You can bet your bottom dollar that it would be a different story if the tables were reversed. I mean does anyone think the demoRATs would treat an inbeached Republican president with such finesse?
Read on...The Bushites are here as usual.
I hear various comments opining that Specter is now neutered, that he will comply now, that he won't rebel, etc etc.
I guess time will tell. It is very troubling that Republican Senators, having a bigger majority now, insist on caving to RINOs such as Specter.
Is it because they want to KA to the Dems, to the Boys Club Senators, they don't really care about their own party platform, or what? Are many of them just totally insincere power hungry politicians with no real conservative convictions?
Frist better be taking some refresher courses for surgery, because he's on the way to an early retirement from the senate. I certainly don't think he has to worry about an exploratory committee for a run for the White House!
They can get away with this as long as ALL of the President's nominees are quickly brought to the floor for a vote, and the dims are dealt with STRONGLY. I have to believe that they do not foresee trouble since they did not give Specter the boot.
Well, at least we have an indea where he stands.
Anyone else get the feeling that we might have been sold out?
Republican or not, these assholes need to be brought down a notch or two. Sunning in their power, they forget who gave them that position.
Some things never change.
If someone had told me 2 months ago that this would be our big problem, I would have taken it.
Looks like the Republicans don't "get it" any more than the DemocRATS do. What a shame.
All I can say is most of ya'll cheered when Lott was cashiered over an insensitive gaffe and hope ya'll are happy.
*I know them both thru family....decent enough men but neither is tuff....like DeLay.
** one of several W endeavors I took issue with but WTF
Many, if not most, of the ills of this country are the result of right-thinking conservatives being forever cajoled into compromise with leftist ideology. It’s been happening for decades. And electing Arlen Specter to chair the Judiciary Committee represents yet another in a long series of erosions of principle.
Arlen Specter has participated in (even orchestrated) massive cover-ups of critical events in this republic’s history that begged to see the light of day. He has been in the pocket of anti-liberty special interest groups the entire span of his four-term senate career, most remarkably placing the economic/physical well-being of this country and its people a distant second to the incessant power-grabs of trial lawyers. On several critical matters of national policy he has declared the US Constitution subservient to international law, most recently proudly declaring that US military personnel should be tried in international courts.
And yet such a man, who has overtly and consistently exhibited an allegiance to power brokers (both foreign and domestic) that supercedes any loyalty he claims to this republic and her people -- and whose political philosophy is more often than not at odds with this administration and the Republican members of the Judiciary Committee -- is likely to be seated as its chair.
Are the inmates running the asylum?
There is nothing (repeat: nothing) in the senate rules that requires that a committee chairmanship be determined on the basis of seniority.
So will someone please explain to me why, after a momentous, historically critical election such as occurred two weeks ago, a man of Arlen Specter’s dubious character and tarnished leadership credentials should be obtaining one of the most powerful positions in Washington? And why, when there are several extremely qualified men (Kyl and Graham come immediatelt to mind) sitting on that very committee who do not need to be strong-armed, under duress, to toe the line, and whose conservative ideology closely mirrors that of the administration, one of those men is not considered more deserving of the post? Does the cream no longer rise to the top in American leadership? (a rhetorical question … the answer is obvious)
In order to obtain this position, Arlen Specter will have to promise to change his stripes, and other men will be passed over – men who have spent their entire political lives fighting for Constitutional principles, and defending that magnificent blueprint from insidious attacks orchestrated by the likes of the man under whose chairmanship they will now sit.
Then there’s the ‘ramifications’ argument. It goes something like this: If Specter were denied the chair, he would work against conservative interests in the senate, especially where judicial nominations are concerned. Translation: According to the ‘unspoken legislative rules’ of the most powerful nation in the free world, senate committee chairmanships can be obtained via a type of political extortion.
If we don't return to valuing merit more than tenure or protocol, we will eventually succeed (if we haven't already) in barring the door to leaders of courage and integrity.
In discussions I have had with people both locally and here on FreeRepublic some have occasionally argued that ‘this is just the way the system works, and the power-brokering is nothing new.’
I don’t agree with the argument that things were not much different years ago. I hear that assertion about the moral fabric of our society as well and I don’t buy it in that respect either. Surely there were political power brokers in our past, and surely there were those whose sense of social morality left a lot to be desired as well, but, in both areas, what used to be something of an aberration is fast becoming the norm. And the fact that, because of the incremental nature of the degradation, we are (in many cases unknowingly) accepting it, does not bode well for us as a civilization.
I cannot assuage my opposition to the ‘you scratch my back/I’ll scratch yours’ theory of power-brokering for two basic reasons: (1) it inevitably leads to incremental leadership corruption and loss of liberty for the individual American, and (2) it causes good and decent people to say ‘this is just the way it is, and we have to simply accept the best that we are able to get out of such an unfortunate system.’ The fact is that our government was not always this way, and unless we at some point say ‘enough is enough!’ our children will be dealing with even more corruption of the system than we are. That is pretty much a given at this point.
The fact is that, if the President and Rick Santorum had endorsed Pat Toomey rather than Arlen Specter in the April Pennsylvania primary, we wouldn't be facing this dilemma now. And now, if a deserving man were elected to the chairmanship, we wouldn't have to consider what many are threatening: removing Specter from his position in the future, if he fails to honor his behind-closed-doors promises. Why make these stupid, characterless decisions in the first place? Why not simply do what is right and avoid the toxic complications resulting from continued compromise? Or is right somehow passe?
When you acquiesce to playing by convoluted rules, which are instituted with less than noble intentions, on a playing field that in no way resembles the one on which you had originally agreed to play, you legitimize both the unfair rules and the dangerous field of play.
We are forever compromising away the integrity of this republic. And there has rarely been a more opportune time than now to apply the brakes – by insisting that the best man for the job of Judiciary chair be chosen. Then if ‘repercussions’ ensue as a result, we deal with them in the same manner. Just as there will necessarily we a web of ‘repercussions’ (because of the current unwieldy nature of the beast), so must there also be a coincidental web of effective responses to them.
You don’t cure a cancer by adapting to it. You cut out its source, and you treat its after-effects.
I, for one, will not rationalize Arlen Specter’s election to the Judiciary chairmanship. Two weeks ago, conservative voters turned out in record numbers showing an unprecedented, implicit faith in those for whom they voted. And this particular myopic, cowardly compromise represents yet another sell-out by a party badly in need of a few history lessons … and a emergency spine transplant.
~ joanie
I'm sorry, but allowing the issue of Arlen Specter to be framed as a "Pro-Life" issue is what guaranteed his appointment to chair the Judiciary.
Ostrich Frist. Well, we know one person who will NOT take the presidential office in 2009.
From my persepctive Specter owes his re-election to Bush. Without Bush's support he would have lost the primary. He very nearly lost the general election. (The only disappointment eletion night was Specter's re-election.)
Specter is unfit to sit on the Senate Judiciary Committee let alone chair it. His outburst several weeks ago was not only ungrateful and arrogant - it was also stupid and ill-conceived. It demonstrates a total lack of judgement.
Myriads of conservative Republicans wrote their representatives, Bush, Cheney, Frist, and the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee demanding Specter be barred from the Chairmanship.
They were ignored.
The Senate once again demonstrated an inherent lack of backbone, contempt for those who elected them, and illustrated that their priamry allegiance was not to their constituents but to each other.
The system is broken.
Its breaking down more and more every day. Each day, each hour, each minute, the collective forces of the ACLU, political correctness, the entrenched elected officials, the bueaurocrats who disdain the public who pays them, the conspirators and prevaricators in the legal "profession" and the courts who serve their own feelings and pockets rather than the Constitution, are dismantling our Republic.
I don't know how we are going to get back, or if we ever can.
The greatest experiment in human political history is being destroyed before our very eyes.
Nothin like givin the back of your hand to the people that elected you and your party eh Frist??
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.