Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

AP: Specter Rewriting Pledge, Senate Leaders Find First Draft Unacceptable
GrassrootsPA ^ | 11/18/04 | GrassrootsPA

Posted on 11/18/2004 10:38:30 AM PST by GeneralHavoc

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-146 next last
To: Coop
Then he's removed as the Chairman, and the Senate count is 54-46. There's no real damage there.

And we want him to be the Republican in exile every time a contentious judicial issue comes up? I don't. Public relations is part of this entire process, ignoring that does the agenda no good. Specter did us a favor by opening his mouth and bringing so much attention to himself and his Chairmanship.

21 posted on 11/18/2004 10:58:30 AM PST by Dolphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Hendrix
The Republicans may have a very small window of opportunity to get Bush's nominees through.

A lot of people said that in 2000 and 2002. Go for everything right now so moderate voters are shocked into voting for rats and we lose everything and more ground in the backlash. Not one of these people could predict what they would eat tommorow much less what the future had in store.

22 posted on 11/18/2004 10:58:38 AM PST by Once-Ler (God Blessed America Again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

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

Something postive will come out of this, I am certain of that. I find it very positive that Senators are seriously considering changing the Senate rules on filibusters. If we can get that done, Specter can have the chairmanship.

23 posted on 11/18/2004 11:01:52 AM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Once-Ler

"A lot of people said that in 2000 and 2002. Go for everything right now so moderate voters are shocked into voting for rats and we lose everything and more ground in the backlash"

I disagree. I think we are where we are because of what Bush has done (his conservative agenda), and I don't think the so called moderates are going to fault Bush or the Republicans for doing whatever it takes to get Bush's judges through. I would be willing to bet anything on that.

That is the Republican's problem; they are too worried about backlash. There won't be any backlash, except from the media.


24 posted on 11/18/2004 11:02:31 AM PST by Hendrix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GeneralHavoc

Sounds like the Republican leadership might be a little smarter this time around. I'm more confident that the grassroot fury will make a difference now.


25 posted on 11/18/2004 11:02:50 AM PST by conservativepoet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneralHavoc

Oh, yeah and when we need to get that last nominee past, the one who will tip the Supreme Court scale to the side of a Roe vs. Wade reversal, Specter's words in writing will keep Specter in line, particularly if (God forbid) Hillary is president. /sarcasm/


26 posted on 11/18/2004 11:03:41 AM PST by TAdams8591 (BORK SPECTER!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GeneralHavoc

Arlen Specter

Magic Bullet Theory
Pro Homosexual Marriage
Pro Abortion
Anti 2nd Ammendment- AWB
Anti 1st Ammendment- McCain Feingold
Pro UN (wants U.S. troops under UN International Criminal Courts
Likes Activist judges..proposes liberal slant litmus test for SCOTUS justices
Friend of SOROS


27 posted on 11/18/2004 11:05:05 AM PST by joesnuffy ("The merit of our Constitution was, not that it promotes democracy, but checks it." Horatio Seymour)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneralHavoc
Specter, for all his warts, has still supported all of Bush 43's nominees. I don't think all the rants about him are necessarily justified.
28 posted on 11/18/2004 11:05:22 AM PST by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F16Fighter; ClancyJ

The GOP are playing hardball with McSpecter!


29 posted on 11/18/2004 11:05:22 AM PST by MamaLucci (Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hendrix
I would rather have him leave the party than to block the judicial nominees.

Forcing him out of the party would probably result in his being more likely to block any judges.

30 posted on 11/18/2004 11:06:05 AM PST by WildTurkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GeneralHavoc

Sorry, but I have no confidence in this guy. Dump him and get it over with. There is much to do and little time to do it. Remove the potential road blocks and lets get this train back on the tracks. We won. Let's start acting like winners for a change.


31 posted on 11/18/2004 11:06:13 AM PST by Eastbound ("Neither a Scrooge nor a Patsy be")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

McCain wouldn't DARE. He's on thin-enough ice as it is--notice his last comments (re Specter) were decidedly pro-Bush. Snow & Collins--no loss whatsoever.


32 posted on 11/18/2004 11:06:29 AM PST by Mach9 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: trickyricky; Coop

The danger in changing the Senate rules on filibuster is it may set a precedent on all filibusters and should the Republican Party fall out of favor with the voters this tool would not be available to stop a one seat rat majority from complete control. Then we might as well do away with the US House which currently operates under those rules.


33 posted on 11/18/2004 11:06:41 AM PST by Once-Ler (God Blessed America Again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Hendrix

He's not leaving the majority to go into the minority...


34 posted on 11/18/2004 11:06:41 AM PST by ken5050
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dolphy

"Specter did us a favor by opening his mouth and bringing so much attention to himself and his Chairmanship."

Right on the money, Dolphy. Specter is very useful to us in his weakened, chastened state.


35 posted on 11/18/2004 11:06:57 AM PST by W1_hooyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GeneralHavoc

either the pubs show some balls, or they'll be history.

they control both houses of the congress + the presidency. if they can't run things, then that's it.

this is the best it's been in my life--republican control. it won't get any better than this.

the dems do more with less.


36 posted on 11/18/2004 11:08:04 AM PST by ken21 (against the democrat plantation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trickyricky; Coop

Whoops. I should have directed that post to Hendrix in post 8


37 posted on 11/18/2004 11:08:53 AM PST by Once-Ler (God Blessed America Again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey
"Forcing him out of the party would probably result in his being more likely to block any judges."

I highly doubt that. He cannot block judges as a mere senator, even if he switched sides. If he joined up with all the liberal republicans, he still could not block a judge on an up or down vote (do the math). I am not advocating forcing him out of the party, but if he leaves because he is not made the head of the judicial committee, so be it.
38 posted on 11/18/2004 11:10:46 AM PST by Hendrix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis
>>>>>"Even under Scottish law, Spector must GO".<<<<

You are absolutely correct.

39 posted on 11/18/2004 11:13:33 AM PST by Thorin ("I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Once-Ler

"The danger in changing the Senate rules on filibuster is it may set a precedent on all filibusters and should the Republican Party fall out of favor with the voters this tool would not be available to stop a one seat rat majority from complete control. Then we might as well do away with the US House which currently operates under those rules."

I am willing to take that chance. Again, that is the problem with Republicans: they are too worried about what might happen. The democrats are always going to not play fair, so no matter what we do to show that we are playing fair (not revoking that rule) will be of no use if they want to do it when and if they get back in power (they will revoke it in a heart beat to stop a minority of republicans). QUIT WORRING ABOUT WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN!


40 posted on 11/18/2004 11:15:26 AM PST by Hendrix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-146 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson