Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
Posted on 11/11/2004 6:47:18 AM PST by cpforlife.org
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 - Many liberal women have never forgiven Senator Arlen Specter for his pointed questioning of Prof. Anita F. Hill, whose accusations of sexual harassment against Judge Clarence Thomas, then a Supreme Court nominee, riveted the nation. But conservatives have never forgiven him for crossing party lines to defeat another Supreme Court nominee, Judge Robert H. Bork.
Now, 17 years later, those conservatives are about to exact their revenge. Emboldened by their role in re-electing President Bush, conservatives are making Mr. Specter - whose brusque independence has earned him the nickname Snarlin' Arlen on Capitol Hill - a test case of their political power. As they try to keep Mr. Specter, a centrist Pennsylvania Republican who supports abortion rights, from heading the Senate Judiciary Committee, they are demanding a steep concession: support for changing a century-old Senate rule that permits judicial nominations to be blocked by filibuster.
"I would be shocked if conservatives don't extract a pound of flesh from Senator Specter," said Richard A. Viguerie, the Republican consultant, who is circulating strategy memos on the issue. He added, "Republicans have long memories. We'll never forget what he did to Judge Bork."
Mr. Specter, a former prosecutor whose sharp legal mind brings him respect, if not affection, from colleagues, is choosing his words carefully. In an interview, he promised to consider all judicial nominees within 30 days. But he did not commit to a rule change, saying only that filibusters were "an unwise practice."
Asked if he fears the chairmanship is slipping from his grasp, the senator replied with characteristic dryness. "Fear," Mr. Specter said, "is not in my lexicon. I'm concerned that it may be."
Conservatives say he ought to be.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Asked if he fears the chairmanship is slipping from his grasp, the senator replied with characteristic dryness. "Fear," Mr. Specter said, "is not in my lexicon. I'm concerned that it may be."
And we will do everything we can to stop you.
Arlen, you should at least fear hell, cause mass murderers go there.
I'll never forgive him invoking "Scottish Law" during the Clinton impeachment - what an @ass...
Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
Better idea: ditch Specter as chairman and get rid of the extra-constitutional filibuster of judicial nominees. I'd like to know how anyone could justify the latter.
[dr_who_2]
> Better idea: ditch Specter as chairman and get rid of the
> extra-constitutional filibuster of judicial nominees. I'd
> like to know how anyone could justify the latter.
ABSOLUTELY! We need to keep our senses, here... why on *earth* should we "promise" Specter a chair that he doesn't deserve, in "exchange" for a "promise" not to use any more unconstitutional filibusters? That's a bit like catching a rapist, and then offering him a light sentence and early parole if he only promises not to rape anyone else!
Aren't there more people who see the insanity of this?
Even though he made a big deal of "not proven", the record shows his vote as "Not Guilty".
PING PING PING
However this works out, I think we have managed to put the fear of God into Snarlin' Arlen...
I don't like the man, don't trust the man, and don't want him with the gavel -- but the Senate is really somewhat immune from our pressure.
Too bad he was just reelected. If he was in the last third of his term he would be a lot easier to handle.
I would think its time for the Republicans to shuffle the deck and force everyone to get on different committes. Put Specter on the foreign relations committee as a chief...can't do much damage there. Same for Hillery...she ought to get some time with other committes too.
"I not only voted against Bork, I led the charge against him."
- Arlen Specter
There are not enough conservative senators to toss Specter, Hagel, Snow, Collins, Lugar & McCain overboard. The Majority Leader has exacted a commitment from Specter and he can be a part of our governing coalition. We don't have to agbree with every position in order to work with him. Do the math, we need these "moderates" too.
Earlier this year, when Kerry had just won the democratic nomination, I heard a call-in talk show discussing Kerry. A caller asked the host and his guest why the media wasn't saying anything about Kerry's anti-war activity, and his testimony before Congress.
The Guest, rather smugly, {You're just gonna have to beleive me, when i say he was smug} said to the caller,
"If the media isn't talking about it, how did you even hear about it?"
And the caller shut them both down when he said,
"Well, I remember it."
I Remember.
Alan Specter's part in borking Bork.
I think I missed that. What is Scottish Law?
I think Specter is doing the math also --- and is realizing he needs these "conservatives" too.
He cited Scottish law in voting not to oust President Clinton...but when I watched him say it on TV, he looked like such a coward...
Actually Specter himself probably does not "Need" conservatives.
He has just been re-elected for 6 years, and his base is Pennsylvania, which went for Kerry.
That however, does not mean we "need" him, and we certainly do not "need" him on Judiciary!
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.