciary Committee said he could support Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) as chairman of the committee if Specter issued a public statement saying he would not try to block a Supreme Court nominee who opposes abortion rights.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) said Specter assured him in a conversation Tuesday he would push for swift up-or-down votes on nominees without regard to their positions on abortion. Cornyn indicated he was satisfied by Specter's comments but wanted them expressed in an official statement.
Asked if he thought Specter would get the chairmanship, Cornyn said, "Today, yes, I do."
Cornyn also said Specter is seeking a meeting with Republicans on the judiciary panel next week to resolve doubts prompted by his comments last week suggesting that the Senate was unlikely to confirm nominees who would overturn the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion nationwide. Conservatives have flooded the Senate with protests, urging Republicans to reject Specter as chairman.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I thought they couldn't ask them how they would rule. No judge can give a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical case can he?
Wouldn't that disqualify him from hearing a case he already "said" what his verdict would be?
Fox news talking about this NOW
I posted an open letter from the National Taxpayer's Union asking the Reps to stop Specter from heading the SJC yesterday.
Make no mistake, Specter is a bad fit for the SJC on a number of fronts.
Correct. Now how much havoc can we stir up before this is settled. I'm fired up. Calls & E-Mails but I don't hold the cards with these members because none are from my state. The rest of you - get in the trenches here & assure us of some satisfaction.
Bush will not be running again, so what do we do, vote Democratic? I don't think that will work out too good.
We failed to hold The President and his handlers accountable for their short comings. It is too late to complain after the election. We will just have to suck up and do the best we can.
Messing with Overtime rules just before the election could not possibly gain one vote, but it could sure discourage any crossover.
A week before the election President Bush says Civil Unions are OK.
A day after the election Illegals are on the front burner.
I thank God President Bush was reelected, but he is not perfect, so we can and should criticize him when necessary.
Yep!
No, if Specter somehow stalls or prevents one of Bush's nominees from getting a floor vote, the Judiciary Committee will vote him out as chairman in a heartbeat, which they can do.
55 posted on 11/12/2004 3:08:08 PM PST by Dog Gone
Uh...I would not bet the ranch on that happening. In fact, I would not even bet a blade of grass.
That's where I am, too. I don't trust the old coot. But some people I do trust (Bush, Cornyn, e.g.) seem prepared to do so -- and, knowing the stakes even better than we, presumably have taken the proper precautions.
All hail Chairman Specter (grits teeth)...
Cornyn is my Senator. I sent him a strongly worded fax about disciplining Specter. I mention this not to brag but to encourage everyone to keep up with pressure with Faxes and phone calls. Don't email. They don't pay as much attention to emails for some reason.
Republicans, you are fixing to lose our support. Don't you realize that we are the ones who put you in office and we have some minor expectations? Quit bending over, stand up and do the job you were elected to do. We are figuring out how to get rid of the useless.
Squat!
Unless of course he writes it in "Scottish Law" verbiage - then it's golden.
/specter mocking off
Let's "vow" to Bork Specter
Frist is a wimp weenieeeee.....
lol, I hear you.
Right you are.
IIRC, it has happened once - 130 years ago. In today's Senate, it would be an impossibility.
Letters are good too.
Well, there are many good arguments against Specter but that might not be the best one since he'll be 80 the next time he's up for re-election...
I think the commitment they are looking for is that he won't stop a vote by the full Senate on a given nominee.
I don't think the GOP CARES if Arlen votes for him in the final vote...just the he lets them out of committee and doesn't support any fillibuster.
The Senate Republicans obviously want to lose the upcoming midterm elections. I can't think of a better way to do that than to hand America's judicial future to Specter. The base will stay at home in 2006 and the RNC will scratch its head as usual, saying, "What went wrong?"
That's certainly a decent expectation. As I say, few have a lower opinion than I of MacSpectre politically; but I do think that his own self-interest (the only reliable factor in his makeup) would assure that if a nominee is blocked from a full-senate vote, it won't be by him.
Dan
Egomaniac Arlen's View Of The Situation
Take the word of a man who voted for putting the US Military under jurisdition of the International Court?
This man is unAmerican! His word means nothing!
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.