Posted on 11/08/2004 3:30:58 AM PST by Always Right
} -->
Our Resolve:
Whereas, liberal Senator Arlen Specter is in line to be Chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
Whereas, liberal Arlen Specter has a stated litmus test against pro-abortion judges.
Whereas, liberal Arlen Specter has stated he will fight against conservative judges
Whereas, in the past liberal Arlen Specter has helped defeat great judges like Robert Bork,
Whereas, the Democrats have loaded the Judiciary Committee with extreme liberals such as Kennedy, Feinstein, Leahy, and Schumer.
Whereas, liberal Arlen Specter is in a position to turn our huge and historic election victory into a defeat by killing the nomination of all decent judges,
Be it resolved, that we will do whatever it takes to get liberal Arlen Specter off the Judiciary Committee!
Updates:
10-8 Update: We are in a critical week. A fellow Freeper has informed me that there will be LOTS of activity this week. The Committee on Committees will be formed and important committee assignments will be made. There will be one or two new spots on the Judicial Committee for the GOP. These spots must be filled by rock solid conservatives. Frisk of course will be a key player here, and so will Senator Kyl. E-mail and fax them and tell them the kind of committee members we need. They will also make initial selections on who the committee chairmen will be. I assume they will follow the seniority rules, but they probably don't have to. The actual GOP Judicial Committee members will meet and vote on their Chairman next week, November 17. If someone in the Committee wants to challenge for the Chairman's job, it will be done there. A final vote on committee Chairmen will be done later by all the GOP Senators.
*****URGENT: Things are happening now! Committee assignments, initial Chairman selections. Keep Sen. Frist and Sen. Kyl informed that we want Conservative appointments on Judiciary and no Arlen Specter.
Karl Rove's Comments: "What I do know is that he told the president that, if he, Senator Specter, were to become chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, that every one of the president's nominees would receive a prompt hearing, a vote in the committee within a reasonable period of time, and that his appellate nominees would all be brought to the floor for an up-or-down decision on the floor. And we're in — Senator Specter's a man of his word, and we'll take him at his word if he becomes chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee."
One thing to note, Rove said 'if' not once, but twice! Something tells me Specter is not out of the woods. However, Rove and Bush seem to put too much faith in Arlen Specter's word. But which Arlen is telling the truth, the one who promised Bush or the one who promised his liberal media friends that none of Bush's extremist judges would be approved to the Bench?
My Question: Why is Specter, a man who opposes everything the GOP stands for on judicial nominations, even on the Judicial Committee???? It really makes no sense.
James Dobson: "There are many, many members of that committee that are more qualified and less of a problem than Senator Specter....He is a problem, and he must be derailed."
10-7 Update: According to an information from an interview on Concerned Women for America website, the GOP members of the Senate Judiciary Committee meet on Wednesday, November 17 to vote on who they select for Chairman. This is an open vote so everyone on the committee will know where they stand. There needs to be someone to CHALLENGE Specter for the Chairman's role. Anyone on the committee would be far superior to Specter. Grassley has removed himself from consideration, but Kyl or Sessions seem like good candidates. We must contact their offices of ALL the GOP committee members and plant some seeds and get some feedback on this. We only have 9 days left on this.
Focus: Drafting a CHALLENGER to Specter - E-mail, fax, phone GOP Committee Members! - Only 9 days left tell they vote! Any feedback you get from any Senate office is appreciated.
Once each committee selects their Chairman, all GOP Senators vote up or down on these Chairmen in a closed vote. Details on when this happens are not known. It is important to contact your GOP Senator's office and voice your opposition to Specter. They will get to vote on it!
Keep up the Good Work: We are being heard! Numerous stories out there prove that we are making a difference.
Grassley somewhat defends Specter: Grassley came out yesterday and told us we don't need to worry about Specter. Not exactly a strong endorsement. His reason, "you know, he led the fight to confirm Justice Thomas, and he's been behind all of the President's appointments the last four years." Really? Specter hindered the nomination of Leon Holmes and expressed serious doubts about him. Specter's position meant that Holmes went up for a vote without a recommendation from the Judiciary Committee. And for Justice Thomas, Specter supported Thomas out of political necessity. Specter was taking a beating for what he did to Robert Bork and was facing a tough re-election. Specter was forced to redeem himself or would have been voted out of office. Specter is not a wild card here, even before last's week press conference where Specter warned Bush about his nominees, Specter has made in position clear during this election. Seeking Post-Gazette's endorsement, Specter went to their editorial board, and promised that no extremists would be approved for the bench. Extremist judges in Specter language are those like Scalia.
Watch out for Specter: Specter knows he is in trouble. Specter is going on the talk show circuit to make his case. Don't buy into his BS. Specter will point out that he has supported Bush's nominees. He voted for Thomas. He voted for Scalia. Of course, so did Senator Kerry and 96 other Senators. Like Senator Kerry, Specter wants to maintain the liberal balance on the court. They will only support a conservative judge if it does not threaten Roe v. Wade. Senator Specter says he doesn't have a litmus test. But just ask Specter what he would do if the court were divided 5-4 on abortion. I am 100% convinced Specter would pull out any and all stops to make sure a pro-abortion judge is appointed. The more I learn about Specter, the more I see that protecting Roe v. Wade is his number one priority. This is why Specter will do and say ANYTHING to get the Judiciary Chairman assignment. Specter is a snake, when he goes to pat you on the back watch out for the knife in his hand. Specter flat out hates social conservatives and 'strict constructionist' judges. Specter is a 'living document' guy.
Ann Coulter was Right: Back in April, Ann warned us that the election between Toomey and Specter was the second most important election of the year. In hindsight, it must be concluded that Ann was dead on. Specter was worthless in helping Bush carry Pennsylvania, but now will be a big thorn in our side on getting judicial nominees confirmed.
Allies:
Coalition for a Fair Judiciary
National Right to Life Committee
Focus on the Family
Confused Conservatives:
Petitions on the Web:
We Want a Strong Leader on the Senate Judiciary Committee - GOPUSA
"New Pro-Abortion Senate Judiciary Chair?" - Voices Heard
Arlen Specter MUST NOT become Chairman of the Judiciary Committee. - nospecter
Pull chair out from under RINO Arlen Specter - Conservative Petitions
Petition to Republican Senators Opposing the Election of Senator Arlen Specter - AFA
THE FAIR JUDICIARY OATH - Coalition for Fair Judiciary
Latest News Stories:
Specter: "I not only voted against Bork, I led the charge aGrassroots PAgainst him." - Grassroots.PA 11-7
Specter says he won't slow anti-abortion court nominees - CNN 11-7
Arlen Specter - "Bork" Him - Intellectual Conservative 11-6
Judges Following No Law (why Arlen Specter must go) - ****Robert Bork, 8-12-04
Keep Arlen Specter off chair of Judiciary Committee! - WND 11-6
Who's spinning? Specter or reporter? - WND 11-5
All eyes on Sen. Specter - Washington Times 11-5
Conservative wing raises fuss over Specter's views - New York Times 11-5
Specter faces battle for Judiciary chair - Washington Times 11-5
Sen. Specter Ignites Firestorm of Opposition - NewsMax 11-5
Suffering Specter - Pittsburg Tribune Review 11-5
Specter's Remarks Trigger Protest - Focus on the Family 11-5
Lawmaker wants Grassley on judiciary panel - Des Moines Register 11-5
Specter 'Borked' Himself from Senate Judiciary Committee - Concerned Women for America 11-5
Pro-Life Pray-In Planned to Stop Specter - CNSNEWS 11-5
Will Specter Chair Judiciary? - Human Events 11-5
Thank You, Arlen - National Review 11-3
GOP Sen. Specter Vows to Block Bush's Nominees - NewsMax 10-29
The Northeastern Liberal (Kerry and Specter, two peas in a pod.) - Evan-Novak 3-11-04
Background:
Actual Transcript of News Conference Wherein Specter Threatens Bush's Judicial Nominees
Specter's "Clarification" of his Threats to Pres. Bush's Judicial Nominees
Another Soros Specter Connection (The Bush-Soros Pick)
SPECTER SLAMS CONSERVATIVES IN CAMPAIGN LETTER, ATTACKS PRO-LIFERS, CHRISTIANS
Contact Information:
Bill Frist: E-mail: senator.frist@senate.gov
461 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON DC 20510
PHONE: (202) 224-3344
Web Form (Email his office): http://www.frist.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=AboutSenatorFrist.ContactForm
Contact Information for all Senators
Sen. Orrin Hatch, UT, current Committee Chair PH: 202-224-5251 FX: 202-224-6331
Sen. Jon Kyl, AZ PH: 202-224-4521 FX: 202-224-2207
Sen. John Cornyn, TX PH: 202-224-2934 FX: 202-228-2856
Sen. Charles Grassley, IA PH: 202-224-3744 FX: 319-363-7179
Sen. Mike DeWine, OH PH: 202-224-2315 FX: 202-224-6519
Sen. Jeff Sessions, AL PH: 202-224-4124 FX: 202-224-3149
Sen. Lindsey Graham, SC PH: 202-224-5972 FX: 202-224-3808
Sen. Larry Craig, ID PH: 202-224-2752 FX: 202-228-1067
Sen. Saxby Chambliss, GA PH: 202-224-3521 FX: 202-224-0103
Homepages of Judiciary Committe Members:
Orrin Hatch Chuck Grassley Jon Kyl Mike DeWine Jeff Sessions Lindsey Graham Larry Craig Saxby Chambliss John Cornyn Arlen Specter
Media Contacts:
Special@foxnews.com; rush@eibnet.com; hannity@foxnews.com; editor@weeklystandard.com; beltwayboys@foxnews.com; tblankley@washingtontimes.com; jmccaslin@washingtontimes.com; gpierce@washingtontimes.com; jseper@washingtontimes.com; Templar119@aol.com; malkin@comcast.net; letters@charleskrauthammer.com; ben@cspc.org; adams_mike@hotmail.com; ballen@t3energy.com; greg@therightbalance.org; VAlpher@aol.com; friends@atr.org; ruddy@spectator.org; editor@spectator.org; rjbacak@sbcglobal.net; online.editors@barrons.com; me@glennbeck.com; carol@carolbernhard.com; jennifer.biddison@heritage.org; kotta@foxnews.com; briankbodine@yahoo.com; jimbohannon@1050wevd.com; JeffBolton@woai.com; wackerma@bowdoin.edu; chrisb@unt.edu; erniebrown@americaatnight.com; bucc@bucknellconservatives.org; calpundit@cox.net; chairman@cyr.org; joshcampbell@mail.utexas.edu; info@capitolhillblue.com; castellanopj@earthlink.net; charles@littlegreenfootballs.com; bobcole@clearchannel.com; cn@isi.org; letters@commentarymagazine.com; lauren.conner@bba02.bus.utexas.edu; dj@flipsideshow.com; copleyd@wharton.upenn.edu; tom@anncoulter.org; info@collegegop.org; cugop@colorado.edu; crider@mail.utexas.edu;
hill2@cp.chemeketa.edu; j0annaz@yahoo.com; rcuster@yaf.org; pundit@dailypundit.com; lukerval@hotmail.com; davidson@collegegop.org; txtau@yahoo.com; holiday.dmitri@foxnews.com; sara@studentsforacademicfreedom.org; larry@larryelder.com; tpelia@yahoo.com; elizabeth@cspc.org; cfennell@ucsd.edu; mfinch@cspc.org; sarahfloerke@mail.com; rforest@ev1.net; rachelzfriedman@yahoo.com; mike@mikeonline.com; cdganske@yahoo.com; bubbgarcia@yahoo.com; ggermany@austin.rr.com; presACG@aol.com; lynn.gibson@heritage.org; giselarm@san.rr.com; jglazov@rogers.com; fgonzalez@isi.org; opeds@gopusa.com; redshift_7@yahoo.com; MJGriffing@hotmail.com; frn@freeper.org; bac@compuserve.com; michaelh@ductape.net; Hannity@aol.com; khart@crnc.org; johnhawkins@rightwingnews.com; roger@rogerhedgecock.com; jchenry_628@mail.utexas.edu; hhewitt@hughhewitt.com; holco004@mailhost1.csusm.edu; suggestions@lauraingraham.com; pundit@instapundit.com; feedback@intellectualconservative.com; Rollye@rollye.net; calidawl217@yahoo.com; niucrchair@yahoo.com; amw@judgemendozawaterhouse.com; rdj@mail.utexas.edu; gk3385@yahoo.com; kfir@protestwarrior.com; kinghorn1836@yahoo.com; becky@becky4congress.com; pklinkne@hamilton.edu; dks@wava.com; comments.kurtz@nationalreview.com; JCL159522@yahoo.com; lars@larslarson.com; mark@marklarson.com; jleo@usnews.com; binghamtonreview@yahoo.com
Previous Threads:
Priority 1: Remove Specter from Judiciary (Thread 1)
Priority 1: Remove Specter from the Judciary (Day 2)
Priority 1: Remove Specter from Judiciary (Day 3)
Priority 1: Remove Specter from the Judiciary (Day 4)
Priority 1: Remove Specter from the Judiciary (Day 5)
Specter = Kerry (from 'The Northeast Liberal' - Evans-Novak)
Bork's approach to reading the Constitution was too "narrow," and Bork didn't appreciate it as "a living, growing document" in Specter's words. Don't forget this is the man in line to chair the Judiciary Committee next year.
Yes, Democrats were sending tax dollars to abortion clinics, and Republicans wanted to add a condition to that money. If an abortionist wanted to abort a minor's unborn child without the parents' knowledge, he could reject the federal funding.
One more detail: the notification rule was waived in the case of "medical emergencies," a broad term which went largely undefined. Still, Kerry and Specter agreed that this was too restrictive. Taxpayer funding for abortionists ought to come with no strings attached, the two concurred.
Neither Senator could point to deficit reduction as their rationale-the bill simply shifted the money to domestic federal programs.
Then, on the fifth roll-call vote of the year, Kerry and Specter helped defeat a pilot program for school choice for poor families only. The provision came with authorization of new funds, and so it could not be accused of draining the public schools.
On that same day, the two voted hand-in-hand a number of times against the GOP leadership to protect the lawyers.
Specter, of course, changed his tune on tax cuts last year (during a time of budget deficts), when Pat Toomey announced his primary challenge.
George W. Bush thinks he can win Pennsylvania. He seems to think having Arlen Specter on the ticket below him will help. Trying to convince voters to vote for Bush and Specter will be a tough row to hoe, especially when it comes to explaining his positions on taxes, cloning, school choice, the life of the unborn, and the direction of the federal courts. Kerry and Specter would be the more natural pair for voters to choose.
Pennsylvania Republicans have a chance this April 27 to help the Bush campaign in the Keystone State have a clear coherent message on life, the strength of the military, and federal budget.
Otherwise, Bush will need to explain why Kerry's positions the wrong ones for a president to take, but just dandy for a senator.
***Ping****Now is not the time to let up. We need to keep pressure on for the next two weeks if we want to shape the Judiciary Committee. No RINOS! Call, fax, e-mail. Thanks for your effort, we are making a difference.
BTTT!!!!!!!
Arlen's name should always be spelled as 'S.P.E.C.T.R.', denoting sinister, shadowy evil.
Specter blunders on Roe vs. Wade
"In truth, Specter cannot really repudiate what he said. His modified stand only pledged to guarantee ''prompt action'' by the committee, not to actively support any Bush nominee. The test is whether the Republican establishment will tolerate a Judiciary chairman who opposes the will of voters who gave Bush a second term and continued GOP control of Congress based on him favoring traditional values."
I predict Specter will get the chair.
It makes sense to have a "pro-choice" Republican Judicial Committee Chairman, when you know Specter will allow a vote. His reputation as an abortion supporter will be advantagous as a response when the MSM tries to derail future nominees.
Rove came out Sun on Fox and said "Senator Specter is a man of his word, and we'll take him at his word if he becomes chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee...He told the president, 'I will make certain your nominees receive a hearing. I'll make certain they receive a vote, and the appellate nominees will be brought to the floor,' "
Dubya has done more for the unborn than any other President in history. I trust his judgement. Dubya, Cheney, Santorum, and Allen supported Specter for re-election. Maybe they know something you don't.
Sen. Specter is an old time republican. You remember, the kind who went along to get along with the democrats in the 70's. He is still a liberal republican in that old mold, not recognizing that our country has grown more conservative. Events have passed Mr. Specter by and he is grasping at straws to maintain relevance. He was given a run for his money by a real (read conservative) republican during the primaries and we conservatives know him for what he is: the republican version of Chuck Schumer who loves the media spotlight and the television camera, but as a man is souless.
Senator Specter is trying to maintain his political clout. I predict that he will fail to get the chairmanship of the judiciary committee and will fade into obscurity because other republicans cannot accept his pulsinanimous vacilation.
Call, fax, e-mail and visit your Senators in D.C. BTTT
Two Rove "ifs" that make a difference IMO BTTT
Let's wait & see how things shake out, before calling the calvary. All this hysteria is getting to be a bit much. Guys, we all have to remember Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment "though shalt not speak ill of another Republican"
You all have to understand that democrats are waiting to divide and conquer us. Let's not give them the opportunity.
Abortion is our wedge issue. But it only retains its potency as long as Roe vs Wade remains intact. If it is overturned, abortion could become an issue that could easily be turned against us, and cost us power
Good post. We need to see this through - I've been informed it's worth doing from FRiends in D.C. and must be initiated from the bottom up...let's go.
You do what you need to do...
Specter is on the run, but we can't let him hide.
No, Arlen is probably "not on the run." This is a man of total self-confidence in himself and the people of PA who blindly prop him up every six years. Arlen Specter believes that he is synonymous with the word "truth" even when he is WRONG! I wonder what PA people see in him.
bump
BTTT
Nice talking points, but I addressed all that in my post.
Supreme Court nominations are just TOO IMPORTANT to trust a liberal with. Make no mistake, Arlen Specter is a liberal, beholden to liberal special interest groups. He must NOT get the chair of the Judiciary Committee.
Just called every Repub committee member. They're getting swamped! Keep up the calls and pressure.
Great news! Thanks for the report. I am glad to see the effort isn't fading.
Yep, how they interpret the Constitution is key to what our government can and can not do. We don't need liberal activists on the court who will force their agenda down our throats.
Is it me or does the " The Committee on Committees" seem freakin STUPID!!
Is there a 'Committee for the Committe on Committes'
Freakin Government waste.
Not really. It isn't a government function, but a GOP function. There has to be a way for the GOP to allocate who serves on what committee. How would you go about making committee assignments?
WE’VE DONE OUR JOB – NOW YOU DO YOURS!
Millions of Americans went to the polls on November 2 to give President Bush and his agenda for America a mandate. Prior to that, millions of voters worked long hours and donated hard earned money to build the grassroot efforts to bring supporters to the polls and vote for President Bush. We’ve spoken – loud and clear. We fully support President Bush and his vision for our country.
One of the most important items in his agenda is appointing judges who are not swayed by personal opinion but ones who will follow the Constitution and uphold the laws of the land rather than writing laws from the bench. Rather than deal in labels or litmus tests, candidates should be chosen for their devotion to the fair reading of the law.
The Democrats have chosen the Judiciary Committee as their main battleground in their quest to lead this country to their beliefs – beliefs that are not supported by a majority of Americans. A strong Chairman of the Judiciary Committee is vital to ensure that ALL nominees are vetted quickly and fairly and sent to the Senate for an up or down vote. The Chairmanship should not be awarded to anyone simply due to seniority, but should be awarded to the individual who is most qualified to run this committee efficiently and fairly.
Senator Specter sees this Chairmanship as his “reward” for years of service. He covets the power of this position. However, he is NOT qualified to lead this committee and has shown his lack of integrity and belief in Republican values again and again. His words and actions show he has his own agenda and not one necessarily in agreement with President Bush or Republican concepts. We, the voters who spoke on November 2, demand the Republican members of the Senate do YOUR JOB and appoint a qualified Chairman to the Judiciary Committee. This demand eliminates Senator Specter who is NOT qualified.
For what it's worth - IMHO - we will be better served not to focus on any one issue such as abortion - but focus on the need to appoint judges who will honor the Constitution and follow the law rather than write law from the bench.
Thanks for your comment. I really didn't see we were focusing on abortion so much. The main reason abortion is discussed is that Roe v. Wade is Arlen's litmus test. The focus is on get strict Constitutionalist judges on the bench, and Roe v. Wade has no Constitutional basis.
Well stated!
Good point. I got a little concerned that so many of the anti-Specter petitions were sponsored by Right-to-Life groups -- not that there's anything wrong with that since Specter himself threw Roe v Wade in the mix, but I agree with you the big picture of strict Constitutionalists are what we're ultimately after.
I doubt that I'll receive a reply to my emails - other than the standard "thank you", but if something of substance comes in, I'll post it.
BTW- thanks and appreciation for your hard work on this endeavor.
then who appoints the committee on committe members :)
"I have said that bluntly during the course of the campaign and before. When the Philadelphia Inquirer endorsed me, they quoted my statement that Roe vs. Wade was inviolate." He suggested that "nobody can be confirmed" who does not accept abortion rights.
I predict that without a public admission of wrong-doing, he is toast!
A good assumption is Frist. He delegates all the committee assignment to that committee. The politics of appointing 55 Sentors to 16 Committees and assigning a chairman would be an overwhelming task for one person and be full of political minefields. When someone gets mad over the assignments, then Frist can fall back and blame it on the committee on committees. Typical political CYA.
I just got a call from the Repub Senatorial Committee asking for MONEY! Can you believe it?
I told the caller NO WAY, NOT ONE MORE DIME until they stop Specter from being selected as Chairman.
Please, everyone, let them know NO MORE MONEY unless they stop Specter!
Your link senator.frist@senate.gov came back returned email.
[Page: S1694] GPO's PDF
---
Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, I have sought recognition to comment briefly on the pending nomination of Judge Charles Pickering for the circuit court of appeals, which was heard by the Judiciary Committee yesterday, with the vote postponed until next week.
I support Judge Pickering because I think Judge Pickering, in the year
[Page: S1695] GPO's PDF
The opposition raised against Judge Pickering, in large measure, is about what he was as a Mississippi State Senator in the 1970s.
It is my hope that at a minimum we will send Judge Pickering's nomination to the floor of the Senate for a vote by the full Senate. The Constitution provides for confirmation by the Senate--not by the Senate Judiciary Committee. There are solid indicators that if Judge Pickering reached the floor, there would be 51 or more votes for his confirmation.
When you take into account an analysis of the comments within the beltway by those who oppose Judge Pickering vociferously, and those in Mississippi who know him best, they are for him. Those who talk about him in Mississippi talk in specifics about how he took a courageous stand against a leader of the Ku Klux Klan, about how he sided with an African American who was a defendant in a case where there was a white victim, something which was frequently not the case in the South.
This may be a warmup for the next Supreme Court nomination.
We have already seen some indicators of that with some members of the Judiciary Committee saying that a litmus test should be applied, and, if a nominee will not pledge to uphold Roe v. Wade, that nominee is not appropriate for confirmation.
This is an effort, in effect, to equate Brown v. Board of Education on segregation, with Roe v. Wade. It is obvious that if someone did not support Brown v. Board of Education and desegregation, that person would not be considered fit for the Federal bench today. But to apply a litmus test more broadly is very troublesome, in my opinion.
It is my hope that if Judge Pickering receives a negative vote in committee along party lines, which seems almost certain, that at a minimum he would be sent to the floor for full floor consideration.
We ought to establish a truce--an armistice--on the partisan in-fighting which has been ongoing on nominations. When we had a Democrat in the White House and a Republican-controlled Senate, it was the mirror image of what we have today with Republican President Bush in the White house and a Senate Judiciary Committee in the Senate controlled by the Democrats. I said the same thing when we had President Clinton in the White House and a Republican-controlled Senate. I crossed party lines to vote for Judge Paez and Judge Berzon, Judge Gregory and Bill Lann Lee for Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.
It is my hope that we will establish a protocol.
I think Senator McConnell was right when he said yesterday in the Judiciary Committee hearing that we are facing an ``institutional crisis.''
The American people do not like the partisan bickering--Democrats versus Republicans--especially when it comes to the selection of Federal judges and there is a judicial emergency in many circuits.
It is my hope that we will move ahead to try to end this partisanship.
There is solid precedent for submitting nominees to the full Senate when there is a negative or tied vote in committee. Judge Bork was defeated 8 to 5 in committee. Yet his nomination was sent to the floor for consideration as a Supreme Court nomination.
Justice Clarence Thomas had a tie vote in the committee of 7 to 7, but by a vote of 13 to 1 his nomination was sent to the floor.
Six nominees for district court or circuit courts have been sent to the full Senate when they did not receive an affirmative vote in committee--since 1951.
We still have time to revise the thinking on Judge Pickering. We still have time for an analysis on an appropriate way to handle Judge Pickering. But I submit that we ought to establish a principle from the Judiciary Committee that, if the vote is strictly along party lines, the matter be put before the full Senate for consideration.
I thank my distinguished colleague from New Hampshire for allowing me to precede him on the floor.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
Thanks, interesting speech. Specter was relunctantly playing the role of good soldier, but I still don't think he is trust-worthy. Some of the stuff he said just doesn't jive with other things he has said over the years.
I'm sure he became more moderate as Hatch's term loomed closer.
Why, that falls under the Divine Right of kings, of course. :-)
See also: United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary Find & Write your Senators & Reps Here Senator Frist Web Form http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1271959/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1271129/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1271211/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1270529/posts/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1272622/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1270632/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1270185/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1271838/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1272325/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1272062/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1272025/posts http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1271617/posts |
That and $2.00 will get you a cup of coffe, unless you are at Starbucks.
No, but Laura Ingraham is determined and motivated to keep the Senate Judiciary Chair from going to Specter.
IMO--Sean aided and abetted a self professed promoter of the holocaust.
Please expound.
Awesome job..Thanks..glad you're on our side....
Try this link -
http://frist.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=AboutSenatorFrist.ContactForm
It seemed to work for me.
I was listening to the talking heads on FOX who seem to believe they will appoint Specter as Judciary head.
I tell you right now, if they appoint Specter as head of the Judiciary AND we fail to get Conservative Justices, there are many of us who will leave the party.
Thanks. Comments are always welcomed. Positive comments are what keep people motivated.
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.