Posted on 11/04/2004 9:57:49 AM PST by Syco
Dear Senator Frist,
After a long and contentious fight to retain the White House and expand our majority in both houses of Congress, I am extremely dismayed by comments made by Senator Specter regarding the President's right to choose his own candidates for the nation's judiciary. After several years of stonewalling on the part of Democrats in the Senate Judiciary Committee, it is incredibly distressing to see a member of the Republican party attempting to block excellent and qualified judges from the bench because of their conservative ideology.
I am a partisan. I will continue to work for our party's success because I believe that we embody the principles that are best for the nation. But make no mistake, conservative members of the Republican party will not continue to support the GOP if a very small minority of our Senators refuse to give a fair hearing to judges who agree with the party platform.
The last election should be a wakeup call to party leadership. The single most important issue to voters was "moral values". The party did a masterful job of getting Evangelical and other Conservative voters to the polls - voters who stayed home in 2000 - largely because of the moral issues facing the nation. It would be disastrous for the party and country if these voters felt betrayed and did not return to the polls in 2006 and 2008.
Renegade judges have been legislating from the bench for decades and have recently accelerated a dangerous experiment in social engineering - whether by redefining marriage, tinkering with the Pledge of Allegiance, or ruling against late term abortion restrictions. The American people recognize this judicial tyranny for what it is, and we look to you and other members of the Senate to put a stop to it.
Senator Specter and Democrats in the Senate say that the President should not nominate candidates with a conservative ideology because they are "outside the mainstream". If that is the case, most of the country must be outside of the mainstream. The vast majority of Americans support some limits on abortion, and clearly Tuesday's results in the states voting on Marriage Amendment should prove that this country will not accept gay marriage as a government supported institution.
In light of all of this, I am writing to you to urge you to take action to remove Senator Specter from the Judiciary Committee. The idea that this man, who won a tough primary fight only with the help of the White House, could be the next Chair of the Judiciary Committee is truly frightening. Please take steps to ensure that he does not aid liberals in continuing to block the President's agenda.
I understand that this move could lead to Mr. Specter defecting to the other side. In reality Senator, he made that defection long ago. Please do what is right and help President Bush and the majority of the American people in seating solid judges, without forcing them to pass a liberal litmus test. As our majority leader, we are counting on you.
"Because he knew there are 6 other justices who would not overturn Roe v. Wade. Read Specters book, he is very clear he would not support any of these if the court was endangered of overturning Roe v. Wade. Specter is a snake and should not be in charge of the Judiciary Committee. Specter will do whatever possible to keep the court with a liberal balance. His words can not be any clearer on this subject."
Dittos on that.
So long as 40 Senators can prevent an appointment there will be no overtly pro-life judges ever.
What's the goal?
And you are falling for the Sphincter "bait-and-switch". Arlen is a low-life scumbag. The only reason he squeaked through the primary against Toomey was because of the President's support. I know this for a fact, because I have talked to people who don't know better who said they were voting for him because of Bush's support.
Specter won his Senate race by about 11% of the vote, but Bush lost by 2%. Never ONCE, did Specter return the favor of trying to help Bush get elected. The Bush team even mentioned Specter's name at every campaign stop in PA (amid boo's by loyal supporters). Believe me, he said this and he meant it.
The only reason you're hearing a different story now is because people have been burning up the phones, faxes and e-mails in Frist's office and he's been told to back off. This is CYA time for Specter.
So, what's your goal?
I agree with you that the filibustering issue is very important but why does this have to be an either/or thing? Why can't we get rid of fillibustering AND put the best person in charge of the judiciary committee.
We won, let's act like it. You can be sure that the Democrats would if they were in our position. My feeling is that Bush will pursue an agressive conservative agenda because he doesn't have to be concerned about moving to the middle in order to make sure that he can be re-elected.
Frist’s number is 202-224-3344.
It's gonna take every bit of political capital there is to get the filibuster rule changed. Conservative, Liberal, Republican and Dem Senators all will lose some personal power if they change it.
There is more at stake than just abortion, and making abortion a litmus test feeds the MSM monster and will defeat us in our quest. Strategery is required on judges.
I don't want to blow it with any Supreme nominees.
Yes, I'm sure. Jim Quinn (Pittsburgh radio host) told his listeners this morning to flood Frist's office. Quinn's show airs from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. I'm not surprised that by the time Rush came on, Specter was scrambling to cover his butt.
Yes, I'm sure. Jim Quinn (Pittsburgh radio host) told his listeners this morning to flood Frist's office. Quinn's show airs from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. I'm not surprised that by the time Rush came on, Specter was scrambling to cover his butt.
oops. hiccup....
I just got off the phone with Jeff Sessions office and Richard Shelby's office. I encouraged both men to work with Senator Frist in preventing Arlen Specter from gaining chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee.
Both people I talked too were already aware of the Spector problem. They were cordial and assured me that my comments would be passed to the Senators.
EVERYONE CALL YOUR SENATORS!!!!!
Who said we're making it a litmus test? It is Specter that's got the litmus test. My only requirement is exactly what the President calls for - someone who will strictly interpret the Constitution rather than legislate from the bench. We don't need a litmus test if they'd just stick to the law.
I guess I don't get it. Why would the party in power have LESS power if we do away with the filibuster?
It's not even a real filibuster anymore. I might actually be for keeping it if it went back to its original form. As it is now, all the other party has to do is threaten to use it and there are NO consequences. What kind of rule is that and how can anyone defend it? I don't think it will expend much political capital at all to do away with such a meaningless rule. I think that what Specter proposed regarding time limits on debate over judical nominees is a reasonable replacement for the filibustering rule but I don't see why we can't go forward with something like that without him in the catbird's seat.
No, it is time to ACT, not complain. We are in the majority. It's time to act like it.
Specter is a RINO. We need CONSERVATIVE chairmen, ESPECIALLY on the Judiciary Committee.
Who said we're making it a litmus test? It is Specter that's got the litmus test. My only requirement is exactly what the President calls for - someone who will strictly interpret the Constitution rather than legislate from the bench. We don't need a litmus test if they'd just stick to the law.
OK now this is where it starts to get messy. The Supremes have ruled Roe v Wade is the law. No way around this. A frontal attack on RvW is not going to work. The MSM will just cut the judicial nominees to shreds. This is exactly why the MSM put this story out at this time. To prepare the field and tilt the odds by using our reaction to this article against us. So how to counter -- What's your approach?
I add that frontal assaults on RvW have been dismal failures in the past.
From the AP article:
GOP Senator Warns Bush on Anti-Abortion Justices
By LARA JAKES JORDAN, AP
PHILADELPHIA (Nov. 4) - The Republican expected to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee next year bluntly warned newly re-elected President Bush on Wednesday against putting forth Supreme Court nominees who would seek to overturn abortion rights or are otherwise too conservative to win confirmation.
Sen. Arlen Specter, fresh from winning a fifth term in Pennsylvania, also said the current Supreme Court now lacks legal "giants" on the bench.
"When you talk about judges who would change the right of a woman to choose, overturn Roe v. Wade, I think that is unlikely," Specter said, referring to the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion.
"The president is well aware of what happened, when a number of his nominees were sent up, with the filibuster," Specter added, referring to Senate Democrats' success over the past four years in blocking the confirmation of many of Bush's conservative judicial picks. "... And I would expect the president to be mindful of the considerations which I am mentioning."
Specter MUST not chair the Senate Judiciary Committee.
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.