AP: Specter Rewriting Pledge, Senate Leaders Find First Draft Unacceptable

GrassrootsPA ^ | 11/18/04 | GrassrootsPA

[GeneralHavoc]

The good news is that GOP Leadership is not letting him off the hook easy. Notice that Senate leaders rejected his first draft.

Associated Press:

Specter, who supports abortion rights, also is pledging a strong predisposition to support the president's nominees for the bench, according to these sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity. The Pennsylvania senator's draft statement affirms that he will not impose a litmus test on nominees based on the issue of abortion, but does not include a blanket pledge to vote for them.

Specter's written statement, apparently undergoing changes, largely covers positions he has staked out in public statements in recent days. Even so, several GOP sources said one early version was deemed unacceptable by Senate leaders in a meeting on Wednesday, particularly on the contentious issue of changing Senate procedures to eliminate the possibility of a filibuster by opponents of a nomination.

[RockinRight]

This just might turn out OK after all. Wait and see.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Sounds like they have a good plan going....he could do real damage if he gets pissed off and does a Jeffers....

[Paine in the Neck]

They need to pin him down on more than just abortion. What about 2nd Amendment? What about 10th Amendment? What about tort reform? What about creeping dependence on citations of foreign law as precedent?

[conservativecorner]

Let's keep the e-mails, letters, calls and faxes going folks. This is way too important to leave it up to the country club set in the senate.

[Delphinium]

Pledge to whom? His word is no good.

[Coop]

he could do real damage if he gets pissed off and does a Jeffers....

How? Then he's removed as the Chairman, and the Senate count is 54-46. There's no real damage there.

[Hendrix]

I would rather have him leave the party than to block the judicial nominees. The Republicans may have a very small window of opportunity to get Bush's nominees through. If we don't take advantage of the window of opportunity, then we may not get that opportunity again for a very long time.

The Republicans need to change the Senate filibuster rule for judicial nominations, or the democrats will use that to stop Bush, regardless of any threat in the next election for senators in the red states up for reelection. Neither party should have the power to filibuster judicial nominees, so we have nothing to lose by changing that rule.

[GeneralHavoc]

I agree his word is no good.

Thank goodness they are making him put something in writing ;)

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

He would take some of his moderate friends with him, McCain, Collins, Snowe,....

[Digger]

Why do we have to go thru this crapola. He a menace to the conservative agenda. GET RID OF HIM.This guy can pick the staff, etc. He can cause much more damage than a word on a piece of paper. He & the other 99 do not adhere to the words in the Constitution so why this silly piece of paper. Oust him now & move on with the agenda that the people sent on election night. End of story!!

[trickyricky]

There's no real damage there.

AMEN!!! It was a disgrace to support him for re-election when he had a CONSERVATIVE
running against him in the primary.
I would have rather seen a democrat whip that RINO's ass.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

AND , having American Soldiers subject to an international Court, that is a BIGGIE in my book, sovereignty issue.

[Diogenesis]

"Even under Scottish law, Spector must GO".

[Digger]

He would take some of his moderate friends with him, McCain, Collins, Snowe,....

Then we will see just who the obstructionists to our agenda are. I doubt that they would go but let's see who with us or against us.

[Once-Ler]

They are not pinning him down on abortion. They are pinning him down on judicial nominees.

[Coop]

He would take some of his moderate friends with him, McCain, Collins, Snowe,....

Like Jeffords did? :-)

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

This is about strategy....we as conservatives are moving the country ever so slowly to the right,,,,and it is slow and very painful after 70 years of the country having lurched far to the left....but we must chose the battles carefully....

In my opinion that is what is going on here....

[Hendrix]

I would rather call their bluff and see if they go that to not implement Bush's agenda because we are afraid that something bad might happen or that we have to get tuff with the democrats instead of playing nice, like Republicans often do (which causes them to lose in the Senate).

Bush and the Senate need to be bold and do whatever it takes to implement the conservative agenda, even if it makes the other side mad.

[Hendrix]

"This is about strategy....we as conservatives are moving the country ever so slowly to the right,,,,and it is slow and very painful after 70 years of the country having lurched far to the left....but we must chose the battles carefully...."

That's true to a point, but Republicans often are too timid in choosing the battles. There are lots of issues that are ripe for choosing (they won't get any more ripe), so it's time to get to work to make it happen.