Posted on 11/18/2004 4:04:39 PM PST by conservativecorner
(CNSNews.com) - Pro-life activists, seeking to derail the appointment of Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Arlen Specter to the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee, will not get a chance to personally argue their case with Majority Leader Bill Frist.
A coalition of pro-life religious leaders did meet with Frist's aides Tuesday, but any efforts to persuade Frist about Specter's fitness to serve as Judiciary chairman will have to be done from afar.
Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition, said Frist's top aide cited scheduling problems that would preclude a meeting with Frist from taking place.
"It is deeply troubling that Senator Frist could not find the time to sit down and discuss the Arlen Specter situation with national leaders and clergy from the pro-life/pro-family community. It clearly shows a profound lack of respect and understanding toward the very people who re-elected President Bush and gave the Republicans majorities in both the House and Senate," Mahoney stated.
"The reality that Senator Frist must now understand is, don't dismiss and ignore us today and expect our enthusiastic support in 2008 if you decide to run for president," Mahoney added.
Despite initial concerns over whether Specter, as chairman of the Judiciary Committee, would give President Bush's conservative judicial nominees fair hearings, Frist Wednesday sounded like the issue had already been decided.
"Today he had the opportunity to make some comments, which were received very well by members of the (Republican) caucus," Frist said, adding that he was anxious to resolve the issue over who will chair the committee.
In addition to handling the president's nominations to the lower federal courts, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee could soon be dealing with one or more Bush nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Now, to be fair, Senator Frist probably has quite a bit on his plate. He might have honestly not had room to set aside an hour to talk to self-proclaimed "leaders." Mahoney is the only name mentioned in the article, so I doubt there were all that many "big guns" in this group.
Things are hectic right now on the Hill, and besides, they didn't even give Frist a chance to respond in the article.
From what I can see, IMHO, these guys need to sit down and take a chill pill.
Specter, the snake, blew his cover when he hissed.
Didn't you hear him hiss, Senator Frist?
Are you Senators such buddies, up there on the hill,
that all else is trumped by the comraderie you feel?
Specter will be Specter, I'm sure you know this,
but in the role of the abbetor,Sir- is Frist being Frist?
The lives of forty million more baby's you hold in your hand,
Tell us once more Senator Frist, how much you trust the Specter man.
SuziQ wrote: "You have to work with what you have, not deal in 'what ifs'. You don't alienate those who are able and willing to help you as much they can. We live in a Representative Republic where not everyone agrees with us. It took 15 years or so for the public to realize that abortion on demand was bad for this country. It has taken another 15 just to get them to realize that some restrictions are OK. It may take another 15 to get it outlawed entirely, if we can ever do so. You build alliances along the way, you don't scream, yell, pout, and take home your marbles when things aren't going EXACTLY the way you wish they would. You work with what you have, and you get the job done."
Suzi, you're right.
But there's a piece missing from the puzzle here.
The pro-life movement is not just a little fringe group, sitting with its hat in its hand in the queue at the Republican front office. These folks have been loyal Republicans for a long time, and are a crucial constituency of the Republican Party. The Republicans cannot do ANY of their agenda if they lose power, and if the pro-lifers are deeply wounded and discouraged, and think that the Republicans have betrayed them, there are a lot of them, probably millions, who won't support the Republicans anymore, because they feel used.
That's what I read here: lots of people who have been loyal footsoldiers who feel used.
There is a politically free way for the Republican leadership to defuse this crisis in the base: OUTREACH.
They're going to put Specter in the Chair because they think they need to, for reasons having to do with the way Washington works.
The pro-lifers hate this, but most probably could abide it IF the leadership came down into the ranks and explained to the pro-life troops why this is necessary.
As it stands, as the headline of this thread indicates, not only are the pro-lifers angry because Specter is getting a job that could imperil their agenda, but even moreso because they are getting the stiff arm from Senator Frist.
Now, I said somewhere far above that I suspect that Senator Frist really does not intend to give the stiff-arm to pro-lifers, but when so many people who were elated by a victory are suddenly handed a plate full of unpalatable politics, AND the leadership isn't down in the ranks explaining that we need to eat our spinach now for good to come later, the venom starts to really do damage.
Look up the thread. There are FReepers here yelling at the pro-lifers for feeling betrayed. And there are other FReepers saying "relax, it will work out." The problem is that if we read the papers and watch TV, or listen to the radio, what's NOT there is Frist, Cheney, Santorum, Bush, or Rove for that matter, reaching out to the angry and frustrated pro-life core of the party.
We've just been handed a stinking pile.
Nobody is ever going to like that.
If officialdom explained the strategy and the plan, it would heal the rift.
But they aren't doing that.
They're acting every bit as detached and arrogant as the pro-lifers who are furious say they are.
I agree, pro-lifers need to keep their powder dry,
but the missing piece is that the leadership has to come down off of Mount Olympus and tell us everything is ok.
That doesn't cost a damned thing, politically, and actually would help strengthen the base.
But the silence is deafening.
People who loudly claim to speak for an entire group of voters, but never show up to do the hard work come election time, are not in that category.
>would very possibly be like trying to herd cats, regardless<
Not from my 167, but I agree to a small degree, however not to the exclusion of an America First calling to what I
think would be the majority of FReepers.
Not on this forum, you won't.
>I think it's too late in my life to feel freedom<
Oh, RP, perhaps the only way YOU are going to understand Freedom is to live where there is none. I appreciate what we've had in this country. There must be law or there be
chaos.
Pessimism is a dark hole. (And happiness is a warm puppy,
which I'm getting tonight - a little Boston Terrier. Celebrate with me!)
True... but the problem is not getting YOU to discuss the problem is getting THEM to discuss.. They have no good argument for murder so they don't argue/discuss.
Clue: its NOT about YOU... its not even about the babies..
Its about when is murder acceptable. Cause it IS murder.
War, Capital punishment, self preservation are a few of the times when murder is acceptable.. Not preferable but acceptable.
Murdering your baby for convience and murdering some third world terrorist because your government says so confuses some people.. Gets even more confused when more options for murder are brought in.. Makeing some mass murderer assume room temperture is also murder.. other terms are used but it still IS murder.. Murder for the public good is good, usually, its just that some peoples idea of the public good morphs into individal good sometimes.. like in abortion..
Humans ain't too smart.. Thats where I'm coming from.. People have been getting murdered for faux "good reasons" for millenia now.. Its not unique to abortion..
Its all about when to murder.. because thers no doubt in my mind YOU yourself are for murder in some instances.. Me too.. Abortion is simply murder. Don't murder your kids.. Others are quite willing to do that to their kids. Stopping them from doing that is what we are talking about here.. Forceing them to NOT murder thier kids.. makes them angry. People have been murdering their own children for thousands of years, born AND unborn..
I'm more concerned with spoiling the children.. because spoiled children grow up to be spoiled adults.. and spoiled adults are exactly the ones that are murdering their own children for self centered reasons. And by the way its not too far away from the abortion mentality for them to have YOU murdered if you get in their way either.. Stalin murdered 150,000,000 of his own people because they were in the way.. You BETTER start discussing abortion... because abortion is what those folks do when they are being NICE..
Did I say its not all about YOU or the babies.. AH! yes I did...
Come down hard? On whom, how, and to what effect?
We can do w/o your dramatics.
Nothin' but a bunch of struttin peacocks full of self-importance and worthy of little else but contemptible disdain...
How many innocent babes are being protected now?
More than if we stay away from the polls in a snit and allow a Democrat to be elected President! Do you think a Democrat will do anything at all to allow restrictions on abortion? At least right now, work is being done to increase those restrictions, but sometimes that work doesn't show in public. I believe Sen. Frist and Sen. Specter have gotten the message loud and clear.
what has changed? How has the republicans delivered any advance on abortion? Even the partial birth abortion law went down without a whimper via the courts which Specter is now the Chairman of overseeing the selection of the composition of such.
There is no way in hell any Senator or President of the same party as an incumbent Senator will endorse a primary challenger.
See the sentence above, read it aloud, numerous times, and maybe, just maybe you'll start to understand.
(I hope so because I've given up on 'Poohbah')
I've given up on self-important wankers who think that CNN talking heads are serious, hard-working conservatives.
There can always be justification in people's minds for wars and capital punishment, but there can never be a viable justification for the murder of a human being who hasn't even taken a breath of air on this earth.
The baby has committed no act for which to killed because the baby has committed no act at all.
It is a murder of convenience or to prevent an inconvenience.
Girl babies in China are killed because they can't contribute enough to the food supply.
Any unscheduled baby in the South American rain forest is murdered by abortion because the food supply will support only a certain number of people.
Women who abort babies in America can't fall back on the self-preservation excuse; we would never knowingly allow a baby or the family of the baby to starve to death.
I don't know how you came to the judgement that my arguments against abortion are selfish in nature.
I'm simply saying that women have no right to murder their babies. It is NOT theirs to destroy! It belongs to the human race, and it is a gift from God.
I am not at all concerned about the future ramifications toward society in general. We'll cross that bridge when we get there.
What I am concerned about is that a baby, at this very minute, is being murdered! That, to me, is a travesty of the highest magnitude.
As long as the mother who is having the procedure performed feels that it is NOT a travesty, we have no common ground, and, therefore, no reason to converse.
Exactly. But they could have stayed out of it. Specter isn't just a moderate. He is the antithesis of everything Santorum professes to believe. Furthermore, not only has Specter NOT been a team player (voting with democrats almost 60% of the time throughout his 24 year carreer), but he has repeatedly been, in crucial moments, a traitor to the party. Thus, Santorum, the pro-life, conservative Republican poster boy, was entitled, this ONE time, during the primary, to stay out of the game to defeat Specter, the pro-choice liberal Democrat-in-Republican-clothing posterboy, for the victory of Toomey, another likeminded pro-life conservative Republican. It was a rare opportunity for Santorum to do the "Right" thing for the country, the conservative cause and the Republican Party (no matter what his fellows believed). He failed miserably. This last Specter term and all the bad that may come from it falls largely on Santorum's shoulders.
The following article by Tim Carney states the above case rather well:
TIMOTHY CARNEY
April 28, 2004, 8:39 a.m.
Santorum Beats Conservatives
Toomey lost to the Republican party, president and all.
FOGELSVILLE, PA. — Pat Toomey's campaign was a model of hard work and honesty, but he ended it with a lie. In his concession speech before a tearful crowd in the Holiday Inn, Toomey began by speaking of the ideas of freedom, limited government, and traditional values. "These ideas," he said, "are at the heart of the Republican party. These ideas are what the Republican party is about."
If the Republican party had these ideas at its core, Pat Toomey would be the nominee for U.S. Senate.
That the GOP is at essence a conservative institution is a common misperception, one shared by Lehigh Valley farmer Arland Schantz. Schantz is kept busy working his farm not far from Toomey's hometown of Zionsville, but he took time off Monday night to attend a Toomey rally. Schantz is a conservative and a free trader, and he's sick of having a Republican senator who "acts like a Democrat" as he puts it.
Schantz is an ardent Bush supporter and backer of Senator Rick Santorum. I asked Schantz about Santorum's and Bush's endorsement of Specter, and Schantz said it was political necessity. "They have to endorse the incumbent," he said, echoing the explanation of everyone else in that room.
Then Schantz winked and went on about Bush and Santorum. "We know what they really want, deep down inside." Schantz was one of a handful of Toomey backers who sincerely believed that Santorum on Tuesday after campaigning for Specter was going to close the curtain behind him in the election booth and pull the lever for Toomey. Similarly, these Toomey fans said Bush needs Toomey in the Senate to advance his agenda.
As I spoke with Schantz, president of "Farmers for Toomey," farmers in central Pennsylvania were receiving automated phone calls from the Specter campaign. The calls had the voice of President Bush, endorsing Specter.
Canvassing voters on Tuesday leaving polling places in Lower Paxton Township and Newberry Township, almost all of the Specter voters cited Santorum's and Bush's endorsements as the reason for their votes.
One dentist in Lower Paxton calls himself a conservative and a pro-lifer, but Bush's relentless campaigning made the dentist think Bush needed Specter if he was going to win the November election. This reasoning is faulty, but local media parroted it, and it pervaded the state enough to push Specter over the top.
Conservatives such as Schantz believe Bush and Santorum backed Specter reluctantly. But this ignores the facts. Bush visited Pennsylvania with Specter many times, endorsing Specter not only for reelection, but also for Judiciary chairman. Bush came to Pittsburgh again eight days ago for a fundraiser and said, "I'm here to say it as plainly as I can: Arlen Specter is the right man for the Senate."
There can be no doubt about it: Bush and Santorum won this election for Arlen Specter, and that is exactly what they meant to do.
The question is why?
Contrary to the common explanation, this move by Bush and Santorum was not part of long-term, complex pragmatic move to advance the conservative cause. It was, however, enlightened self-interest.
This race had been billed as a battle between the conservatives and the liberals within the Republican party. That characterization ignores the glaring facts of Santorum and Bush.
This was instead a battle between the establishment and the grassroots. Local media described Specter defending the Keystone GOP's tradition as a moderate Republican state. That more describes the leaders of the party in Harrisburg than it does the voters throughout that state's 67 counties.
To hold on to power, the party heads had to scare the conservatives throughout the state. A vote for Toomey, they said, is not only a vote for Joe Hoeffel and thus for Tom Daschle, it is also a vote for John Kerry. These lines are lies, but with that much supposedly on the line, it's no wonder so many conservatives held their noses and voted for Specter.
And one State Republican Committee candidate described her vote for the incumbent exactly that way, with her head turned away and her fingers pinching her nose.
Toomey's campaign had legions of motivated young conservatives volunteering — the college Republicans from schools throughout the state, and young Capitol Hill staffers up from Washington, D.C.
But Arlen Specter had something far more powerful on his side. He had the machine on working for him. He was able to pour $5 million into a get-out-the-vote effort in the final 72 hours, and drive up turnout in the moderate white-bread suburbs of Montgomery County. Specter had George Soros and well-heeled Main Street Republicans teaming up with the National Republican Senatorial Committee for him at the last minute.
The party was not trying to advance Specter's liberal policies. The party was doing what the party exists to do: protect its own. Throwing Bob Smith overboard in 2002 was easy. Smith had done something far worse than sink a GOP judicial nominee, derail a tax cut, or vote to fund abortion. Smith had left the party for a few weeks.
Tom Fleig of Harrisburg voted for Pat Toomey Tuesday. He told me he did it "to send President Bush a message." The Medicare Prescription Drug Entitlement is a costly fraud. Don't think of appointing another Anthony Kennedy to the bench. Forget about amnesty.
That's not a message Bush wanted to hear. Nor is it one Rick Santorum, the Senate Republican Conference head, wants to deal with. Now they don't have to worry about Pat Toomey rocking the boat for the next six months — or the next six years.
But in his conscience, Rick Santorum has a new burden to bear. For every vote Specter casts to keep abortion legal, for every dollar Specter adds to a spending bill or subtracts from a tax cut, Americans can blame Santorum.
Pat Toomey didn't lose to liberal Arlen Specter. Toomey lost to the entire Republican party. That Republican victory was at the cost of the conservative cause. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nationalreview.com/carney/carney200404280839.asp
OK, you vote for a Democrat next time, if you think they'll make things any better. At least with Repubs. in office the babies have some ghost of a chance!
My argument is not flawed.. and you are probably wrong about other things too.. Winning some battles wrongly can lose the war. Myopic vision can also make one an impediment to winning a war instead of advancing the front. Presently the U.S. gives parents the option of murdering their children, legally..
Its legal.. seeing the forest AND the trees too is mandatory in this war.. After all no one dies at all ever, anyway.. Everybody ever born will live forever somewhere.. If not.. we're all road kill walking anyways.. I prefer to believe the former which makes murder a mental construct...
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.