Keep Arlen Specter From the Judiciary Committee

[Guest MoDeRnGiRl4cHrIsT]

bush is just the leser of evials

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='MoDeRnGiRl4cHrIsT' date='Nov 5 2004, 03:23 PM'] bush is just the leser of evials [/quote]
I don't tend to refer to any one as "an evil," but I agree that both are flawed and that of the two, Bush is the better man for the job.

[cmotherofpirl]

In the interest of truth and charity I think you ought to hear Senator Specter's response:
SPECTER COMMENTS ON THE JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION PROCESS

Washington, D.C. - Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) made the following comments today on the judicial confirmation process.

“Contrary to press accounts, I did not warn the President about anything and was very respectful of his Constitutional authority on the appointment of federal judges.

“As the record shows, I have supported every one of President Bush’s nominees in the Judiciary Committee and on the Senate floor. I have never and would never apply any litmus test on the abortion issue and, as the record shows, I have voted to confirm Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justice O’Connor, and Justice Kennedy and led the fight to confirm Justice Thomas.

“I have already sponsored a protocol calling for a Judiciary Committee hearing within thirty days of a nomination, a vote out of Committee thirty days later, and floor action thirty days after that. I am committed to such prompt action by the Committee on all of President Bush’s nominees.

“In light of the repeated filibusters by the Democrats in the last Senate session, I am concerned about a potential repetition of such filibusters. I expect to work well with President Bush in the judicial confirmation process in the years ahead.”

[popestpiusx]

cmom, the guy is a staunch defender of a woman's "right" to have her unborn child dismembered and sucked through a tube. He is an evil man. Why do you continue to defend him when you stood so strongly against Kerry?

[Sinner]

Written.......

[Good Friday]

Here's the action alert from National Right to Life outlining what we can do, including e-mailing or calling the Senators who are already on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The action alert mentions that Sen. Specter can only be kept from becoming the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee if another Senator already on the Committee challenges him, and then receives the support of the other Republicans on the Committee. If the other Senator does receive the support of the other Republicans on the Committee, then a vote will go before the entire Republican caucus.

I think that the perfect candidate for challenging Specter would be Sen. Mike DeWine, the Senior Senator from Ohio who is also on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Two reasons: DeWine has a 100% rating from National Right to Life; and DeWine is the Senior Senator from THE battleground state in the election we just had. I think that, being that he is from Ohio, the other Republicans on the Committee and the Republicans in the caucus will be afraid [b]not[/b] to support him over Specter, for fear of losing the Evangelical/Catholic base in Ohio, which could cost them the next congressional elections and/or the next presidential election. So I think that any Ohioans, or any non-Ohioans for that matter, should e-mail Sen. DeWine and encourage him to challenge Specter for chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The more e-mails he receives, the more likely he is to do something. Go to his [url="http://dewine.senate.gov/"]website[/url] and e-mail him about it.

As I said, here's the action alert from National Right to Life.

* * *

Help prevent Arlen Specter from becoming chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee!

It is likely that President Bush will have the opportunity to nominate two or more justices of the U.S. Supreme Court during the next four years. Pro-abortion advocacy groups are vowing to do everything in their power to block the President's nominees in the Senate. There has not been a vacancy on the Court for over 10 years, but in recent weeks the press has reported that Chief Justice William Rehnquist is seriously ill.

When President Bush nominates a man or woman to the Supreme Court, that nomination goes first to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which conducts hearings and votes on the nomination. The chairman of the Judiciary Committee will be crucial in shepherding the President's nominees to successful confirmation votes in the committee and in the full Senate.

But what if the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee was himself undercutting President Bush's nominee -- or even actively opposing confirmation of the nominee?

Soon, the Republican members of the Judiciary Committee must decide on who they want as their chairman. Ordinarily, this job would go to the most-senior Republican committee member who does not chair some other major committee. However, in this case, that senior committee member is Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.).

Specter would be a disaster as chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Senator Specter has a strongly pro-abortion record, and he is one of the leading champions of human cloning. In 1987, as a member of the Judiciary Committee, Specter played a key role in defeating President Reagan's nominee to the Supreme Court, Judge Robert Bork, who was on record in opposition to Roe v. Wade. In 1995, Specter briefly sought the Republican presidential nomination on a pro-abortion platform. In January 2001, Specter complained on a TV program that some nominees for the Supreme Court were reluctant to take clear positions on Roe v. Wade, and he said that he might have to start withholding his support in such cases.

On November 3, 2004, the day after the election, Specter told reporters that he considers Roe v. Wade "inviolate," and indicated that he believes that nominees who do not express support for that ruling cannot be confirmed. Asked if he would support President Bush's judicial nominees, Specter replied, "That obviously depends upon the president's judicial nominees."

On November 4, those remarks were widely reported in the news media as a "warning" to the White House. The same day, Specter issued a statement saying that he had been warning of possible filibusters by Democrats -- but he did not pledge to support President Bush's nominations to the Supreme Court.

Senator Specter assumes he has a lock on the job -- but actually, he does not have an entitlement to the Judiciary Committee chairmanship.

If another Republican member of the committee decides to challenge Specter and gains the support of a majority of Republican members of the committee, then the decision would go before the entire Republican conference, which is the caucus of all of the Republican senators who will serve in the new Congress that convenes in January. In that case, the 55 Republican senators would decide who will be chairman by a secret ballot.

Thus, ultimately, every Republican senator can have a voice on who holds the powerful gavel at the Judiciary Committee.

ACTION ITEMS:

Please take these three actions immediately, and urge others to do the same:

1. If one or both of the U.S. senators who will represent your state in the new Congress is a Republican, contact his or her office immediately with this message: "Senator Specter must not become chairman of the Judiciary Committee. We urge Senator ______ to support any other Republican member of the Judiciary Committee to become chairman -- anyone but Arlen Specter." The offices of continuing senators can be contacted by telephone through the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121, and appropriate e-mail messages can be sent to them by clicking on the "Elected Officials" tab at the top of this page. Please use both phone AND e-mail.

[NOTE: We will post contact information for the seven newly elected Republican senators on our website's Legislative Action Center as soon as it becomes available. For some of these, local campaign offices may still be open and taking messages. The seven newly elected Republican senators are Mel Martinez (Fl.), Johnny Isakson (Ga.), David Vitter (La.), Richard Burr (NC), Tom Coburn (Ok.), Jim DeMint (SC), and John Thune (SD).]

2. Call the office of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tn.) at 202-224-3344, with a message along these lines: "Senator Arlen Specter MUST NOT become chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He would use that position to protect Roe v. Wade and to advance abortion and human cloning. We urge you to do everything in your power to ensure that a pro-life Republican becomes chairman, not Specter." You can also send Sen. Frist a fax at 202-228-1264, and send him an e-mail by clicking here.

[NOTE: The majority leader does NOT have the power to simply appoint a chairman for the Judiciary Committee. But Senator Frist can be influential in guiding the Republican senators collectively to solve this urgent problem.]

3. If you receive a response from the office of any Republican senator, or see a statement on the matter by your senator in the news media, please forward it to the Federal Legislation Department at National Right to Life at Legfederal@aol.com, or by fax to 202-347-3668, or by phone to 202-626-8820.

SPECIAL ACTION ITEM:

If your Republican senator is already a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he can be especially influential in deciding who the new chairman will be. Please make every effort to encourage other constituents to contact the Republican committee members who are listed below. (NOTE: One or more NEW Republican senators may be appointed to the committee later this month, but it is not yet known who they will be.)

Orrin Hatch (Utah)
Charles Grassley (Iowa)
Jon Kyl (Az.)
Mike DeWine (Ohio)
Jeff Sessions (Al.)
Lindsey Graham (SC)
Larry Craig (Id.)
Saxby Chambliss (Ga.)
John Cornyn (Tx.)

[Good Friday]

[url="http://nnelson.blogspot.com/2004/11/stop-arlen-specter.html"]Here.[/url]

[SirMyztiq]

That's interesting.

I hope that the intern who reads your e-mail passes on your message.

Bush would NEVER appoint any judge under the abortion "litmus" test. What is that any way? Do you wrap litmus paper around the person then dunk them into holy water?

Bush appointing a open anti-choice judge would be incredible noting that Democrats will probably fillibuster.

Why don't we just appoint a hick whos only input in the government is his stance on abortion?

[Guest Aluigi]

why don't we just stop the murder

don't come on open mic to debate, the same topic is on the Debate Table

Nathan, blogging again? I hope you know what you're doing...
but it's a good first post...

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Aluigi' date='Nov 6 2004, 10:55 PM'] why don't we just stop the murder

don't come on open mic to debate, the same topic is on the Debate Table

Nathan, blogging again? I hope you know what you're doing...
but it's a good first post... [/quote]
LoL, first post? He's had awesome posts for the last week or so...

[BeenaBobba]

I'm such an idiot! Correction: Specter's not running for a chair in the Committee; he's running for the chairmanship! Of course, that's just as bad, if not worse, so continue with your letter writing, folks!

God bless,

Jen

[popestpiusx]

[url="http://www.notspecter.com/"]http://www.notspecter.com/[/url]

[Good Friday]

The Priests for Life issued a statement. It isn't on their website yet, but I got it via e-mail from their mailing list and posted it on my blog. You can view it [url="http://nnelson.blogspot.com/2004/11/more-on-specter.html"]here[/url]. They're backing the effort to keep Specter from chairmanship of the committee, and they included the National Right to Life action alert in their e-mail.

When National Right to Life is opposing Specter, and when the Priests for Life are opposing Specter, when he has said that Roe v. Wade is "inviolate" and when he has held 90% ratings from NARAL and 0% ratings from National Right to Life, it seems to me that some people with good intentions are on the wrong side of this and need to reconsider. And that's the last thing I have to say about this.

[Guest Aluigi]

[quote]Dear Friend:

Thank you for contacting me regarding judicial nominations in the
newly-elected session of Congress.  It is an honor to serve in the United
States Senate.

The Constitution's "advice and consent" clause clearly gives the Senate the
prerogative to accept or reject any of the President's judicial
nominations.  Unfortunately, a minority of Senators have been using Senate
rules to stop the confirmation of many of these nominees and thwart the
will of the majority.  Their unwise and dangerous efforts are unprecedented
and must not be allowed to succeed.  That is why I have taken several steps
to address this attack on our Constitution and judicial system.  On June 5,
2003, I proposed a narrow change to Senate rules that would prohibit long
term filibustering of judicial nominees.  On November 12 - 14, 2003, I held
the Senate in session for almost forty straight hours — the longest
continuous debate in over 10 years — to force the minority to defend their
actions.

I believe that the American voters sent a very clear and stunning message
in the November 2, 2004, elections.  That is why, as I begin work as
Majority Leader in the 109th Congress, I will continue to work to ensure
that President Bush's judicial nominees receive fair treatment.  I am sure
the President will continue to nominate judges who believe in protecting
the rule of law, and I am confident that the Senate will be able to confirm
these judges in the 109th Congress.  Activist judges who make law instead
of interpreting law undermine the rule of law.  It is imperative that the
Judiciary Committee approve the President’s judicial nominees and send them
to the Senate floor for an up-or-down vote.

Rest assured, I will continue to fight for fair treatment of the
President's judicial nominations.  Anything less is unfair to the nominees,
the President, the integrity of the judicial system and the American
people.

Sincerely,
William H. Frist, M.D.
Majority Leader
United States Senate[/quote]

It appears that the way this is going to play out: Spector will be head of Judiciary Comittee but First and others will pressure him and make sure Bush's judges get through. but when it actually gets to the senate for a vote, we need 5 more votes.