Posted on 11/14/2004 6:39:17 AM PST by NCjim
There are very few remaining Republicans in the Senate who have shown a willingness to work for the good of the nation in a bipartisan manner. Arlen Specter is one. The Pennsylvania moderate has been a senator for 24 years and, during that time, has demonstrated a solid intellect and an independent spirit. But Specter's willingness to take reasonable, centrist positions occasionally gets him into trouble with his party's social conservatives.
He is currently embroiled in a controversy that threatens to deny him a key leadership post in the coming Congress. If President Bush truly means to try and unify the nation after a bruising and divisive election, he could start by supporting Specter's bid to become chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. After all, he actively campaigned for Specter's re-election this year.
Specter's apparent faux pas was to mention at a postelection press conference that it wasn't likely that the Senate would confirm "judges who would change the right of a woman to choose." Democrats have made it clear they will filibuster nominees who expressly call for the overturning of Roe vs. Wade. Still, the comment incensed the religious conservatives, and there is now a coordinated campaign to try to deny Specter the chairmanship after Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican, steps down under a Senate rule limiting the terms of committee chairmen.
As a prochoice Republican and supporter of embryonic stem cell research, Specter has long been a figure of distrust by religious conservatives. He is remembered as the Republican who joined Democrats to defeat Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork, and obviously Bork's defenders see this as an opportunity for pay-back.
It doesn't seem to matter that Specter was also a leading advocate for Clarence Thomas to the high court, or that he voted to confirm William Rehnquist as chief justice and has supported every one of Bush's judicial nominees; apparently any deviation from strict party loyalty is to be long remembered and punished. If Specter loses his chairmanship, it will be viewed as a warning to the handful of remaining Republican moderates that their conservative leadership on Capitol Hill is planning to follow the drumbeat of its base.
The Judiciary Committee under Specter would be far more collegial and balanced than it has been under Hatch. It is expected that Specter would work to curb the partisan sniping and allow members to more objectively consider a judicial nominee's qualifications, not simply his or her ideology. The president should make clear that such changes in the way Congress does business would be welcome as would Specter's chairmanship.
Willing to be bipartisan and cooperative is one thing. To impose a litmus test that automatically excludes traditional religious believers from the judiciary is another thing, and it is not in the least bit "moderate".
Hint: Abortion is not for the good of the nation.
This writer thinks Specter's mistake was to mention it - I think Specter's mistake was to take the position in the first place.
No he doesn't.
One knife in the back is enough.
Where's the "barf alert"?
Code for liberal manner
And if Kerry were elected and the House and Senate were in democrats control, how much 'bipartisanship' would there be on the part of the Dems??
ZERO!
Show the old fart, Arlie Sphincter, the door. Here in Penna, we tried to get rid of him, and it was close, but the lib-dem garbage in Philly saved his butt, once again. He's a traitor to the party.
(Of course it really won't do him any good, because we hate him now, we have always hated him, and even if he appoints Specter, we'll still hate him and try to undermine him. All this talk of "unification" is the usual doublespeak from us and it is codeword which means that we are hysterical that we lost, and we demand that he cave in to our demands and make us feel better. Also, since we support killing babies, Specter is the best choice to make sure that the baby killing factories continue running at full speed.)
I don't think that any nominee has ever or will ever openly call for such a thing--that would be expressing prejudice toward a possible future case. So is the Senate-mandated opposite extrem: unwillingness to listen to the merits of a case against Roe or Casey.
Boy, the Dems really want Arlen chairing that committee. Gee, wonder why? Earth to Sen. Frist....
This man wants & approves of US citizens tried before a World Court!
Is anyone surprised that a liberal paper would come out in defense of a RINO?
When I first read it, I thought that it was from St. Petersburg, Russia. But then upon further inspection, I deemed it too liberal a position to have come from Russia.
This is arse backwards...it is Bush that deserves Specter's support and RESPECT.
"St. Petersburg Communist Daily Worker, where the editorial page starts on 1-A and runs through the classifieds.
"bipartisan" means let the demonrats have their way, even though they lost again, and a majority of Americans do not support them.
This is one of the last rags I would give any credence."
I couldn't have said it better! It bears repeating.
Bingo! I don't trust him. Period.
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.