Posted on 11/06/2004 5:34:57 PM PST by familyop
It is imperative to prevent Senator Arlen Specter from becoming chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee next week, because he has stated that he would block U.S. Supreme Court and Court of Appeals judicial nominees who are pro-life. There is a certain irony here. In April 2004, Senator Arlen Specter was in he fight of his life, being challenged by a conservative Pro-Life congressman Patrick Toomey. Toomey was surging as the primary election day grew closer. Arlen Specter then went to the White House, asked for and received support from the President and from the junior senator from Pennsylvania, Rick Santorum. The argument by the White House and Santorum was that the Republicans needed to hold on to the Senate and that Specter would help them win Pennsylvania.
Specter barely squeaked by in the Pennsylvania primary defeating Toomey by 17,200 votes. Given the closeness of the race, his re-election did not endear the President or Santorum to the countless pro-lifers who had worked so hard for Toomey. Many believed that had the president or Santorum remained silent, Toomey would have won. This author was one of those who extremely displeased with the actions of the White House. Both Santorum and the White House were told that caving on the pro-life issue would not help the cause either in the short or the long run. My comments were dismissed as coming from someone without any real credentials. They are right except that I am part of the grass roots. I do rub shoulders and work with the people who carry the petitions and make the phone calls. These folks do not like being conned or misled or told that they have to “trust” the “higher ups.” They want reasons and there were no morally good reasons to support Arlen Specter. Indeed, if there are possible reasons why Pennsylvania did not go for the president, this may be one of them. How many just did not vote on Tuesday because they were upset. Specter did not help the President during the campaign. He only looked out for himself.
Now less than two after the general election, he sends a shot across the bow and tells the press that the president better not send him any conservative pro-life judges. Then just after it is reported, he retreats and claims he never said that.
Well, let’s look at the record. Arlen Specter is pro abortion. He believes in Roe v. Wade. Planned Parenthood and the pro-abortion extremists support him. He was responsible for the defeat of Judge Bork. He prevented this fine jurist from being appointed to the Supreme Court. From that defeat, the left took strength in their ability to ‘bork’ candidates. We can thank Arlen Specter for empowering the enemies of unborn children and giving the nation even more division and acrimony during the last ten years.
Even now Specter is siding with the Democrats. Compare his statement with that of Terry McAuliffe, Chairman, DNC.
“I don’t think a 51-49 election is any mandate…they need to be very careful that they now need to govern from the middle in a bipartisan way.” - Terry McAuliffe, chairman, DNC, November 3, 2004.
“President Bush’s margin of victory proves that we “have a narrowly divided country, and that’s not a traditional mandate…the number-one item on my agenda is to try to move the party to the center.” - Sen. Arlen Specter, November 3, 2004.
Vice President Cheney introducing President Bush for his victory speech, Ronald Reagan Building, November 3, 2004 stated
“President Bush ran forthrightly on a clear agenda for this nation’s future, and the nation responded by giving him a mandate.”
Referring to a email sent to me through our related contacts, I quote the following points which all appear to be excellent reasons why Specter should NOT be the chairman
· Specter denied the legitimacy of President Bush’s historic mandate.
· Specter announced a pro-abortion litmus test for the president’s judicial nominees. Specter claims that Roe v. Wade is “inviolate” and insists that “nobody can be confirmed today who does not agree with it.”
· Specter’s illegal litmus test would disqualify all constitutionalist nominees from serving on the Supreme Court of the United States and the lower federal courts.
· Specter’s illegal litmus test demands that all nominees violate the canons of judicial ethics by announcing or pledging how they will vote in a particular case.
· Specter will not promise to support the President’s nominees. Instead, he merely “hopes” that he can support them. The day after the election, when a reporter asked Specter if he would support the president’s nominees, the senator hesitated and equivocated: “I am hopeful that I’ll be able to do that. That obviously depends upon the president’s judicial nominees. I’m hopeful that I can support them.”
· Specter criticized President Bush’s first-term judicial nominees: “The nominees whom I supported in committee, I had reservations on.”
· Specter insulted Janice Rogers Brown, president Bush’s nominee to the important U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Specter referred to Brown, a distinguished conservative and the first African American woman to serve on the California Supreme Court, as “the woman judge out of California” who he had reservations about.
· Specter insulted the entire Supreme Court of the United States, including Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Scalia and Thomas. When a reporter asked Specter “Are you saying that there is not greatness” on the Supreme Court, Specter replied: “Yes. Can you take yes for an answer?”
· Specter’s comments reveal that, like Sen. Kerry and Sen. Daschle, Specter favors judges who follow politics and popular opinion, not the Constitution and the rule of law.
· Specter accused President Bush of ignoring the Senate’s advise and consent role: “The Constitution has a clause called advise and consent, the advise part is traditionally not paid a whole lot of attention to, I wouldn’t say quite ignored, but close to that.”
· Specter wants to encroach upon the president’s appointment power. Obstructionist Democrats filibustered ten of President Bush’s appeals court nominees. Now Specter wants the Senate to become MORE involved in judicial appointments: “My hope is that the Senate will be more involved in expressing our views.”
SPECTER’S RECORD OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS DEMONSTRATES A PATTERN OF VERY TROUBLING CONDUCT ON JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ISSUES
· Specter fought against the distinguished Judge Robert H. Bork, betraying President Reagan and his fellow Republicans.
· Specter voted against Judge Bork on the judiciary committee, and against Bork’s confirmation on the Senate floor. By joining liberal Democratic senators and radical left-wing groups in their opposition to Judge Bork, Specter gave those groups aid and comfort, and was instrumental in Judge Bork’s defeat.
· If Specter remained faithful to his president and his party, Judge Bork would almost certainly have been confirmed to the Supreme Court. Specter’s opposition doomed him.
· Judge Bork warned Americans that Specter does not understand the Constitution and that Specter, along with Senate Democrats “professed horror at the thought that a judge must limit his rulings to the principles in the actual Constitution.”
· President Ronald Reagan called the left-wing assault against Judge Bork “an unprecedented political attack” on a Supreme Court nominee and “a tragedy for our country.” Specter rebuffed President Reagan’s plea to support Judge Bork.
· Specter helped defeat the nomination of conservative Jeff Sessions for a federal judgeship.
· Specter warned filibustered appeals court nominee William Pryor that just because he voted for him on the committee did not mean that he would vote on the Senate floor for his confirmation.
· The “National Review” exposed Specter as “The Worst Republican Senator” in a prominent September 1, 2003 cover story. According to “National Review,” Specter “is not a team player…is an abortion rights absolutist, a dogged advocate of racial preferences, a bitter foe of tax reform, a firm friend of the International Criminal Court.”
· Specter refuses to support the elevation of Justice Clarence Thomas to Chief Justice: “I’d have to think about that,” Specter equivocated. Ditto for Justice Antonin Scalia: “I’d have to think about that too.” Specter once slandered Justice Thomas as a “disappointment.”
THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE MUST BE SOMEONE DEVOTED TO THE CONSTITUTION AS WRITTEN AND THE RULE OF LAW
· The situation is urgent. Chief Justice Rehnquist is gravely ill. A Supreme Court vacancy is imminent.
· President Bush may be called upon to nominate a Supreme Court justice within the next several weeks.
· Court watchers predict as many as three Supreme Court vacancies during President Bush’s second term.
· President Bush will likely have a historic, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to return the Supreme Court to constitutionalist principles.
· The President needs as chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee a loyal, reliable, conservative partner who will shepherd his nominees through the confirmation process.
· Under intense political pressure, Specter tried to recant portions of his post-election statements the day after he uttered them. That means nothing. His 20-year record of party disloyalty and tormenting conservative nominees means everything.
· As chairman, Specter will act as a vexatious intermeddler, second-guessing President Bush’s Supreme Court and lower court nominations. This imperils the President’s legacy.
· As chairman, Specter will have control over the committee’s staff, agenda, and schedule, giving him great power to obstruct the confirmation of conservative judges.
· Under the Senate’s seniority rules, Specter is slated to take over the Judiciary Committee, but under Senate rules and procedures, he can be stopped from becoming committee chairman.
· The window of opportunity to stop Specter is limited. Once he becomes chairman, it will be impossible to unseat him.
Act now to stop Specter. There are a number of websites set up to assist you including Arizona Right to life at www.azrtl.org, www.stopspecter.org, savethegop.com, and www.notspecter.com.
You can also check out the National Right to life committee website at www.nrlc.org.
George Bush was re-elected to uphold the moral values that protect the lives of all human beings. He was re-elected so that we could move toward ending abortion in this nation. An abortion kills an unborn child. No court decision can legitimize the killing of a child. It is never morally permissible to intentionally kill an innocent person. Now more than ever we need to act. John Jakubczyk is a lawyer and President of Arizona Right to Life. He has been a frequent speaker on life issues throughout the country.
Free Republic is making history again!
Bush and Santorum sold us down the river with Specter. Let them take care of their handiwork. shame on both of them.
In fairness, it is a collaborative effort between NRO and FR.
The man who changed a name into a verb.
Send off the letter or E-mail.
Sign the petition.
Help. Please.
http://stopspecter.savethegop.com/
Arlen Specter, as the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, will be able to shut down any nominee by simply not bringing him up for debate. Specter has made clear that he will block any judge that believes in strict construction , as he showed by stopping the Bork nomination and in recent press statements warning Bush not to ominate "conservative" judges.
The grassroots of the Republican Party worked too hard to elect the President so we could guarantee better justices on the court to have it all overruled by liberal Arlen Specter. Therefore, we have to fight to make sure that he is not appointed to Chair the Judiciary committee. Senator Santorum and Senator Frist must be made aware that
the base of the party simply will not stand for it.
One more thing left out of this article -
Specter voted against the impeachment of Clinton!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Bork him!
Outstanding!
It would be historic irony that the senator most responsible for borking Bork is thoroughly BORKED himself.
I do NOT want Specter running Judiciary.
He was using SCOTTISH LAW. Or was it scotch and soda?
Sen Specter is part of the problem concerning activist judges not part of the solution. As Judge Bork has said, Mr Magic Bullet does not understand the Constitution.
My reason is obvious, besides all you wrote above, our President lost Pennsylvania and got little or no support from Specter who was elected.
Politics isn't for the faint-hearts. However, two wrongs don't make a right. The GOP Judiciary Cmte members HAVE TO KNOW where their electorate stands. Their initial appointee (Kyl, probably) can conveniently resign (if he wishes) if Specter behaves himself for the first two years.
Ancient Scottish law.
Well, Bork Him then.
Well--OF COURSE.
And then feed him haggis. Cold haggis with stale beer.
Specter is irrelivant. We can loose 5 Republican Senators and still change the rules. VP Cheney would break the tie. Leave Arlen alone, We may need him in the future.
What does this say about Senator Specter?
Hey, I've met John Jakubczyk. He spoke to our little Tempe Right to Life Group one night years ago here in AZ. He wasn't President of ARTL then, though.
That he isn't a Roman Catholic, as if that were any surprise for a Jewish senator... the concern now, I think, is not to proclaim damnation of Spector but to prevent him from sidetracking conservative justices.
This is NOT TRUE. This entire [current] campaign against Specter is based on a MSM distortion intended to split the Republican Party and hurt our chances of getting good judges in.
I have been very careful in what I have said and what I have done. The nominees whom I supported in Committee, I had reservations on. As for judge Pryor, there had been an issue as to whether as Attorney General he had raised money, I said in voting him out of committee, that he did not have my vote on the floor until I satisfied myself about collateral matters.
Where is the pro-abort litmus test? It's well known that Pryor called Roe an abomination, yet Specter doesn't mention that. Specter voted for Clarence Thomas, Rehnquist and Scalia - all anti-Roe. He voted for ALL the filibustered judges. He has said that he is committed to getting EVERY ONE of Pres. Bush's nominees onto the floor for a floor vote - EVERY ONE. There is no issue here - only an illusion created by the pro-abort media that wants to hurt the Republican Party. Specter's record makes it clear that even though he is a pro-abort, he doesn't consider it a major issue in confirming judges either way - certainly not a litmus test.
As long as Specter will vote to confirm another Thomas, Scalia, or Rehnquist to the Court, I don't really care what he believes on abortion. Beating Roe is the important thing - everything else needs to be taken care of state-by-state. Tossing Specter from the commitee spot he wants is only going to hurt that.
CLICK HERE FOR THREAD, and scroll down to # 81 The link on that thread was working last time I checked.
i'd say winning THIRTY out of fifty states is a MANDATE!!!
Yeah - all Specter is doing is pointing out that the Dems are going to filibuster conservative nominees. Speculation that Pres. Bush is going to appoint a so-called "moderate" is hardly limited to Specter - there was an article on it in the WSJ just recently.
Specter voted for Scalia, Thomas, and Pryor and has promised to send all the President's nominees to a floor vote. That doesn't sound like a pro-abort litmus test to me.
There is NO WAY Specter can be allowed to chair the Judiciary Committee. The GOP has a chance to stop a traitor to the party BEFORE he is in a position to do real harm.......they must take it. Keep calling, folks!
Thank you! And by the way, I know some Luccis in southeast Kansas--very nice people!
Let's remember to keep the prayers going too! Serious prayers!
"With God all things are possible."
Thanks for posting the link. I don't have a clue why my link attempts failed. I posted it exactly the same as I had done on another thread where it worked perfectly, but the preview would come up blank. I thought maybe FR was blocking links to the AFA site, but yours works so I'm still at a loss as to why mine didn't.<p.Anyway, thanks again.
Specter will retaliate by either switching parties or just voting against everything Bush wants for the next four years. That wouldn't bother me if we could get a Democrat to cross the aisle (not very likely).
I don't think we need Specter's vote anymore on anything. Repubs gained votes.
And also there are already some Democrats who vote in support of Bush's programs at times.
Replace Specter as head of the Judiciary!!!!!
Wow. That's significant. Could you tell me, please, where we can find that text, "Several of his colleagues on the committee...?"
Thanks in advance!
Here's the latest action analysis.
Priority 1: Remove Specter from the Judiciary (Day 4)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1272644/posts
I'm calling for my narrow interest activists to call for Kyl or Grassley in order to let the two and their immediate Republican colleagues decide between those two, exclusively. And no, McCain is not an option.
Thanks! That beats one argument we are often encountering (that it can't be done, that Senate colleagues will oppose us, etc.).
Never McCain!
What about Sessions, is that a possibility? I read that Kyl is already in leadership on another position? Is that right?
(And Grassley seems set on Finance.)
http://www.issues2000.org/Senate/Jeff_Sessions.htm
I think he's a go. ...might want to put his name in a comment behind the URL I just posted.
Uh, this URL.
Priority 1: Remove Specter from the Judiciary (Day 4)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1272644/posts
Thanks. I just read your post at the other thread too.
I think it's definitely a good idea to put Sessions name as a choice. He's truly conservative, and as you said, if for some reason Kyl and Grassley refuse, we don't want a RINO to be put in place as a choice.
LOL! It just keeps getting better all the time!
The Bush-Soros Pick (George Soros funded Arlen Specter's reelection!)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1273234/posts
bump
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.