Posted on 11/04/2004 7:03:07 PM PST by MNJohnnie
Arrogant Pennsylvania Senator, Arlen Specter who won a very narrow victory in both his primary and general election now purports to tell President Bush what to do. This pretender to being a Republican is scheduled to be the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee where he would be able to obstruct the nominees sent up by the President.
President Bush has made excellent choices for the Federal bench in his first term, said Richard Engle, President of the National Federation of Republican Assemblies, and I expect that he will nominate similarly for the Supreme Court. Throughout the campaign Bush repeatedly shot down Democrat nominee John Kerrys assertion that there should be a litmus test for abortion for any judicial nominee. According to Engle, The Presidents only litmus test is the U.S. Constitution
(Excerpt) Read more at gopwing.com ...
I'll never forgive Spector for being Ira Einhorn's attorney after he murdered Holly Maddux and fled to France where the French, of course protected and refused to extradite him for years while he sipped wine and ate fois gras. Murderous pig and pseudo "Earth Day" pretender.
he has denied and/or recanted on his official web site:
http://www.specter.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=661&Month=11&Year=2004
not sure where this leaves the issue, but the posting is there
Please read his actual statement before getting spun by the MSM.
he has denied and/or recanted on his official web site:
http://www.specter.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=661&Month=11&Year=2004
not sure where this leaves the issue, but the posting is there
That's what he said once the crap storm started to land on him. Keep the pressure on him.
Please read his actual statement before getting spun by the MSM.
Please keep in mind he is changing his tune now that Repb activists have started to land on him with both feet. Specter is untrustworthy and we need to keep the pressure on him.
here is the transcript of what he actually said.
you all be the judge:
>
> November 3, 2004
> Transcript
>
>
> JORDAN: Senator, you didn't talk about the Judiciary
> Committee, it is something you are expected to Chair this January.
> With 3 Supreme Court Justices rumored to retire soon, starting with
> Rehnquist, how do you see this unfolding in the next couple of months
> and what part do you intend to play on it?
>
> SPECTER: You know my approach is cautious with respect to
> the Judiciary Committee. I am in line, Senator Hatch is barred now by
> term limits and Senate Rules so that I am next in line. There has to
> be a vote of the Committee and I have already started to talk to some
> of my fellow committee members. I am respectful of Senate traditions,
> so I am not designating myself Chairman, I will wait for the Senate
> procedures to act in do course. You are right on the substance, the
> Chief Justice is gravely ill. I had known more about that than had
> appeared in the media. When he said he was going to be back on
> Monday, it was known inside that he was not going to be back on
> Monday. The full extent of his full incapacitation is really not
> known, I believe there will be cause for deliberation by the
> President. The Constitution has a clause called advise and consent,
> the advise part is traditionally not paid a whole lot of attention to,
> I wouldn't quite say ignored, but close to that. My hope that the
> Senate will be more involved in expressing our views. We start off
> with the basic fact that the Democrats are have filibustered and
> expect them to filibuster if the nominees are not within the broad
> range of acceptability. I think there is a very broad range of
> Presidential Discretion but there is a range.
>
> ODOM: Is Mr. Bush, he just won the election, even with
> the popular vote as well. If he wants anti-abortion judges up there,
> you are caught in the middle of it what are you going to do? The
> party is going one way and you are saying this.
>
> SPECTER: When you talk about judges who would change the
> right of a woman to choose, overturn Roe v Wade, I think that is
> unlikely. And I have said that bluntly during the course of the
> campaign and before. When the Inquirer endorsed me, they quoted my
> statement that Roe v Wade was inviolate. And that 1973 decision,
> which has been in effect now for 33 years, was buttressed by the 1992
> decision, written by three Republican justices-O'Conner, Souter, and
> Kennedy-and nobody can doubt Anthony Kennedy's conservativism or
> pro-life position, but that's the fabric of the country. Nobody can be
> confirmed today who didn't agree with Brown v. Board of Education on
> integration, and I believe that while you traditionally do not ask a
> nominee how they're going to decide a specific case, there's a
> doctorate and a fancy label term, stari decisis, precedent which I
> think protects that issue. That is my view, now, before, and always.
>
>
> ODOM: You are saying the President should not bother
> to send somebody up there like that.
>
> SPECTER: Can't hear you
>
> ODOM: You are saying the President should not bother
> or make the move to send somebody up there who is clearly
> anti-abortion.
>
> SPECTER: I don't want to prejudge what the President is
> going to do. But the President is well aware of what happened when a
> number of his nominees were sent up, were filibustered, and the
> President has said he is not going to impose a litmus test, he faced
> that issue squarely in the third debate and I would not expect the
> President, I would expect the President to be mindful of the
> considerations that I mentioned.
>
> JORDAN: However, Senator the President has President has sent
> up, as you know, a number of very very conservative judges socially,
> you have made a point in this campaign of saying that you have
> supported all of those ______ at least I the last two years, how is
> this going to square with what you are saying today about wanting the
> Republican party to be big tent and moderate.
>
> SPECTER: I have been very careful in what I have said and
> what I have done. The nominees whom I supported in Committee, I had
> reservations on. As for judge Pryor, there had been an issue as to
> whether as Attorney General he had raised money, I said in voting him
> out of committee, that he did not have my vote on the floor until I
> satisfied myself about collateral matters. The woman judge out of
> California, who had dismissed a case on invasion of privacy where the
> doctor had permitted an insurance adjuster to watch a mammogram, I had
> a reservation on it, so I wanted to talk to her to see if that was
> aberrational or whether that really reflected her judgment on each and
> every one of those cases. This may be more detail than you want, but
> there was one judge for a district judgeship, Judge Holmes, in
> Arkansas, who was first in his class at the University of Arkansas,
> had a PhD from Duke, had a master's degree, was touted by both
> Democratic Arkansas Senators, was supported by 2 pro-choice women,
> Senator Landrieu and Senator Lincoln, highly regarded in the Arkansas
> editorial pages, and for a district court judgeship I thought. He had
> made two statements, and they were, one was in a religious context
> that a wife should be subservient to a husband, that was in a
> religious context. Then he made a statement doubting the potential
> for impregnation from rape, and made an absurd statement that it would
> be as rare as snow in Florida in July. That was about a 20 year-old
> statement and I brought him in and sat down, had a long talk with him
> and concluded that they were not disqualifiers. He was the only judge
> whom I voted to confirm on the floor vote where any question has been
> raised and I think that was the right decision for a district court
> judgeship, not to make that a disqualifier. There are few if any
> whose record if you go back over 30 or 40 years, and not find some
> dumb thing, I don't want you to take a to close a look at my 40 year
> record.
>
> HIGHSMITH: Talk to us a little bit beyond judgeships, you
> said again today and last night that your goal now is to moderate the
> party, bring it to the center.
>
> SPECTER: Correct
>
> [BREAK-Bringing the Country Together Question]
>
> [BREAK-Stem Cell Question]
>
> MACINTOSH: What are the characteristics that you are
> looking for in any candidate for the high court who might come your
> way in the next year or two?
>
> SPECTER: Well I would like to see a select someone in the
> mold of Holmes, Brandeis, Cardozo, or Marshall. With all due respect
> to the U.S. Supreme Court, we don't have one. And I haven't minced
> any words about that during the confirmation process.
>
> MACINTOSH: Meaning?
>
> SPECTER: Where I have questioned them all very closely.
> I had an argument before the Supreme Court of the United States on
> trying to keep the Navy base, and you should heard what the eight of
> them had to say to me. They were almost as tough as this gang here
> this morning.
>
> ODOM: Senator, the judges you mentioned are obviously
> renown. Are you saying that there are no greatness on there, is that
> what you're driving at?
>
> SPECTER: Yes. Can you take yes for an answer Vernon?
> I'm saying that we don't have anybody of the stature of Oliver Wendell
> Holmes, or Willy Brandeis, or Cardozo, or Marshall. That's what I'm
> saying. I'm saying that we have a court which they're graduates from
> the Court of Appeals from the District of Columbia basically, some
> other Circuit Courts of Appeals. I think that we could use, and I am
> repeating myself again, a Holmes or a Brandeis.
>
> ODOM: Would you resign to take the appointment?
> You're the only person I can think of?
>
> SPECTER: I can think of quite a few other people.
>
> JORDAN: Like who?
>
> SPECTER: I think there's some possibility, just a slight
> possibility, I may not be offered the appointment.
>
> JORDAN: Senator, who do you think would be a good candidate?
>
> SPECTER: For the Supreme Court?
>
> JORDAN: Yes.
>
> SPECTER: I have some ideas but I'm going to withhold my
> comments. If, as, and when the President asks that question, Lara,
> I'll have some specific information for him. In the alternative, if
> you become President, I'll have it for you.
>
> [BREAK-Election 2010 question]
>
> [BREAK-Iraq questions]
>
> Jordan: Do you expect to continue supporting all of
> President Bush's judicial nominees?
>
> AS: I am hopeful that I'll be able to do that. That
> obviously depends upon the President's judicial nominees. I'm hopeful
> that I can support them.
>
> [BREAK-Election question]
>
> [End Press Conference]
BUMP!!
Arlen is a bigger threat to the GOP than they realize.
Can you post a standard email format indicating his actions? I'm not good in wiritng but I can forward it to the rest of my conservative buddies. But I'm trapped both of my senators are LIBS in California. Probably I'll just contact my district he's a republican.
I can't even do that. I live in Sam Farr country.
Could we get him kicked out of the party?
Ping
Specter would say that he was "just being John Adams" when he (Specter) represented the once popular (among the left) Einhorn. John Adams was unpopular for defending British soldiers implicated in the deadly Boston Massacre of March 5, 1770. But the independent Adams said that everyone deserves legal representation.
Well, Henry Clay kicked John Tyler out of the Whig Party in 1841!
Still, we must admit that the people of PA don't think they could get along without their Arlen Specter!
I trust Specter's WORDS
about as far as I
could throw his fellow globalist stooget
Scuba Teddy WITH his water soaked car WITH Theresa and SKERRY and their SUV's.
The man's globalist anti-life votes and standings are a matter of record, imho.
All I need to know is that he's a puppet master stooge. That's enough for me. We have too many puppet master stooges in the Supreme Court already!!!
arlen_specter@specter.senate.gov
Weblink to get Senator's Email.
http://www.senate.gov/
Specter, as presumptive chairman of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, suggested that he would block any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court who opposed abortion rights. Reiterating his position that a woman's right to choose is "inviolate," he said overturning Roe v. Wade today would be akin to trying to reverse Brown v. Board of Education, the court's 1954 landmark desegregation decision.
Barring unforeseen GOP objections, Specter, 74, should assume the committee chairmanship in January. He also sent an unsubtle message to the White House that he expects nominees for the federal bench to be of the highest caliber, and took a critical swipe at the stature of the current court. [emphasis added]
May I suggest that you all also encourage folks to call or email the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Letters are too slow because of security procedures offsite -- so it has to be emails and calls.
And keep it up -- this is reeeeeeaaaaallllllllly critical.
what is Spectors e-mail address

The Specter has already said he'll block strict constructionist, pro-life, constitutionalist judges.
If more Pennsylvanians had voted for Jim Clymer, someone who's more of a team player and more friendly to the President's agenda might be running Judiciary. If constitutionalist judicial nominees are blocked, some of the fault lies with the conservatives who supported The Specter.
Don't bother to call the Senator's office, the phone will be off the hook, his staff is exactly like he is. Put the pressure on Frist.
Eventually, they have to answer teh phone.
What other committee can they give The Specter where he can do less harm?
This is what happens when you elect liberal RINOs.
We tried very hard to get rid of him in the primary, nearly pulled it off, but thanks to Santorum and Bush, Specter made it. Arlen can be in charge of the "Hair Plug Committee".
Santorum's office will get the phone calls because Specter's WILL NOT deal with them.
What does this say about Senator Specter?
Stop Specter Bump
Do you have a Stop Specter Ping list? If so, please add me.

Conservative wing raises fuss over Specter's views
Carl Hulse, New York Times
November 6, 2004
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Angry conservatives flooded Senate phone and fax lines Friday demanding that Republicans prevent Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., from presiding over the Judiciary Committee for saying two days earlier that judicial nominees who strongly oppose abortion might be rejected.
Republican senators and their aides, speaking privately for the most part, said the uproar posed an impediment for Specter, who is in line to succeed chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, atop the committee that examines judicial nominees. It was likely that he would still get the post, they said, but not certain. "He is not out of the woods," said one aide.
Stop Specter!
Offices of Senator Frist:
Washington, D.C.
Office of Senator Bill Frist, M.D.
461 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-3344
202-228-1264 (fax)Nashville
28 White Bridge Road
Suite 211
Nashville, TN 37205
615-352-941
615-352-9985 (fax)Chattanooga
James Building
735 Broad Street, Suite 701
Chattanooga, TN 37402
423-756-2757
423-756-5313 (fax)Jackson
200 East Main Street
Suite 111
Jackson, TN 38301
731-424-9655
731-424-8322 (fax)Kingsport/Tri-Cities
10368 Wallace Alley Street
Suite 7
Kingsport, TN 37663
423-323-1252
423-323-0358 (fax)Knoxville
Twelve Oaks Executive Park
Building One, Suite 170
Knoxville, TN 37919
865-602-7977
865-602-7979 (fax)Memphis
5100 Poplar Avenue
Suite 514
Memphis, TN 38137
901-683-1910
901-683-3610 (fax)
See also:
United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Find & Write your Senators Here
Senator Frist Web Form
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1271959/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1271129/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1271211/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1270529/posts/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1271959/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1270632/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1270185/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1271838/posts
He should also be Freeped for insulting the current members - saying there are no great legal minds on the Court.
Arlen Sphincter
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.