Priority 1: Remove Specter from the Judiciary (Day 7)

11-9-04 | Alway Right

[Always Right]

Keep up the good work. I kind of wish the GOP would eliminate the Seniority protocol for selecting Chairman. Committee seniority is not the way to pick the Chairman and is the reason we are in this mess. It is my understanding they instituted Seniority and the 8 year limit during the Gingrich revolution.

[Always Right]

Whoops, forgot to Change the title to day 7

[Always Right]

Specter ping....please ping the thread and tell us of any additional information or activity.

[Happy2BMe]

Senator Specter has an Agenda — Liberal Judges

“President Bush ran forthrightly on a clear agenda for this nation’s future, and the nation responded by giving him a mandate.” – Remarks by Vice President Cheney introducing President Bush for his victory speech, Ronald Reagan Building, November 3, 2004.

President Bush’s margin of victory proves that we “have a narrowly divided country, and that’s not a traditional mandate…the number-one item on my agenda is to try to move the party to the center.” – Sen. Arlen Specter, November 3, 2004.

Senator Arlen Specter's shocking comments the day after President Bush's decisive re-election raise troubling concersn

• SIGN THE PETITION

  Specter denied the legitimacy of President Bush’s historic mandate.
  
  
• Specter announced a pro-abortion litmus test for the president’s judicial nominees. Specter claims that Roe v. Wade is “inviolate” and insists that “nobody can be confirmed today who does not agree with it.”
  
  
• Specter’s illegal litmus test would disqualify all constitutionalist nominees from serving on the Supreme Court of the United States and the lower federal courts.
  
  
• Specter’s illegal litmus test demands that all nominees violate the canons of judicial ethics by announcing or pledging how they will vote in a particular case.
  
  
• Specter will not promise to support the President’s nominees. Instead, he merely “hopes” that he can support them. The day after the election, when a reporter asked Specter if he would support the president’s nominees, the senator hesitated and equivocated: “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.”
  
  
• Specter criticized President Bush’s first-term judicial nominees: “The nominees whom I supported in committee, I had reservations on.”
  
  
• Specter insulted Janice Rogers Brown, president Bush’s nominee to the important U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Specter referred to Brown, a distinguished conservative and the first African American woman to serve on the California Supreme Court, as “the woman judge out of California” who he had reservations about.
  
  
• Specter insulted the entire Supreme Court of the United States, including Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Scalia and Thomas. When a reporter asked Specter “Are you saying that there is not greatness” on the Supreme Court, Specter replied: “Yes. Can you take yes for an answer?”
  
  
• Specter’s comments reveal that, like Sen. Kerry and Sen. Daschle, Specter favors judges who follow politics and popular opinion, not the Constitution and the rule of law.
  
  
• Specter accused President Bush of ignoring the Senate’s advise and consent role: “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 say quite ignored, but close to that.”
  
  
• Specter wants to encroach upon the president’s appointment power. Obstructionist Democrats filibustered ten of President Bush’s appeals court nominees. Now Specter wants the Senate to become MORE involved in judicial appointments: “My hope is that the Senate will be more involved in expressing our views.”

Specter's record over the last 20 years demonstrated a pattern of very troubling conduct on Judiciary Committee issues

• SIGN THE PETITION

  Specter fought against the distinguished Judge Robert H. Bork, betraying President Reagan and his fellow Republicans.
  
  
• Specter voted against Judge Bork on the judiciary committee, and against Bork’s confirmation on the Senate floor. By joining liberal Democratic senators and radical left-wing groups in their opposition to Judge Bork, Specter gave those groups aid and comfort, and was instrumental in Judge Bork’s defeat.
  
  
• Judge Bork warned Americans that Specter does not understand the Constitution and that Specter, along with Senate Democrats “professed horror at the thought that a judge must limit his rulings to the principles in the actual Constitution.”
  
  
• President Ronald Reagan called the left-wing assault against Judge Bork “an unprecedented political attack” on a Supreme Court nominee and “a tragedy for our country.” Specter rebuffed President Reagan’s plea to support Judge Bork.
  
  
• Specter helped defeat the nomination of conservative Jeff Sessions for a federal judgeship.
  
  
• Specter warned filibustered appeals court nominee William Pryor that just because he voted for him on the committee did not mean that he would vote on the Senate floor for his confirmation.
  
  
• The “National Review” exposed Specter as “The Worst Republican Senator” in a prominent September 1, 2003 cover story. According to “National Review,” Specter “is not a team player…is an abortion rights absolutist, a dogged advocate of racial preferences, a bitter foe of tax reform, a firm friend of the International Criminal Court.”
  
  
• Specter refuses to support the elevation of Justice Clarence Thomas to Chief Justice: “I’d have to think about that,” Specter equivocated. Ditto for Justice Antonin Scalia: “I’d have to think about that too.” Specter once slandered Justice Thomas as a “disappointment.”

The Chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee must be someone devoted to the Constitution as written and the rule of law

• SIGN THE PETITION

  The situation is urgent. Chief Justice Rehnquist is gravely ill. A Supreme Court vacancy is imminent.
  
  
• President Bush may be called upon to nominate a Supreme Court justice within the next several weeks.
  
  
• Court watchers predict as many as three Supreme Court vacancies during President Bush’s second term.
  
  
• President Bush will likely have a historic, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to return the Supreme Court to constitutionalist principles.
  
  
• The President needs as chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee a loyal, reliable, conservative partner who will shepherd his nominees through the confirmation process.
  
  
• Under intense political pressure, Specter tried to recant portions of his post-election statements the day after he uttered them. That means nothing. His 20-year record of party disloyalty and tormenting conservative nominees means everything.
  
  
• As chairman, Specter will act as a vexatious intermeddler, second-guessing President Bush’s Supreme Court and lower court nominations. This imperils the President’s legacy.
  
  
• Under the Senate’s seniority rules, Specter is slated to take over the Judiciary Committee, but under Senate rules and procedures, he can be stopped from becoming committee chairman.
  
  
• The window of opportunity to stop Specter is limited. Once he becomes chairman, it will be impossible to unseat him.

[GeronL]

BUMP. Check the Corner at NRO, they usually keep track

[Always Right]

The window of opportunity to stop Specter is limited. Once he becomes chairman, it will be impossible to unseat him.

I always get a kick out of the Specter defenders who say if he screws up we will just replace him. How? I don't think there is a process to remove a committee chairman.

[Tamzee]

But which Arlen is telling the truth, the one who promised Bush or the one who promised his liberal media friends that none of Bush's extremist judges would be approved to the Bench?

Regarding "which Arlen is telling the truth", wouldn't the Republican Senators and President Bush be exactly the best people to judge that based on promises Specter has made them and if he sticks by his agreements?

[PGalt]

BTTT!

[Liz]

FRmail the AdminMod....they'll change it for you.

[Happy2BMe]

About the only way to remove a committee chairman is for them to remove themself either voluntarily or involuntarily (e.g., they broke the law).

[jwpjr]

I certainly hope and pray that Sen. Specter is not the best we Republicans have to offer when it comes to chairing this committee! I heard him yesterday on Sean Hannity and I was appalled at his attitude that a judge like Bork does not belong on the Supreme Court. And he NEVER mentioned the use of filibuster to circumvent the intent of the Founding Fathers that a simple majority would be needed to affirm an appointment to the federal bench. Had it been their intent to make it a super majority they would have said so. I would not object to the use of filibuster in this manner IF they would really make the opposition do the filibuster instead of letting the mere threat scare them off.

[Lexinom]

He isn't. Senator Grassley (R-IA) is our kind of Senator, and has seniority such that, if he wants the chair, he'll get it instead of Specter.

[Lexinom]

Some additional motivation for the troops (us):

Another pro-abortion Republican in the Senate, Susan Collins of Maine, said she didn't believe efforts to deny Specter the chairmanship would prevail.

"Sen. Specter's seniority puts him next in line. I think any effort to deny him his chairmanship will fizzle," she told USA Today.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!!

[Always Right]

He isn't. Senator Grassley (R-IA) is our kind of Senator, and has seniority such that, if he wants the chair, he'll get it instead of Specter.

Only if he steps down as Finance Chairman, which he repeatly has said he would not.

[tkathy]

This is the circular firing squad in full battle array. This has to put Karl Rove in total despair.

The inability of extremists to think things through never fails to amaze me.

[OXENinFLA]

http://www.hughhewitt.com/

Hugh has been on heavy on this topic.

[Oklahoma 1]

Senator Don Nickles' office reports that the vote on chairmanship for Specter will take place on Monday, November 15!

[myself6]

The fact that you use the word "extremist" to define those who want specter out says allot about where YOU are coming from.

A person uses the word extremist to describe someone that they don't agree with on ANYTHING. The word is not so much an accusation of the target but an indictment of the person using it.

Please do not forget that we are at war with LIBERALS not with democrats (zell miller is a democrat). The Scottish sphincter as committee chairman is no better than hillary clinton as committee chairman. They are both liberals first and foremost.