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

Skip to comments.

Democrats Tell President Bush: Don't Propose Judges Against Abortion
Life News ^ | 11/13/06 | Steven Ertelt

Posted on 11/13/2006 4:26:15 PM PST by wagglebee

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Now that the elections have given them control of the Senate, leading Democrats on judicial issues have a message for President Bush. They don't want him to send up for confirmation any judges who would be hostile to legalized abortion or they plan vote down or filibuster them.

Democrats now have 51 votes in the Senate and will likely have a slim one vote majority on the Senate Judiciary Committee when Congress starts its new session in January.

Though they technically have enough votes on the panel and in the Senate to defeat any Bush judicial pick, they may still have a tough time keeping their caucus together as some moderate Democrats joined a group of Republicans in making sure filibusters weren't used to hold up nominees.

But leading pro-abortion Democrats tell Bush he needs to pick someone without a record opposed to abortion in order to get judges -- especially for the Supreme Court -- confirmed in their Senate.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, told Newsday that Bush should nominate only "consensus" nominees.

Sen. Charles Schumer, of New York, was more strident and vowed to block any nominee he feels is too extreme on abortion.

"We will do everything in our power to see that that happens," he told Newsday, saying filibusters should be expected. He added that Bush "will have to negotiate with us, because we'll have the majority."

There are no current Supreme Court openings, but pro-abortion Justice John Paul Stevens, who was the subject of retirement speculations shortly before the elections, is 86 years-old and battling significant health problems.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg, another abortion advocate is 73 years-old and has her own health concerns.

Had the GOP kept control of the Senate, the liberal judges may have waited to retire, but they could step down feeling that the chances they would be replaced by a less conservative judge are higher with Democrats heading up the chamber.

How Bush reacts to Democratic control may be seen in whether he chooses to re-nominate six conservative appeals court judges who have yet to be confirmed.

Should a Supreme Court opening develop closer to the 2008 presidential elections, that may put more pressure on Senate Democrats to hold off on confirming a replacement until afterwards.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortion; abortionequalsmurder; adoptionnotabortion; babykillers; children; democrats; demoncrats; demonicrats; dimmocrats; dumbocrats; homicideinthewomb; infanticide; innocentlittlebaby; jackass; jackasses; judiciary; kids; letthebabylive; life; partyofdeath; prodeath; prolife; sanctity; slaughterthehelpless; thxmom4notkillingme; yourmotherchoselife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-224 next last
How differently things would have been if Frist had used the nuclear/Constitutional option last year.
1 posted on 11/13/2006 4:26:17 PM PST by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cgk; Coleus; cpforlife.org; Mr. Silverback; narses; 8mmMauser

Pro-Life Ping


2 posted on 11/13/2006 4:26:50 PM PST by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Gee, what a shock. Hope the Catholics who turned to the rat party of death are pleased.


3 posted on 11/13/2006 4:28:06 PM PST by ladyinred (RIP my precious Lamb Chop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

The Gang of 14 really screwed us.


4 posted on 11/13/2006 4:28:19 PM PST by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Yeah, well thank John McCain. Thanks a heap.


5 posted on 11/13/2006 4:28:23 PM PST by DoughtyOne (Victory will never be achieved while defining Conservatism downward, and forsaking it's heritage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Why so? The Dems now have a majority. It's more likely the GOP who will be filibustering.

The only possible strategy of the pro-lifers at this point is to harp on the most egredious abuses of abortion, and hopefully win back the high ground in this battle. Constantly remind folks that the Dems are in favor of partial birth abortions. Constantly point out the many failings of the judiciary.


6 posted on 11/13/2006 4:29:51 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Bah. You power is illusory, abortion pushers. The prolife wave will sweep your party clean of that foul position.


7 posted on 11/13/2006 4:29:53 PM PST by rjp2005 (Lord have mercy on us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Babies must be sacrificed on the altar of liberalism, it is after all one of their sacraments.


8 posted on 11/13/2006 4:30:21 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Can't we still do it? I mean, those just elected aren't at the job yet.


9 posted on 11/13/2006 4:30:33 PM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Thanks to Frist, who is now GONE...and just why were the gutless Republicans afaid of the nuclear option? Did they think it may cost them the marjority? Not called the stupid party for no reason.


10 posted on 11/13/2006 4:30:54 PM PST by greyfoxx39 (Re:Terrorists: Realize that it has nothing to do with what we have done but with what they want.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

What is it that the GOP will be able to filibuster? Are you saying that the Republicans should filibuster Bush's nominees?


11 posted on 11/13/2006 4:31:22 PM PST by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
The President should have a two part reply. First -


"Go forth and multiply."

Second - he should say, "Well, Senator Tester, Senator Casey, Senator Webb - your constituents voted for you because you weren't going to sign up for liberal baby killing nonsense. You can either obey your party and be exposed as having lied to the people who voted for you, or you can stick to the supposed principles you espouse and vote for my judges. Capiche?"

Regards, Ivan

12 posted on 11/13/2006 4:31:42 PM PST by MadIvan (I aim to misbehave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
They don't want him to send up for confirmation any judges who would be hostile to legalized abortion

What is more hostile than piercing the back of a baby's neck and sucking out it's brains?

13 posted on 11/13/2006 4:31:48 PM PST by DrewsDad (PIERCE the EARMARKS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Why would he do what they say? Nominate a conservative...they say no. Nominate a more conservative...they say no. Nominate even more conservative....they say no.........how long can they go saying no? Make them do it.

MAKE THEM DO IT! I do NOT believe they will turn down nominee after nominee after nominee. I don't think they can sustain it. It will become the dominant issue on the news.......MAKE THEM DO IT!

Make my day....vote down judge after judge after judge....do it Democrats. I dare ya. We can keep nominating a new one over and over again for two years if thats what you want to do.

Anyway...if it was me thats what I would do.
14 posted on 11/13/2006 4:31:50 PM PST by Arkinsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker

We still have time before the abort-a-babies take over.


15 posted on 11/13/2006 4:31:50 PM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

But what about those pro-life Dems that were just elected? (end/sarcasm)


16 posted on 11/13/2006 4:31:55 PM PST by dawn53
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred

Yeah that was my thought. Also, those conservatives who wanted to send the GOP a message.


17 posted on 11/13/2006 4:32:02 PM PST by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
and just why were the gutless Republicans afaid of the nuclear option?

Most GOP politicians are afraid of their own shadow.

18 posted on 11/13/2006 4:32:04 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Isn't there a law that allows the president to appoint the judges he wants when the Congress and Senate are on recess? He doesn't need their approval?


19 posted on 11/13/2006 4:32:12 PM PST by xtinct (I was the next door neighbor kid's imaginary friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

No. But I am saying that they are more likely to filibuster Bush's nominees than the Dems are. They Dems will just vote them down. They are in control.


20 posted on 11/13/2006 4:32:42 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-224 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