Arlen Specter: Action needs to be taken.

[Guest proud2bcatholic]

What a great week, the possibilities of advancements in the Culture of Life is very encouraging, however we need to take some action.

As some of you may know, Arlen Specter is a vehemently pro-death Republican Senator from Pennsylvania. He is a member of the Judiciary Committee and based on seniority he is next in line to be chairman of the Judiciary Committee. He has vowed to do everything in his power to block any Bush nominees to the Courts that are pro-life. We need to take action. The Republican Senators are thinking of making an exception to tradition and not appointing somebody based on seniority. If this is the case, the chairman would be Senator Jon Kyl from Arizona a very pro-life Senator. We need to contact our Republican Senators and encourage them to reject Specter for Kyl. We need to let them know that they won this election because of morality, and therefore they have a duty to recognize us and our values. So please, please contact your Republican Senators and tell them to take action by refusing the chair to Specter. Here is a link to the contact information of your Senators.

[url="http://www.senate.gov/general/conta...enators_cfm.cfm"]http://www.senate.gov/general/conta...enators_cfm.cfm[/url]

Here is an article that discusses Arlen Specter and his vow to block Bush's nominees.

[url="http://www.nationalreview.com/edito...00411050752.asp"]http://www.nationalreview.com/edito...00411050752.asp[/url]

Let's do this. Let us be a voice for the voiceless. God has blessed us with an opportunity and Satan is going to do everything in his power to halt the Culture of Life, we need to be on the offensive with our actions and prayers.

[popestpiusx]

Very good.

[cmotherofpirl]

I think it fair we hear from the Senator himself.:
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]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Nov 5 2004, 07:12 PM'] I think it fair we hear from the Senator himself.:
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.” [/quote]
He lets the dems do his dirty work.

[cmotherofpirl]

That protocol would make it a lot easier to get people thru the system.

[Anna]

CMom, as always, you're the voice of reason.
The lurker's initial post is full of scandal, calumny, and detraction.
Senator Arlen Specter is not vehemently pro-abortion ~ not in the least.
Ok, so he isn't always where we want him to be on all the Life issues, but he has been there on sooooooo many in recent years that NARAL (the National Abortion Rights Action League) supported his opponent (Hoeffel) in the recent election.

Be very careful when it is the babies' lives at stake, people!

Don't be so quick to oust a moderate, who will surely vote with the current flow of conservative Republicans. (That is what moderates do, you know, they vote with the flow!) Specter is no advocate of abortion, he never really was.

What leftist liberal political activist/"reporter" Lara Jakes Jordan succeeded in doing with her article on Specter, was to drive a wedge between pro-life zealots who took her bait, and the new Republican administration. How clever she is, and no wonder! She is married to veteran Democratic Party operative Jim Jordan, the former executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and manager of Sen. John Kerry's presidential bid.

Back in April of 2003, she did what her colleagues call an "ambush interview" and a "hatchet job" on pro-life Senator Rick Santorum. That's her modus operandi.

Don't take the bait the liberal media is dangling before you.
The media has never been a pro-life ally.
Specter has never been the enmeny.

Get the facts before you act!!! It's the babies' lives and the reputation of the entire pro-life movement we're risking here.

[Guest proud2bcatholic]

Oh really, then why did he block Robert Bork? Why has he voted against parental notification for teens wanting abortions?

I could go on and on. We have worked hard to get to this point, and we can't risk having Arlen Specter as the point man in the committee.

[Anna]

Lurker, you are misinforming the phamily here.

I looked up his Senatorial Voting Record on VoteSmart, as anyone can do who cares to know the Truth.

He also consistently voted with us to ban partial birth abortion over the past several years, even voting to override Clinton's veto.

He voted against funding abortions overseas on military bases.

I never said he was 100% pro-life, I said he is a moderate.

Yes, he rejected Bork back in the 1980's. Get over it. He's come a lonnnng way, baby.

You're willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater here. It's not your life on the line.

I've been involved in pro-life politics to know you don't attack a non-enemy; he could be a good ally. He's in a position to do a lot for the pro-life movement, and the Pro-Aborts, namely NARAL, rejected him this past election and supported his loser opponent. He owes the pro-aborts NOTHING. He is surrounded by conservative fellow Republicans.

Based upon my experience in the pro-life political arena, I anticipate that he will side with his party and with his president. There is no cause for alarm here.

Specter is not the enemy. Don't shoot him down with friendly fire. He'll vote with us for pro-life Justices, I am absolutely positive on this.

Btw, how long have you been following politics, proud2Catholic?
Are you proud to commit calumny?

Edited November 6, 2004 by Anna

[qfnol31]

I was just going to say that I got something on this from CINLife saying the same thing as proud2bcatholic. And first it came from [url="http://www.azrtl.org/elerts/2004/110504.html"]http://www.azrtl.org/elerts/2004/110504.html[/url]:

[quote]Senator Specter Must Go !

On Wednesday, November 3, Senator Arlen Specter warned President Bush that
he should not try to nominate pro-life judicial candidates to the federal
courts including the United State Supreme Court. In doing so, Senator
Specter revealed that he intends to impose an abortion "litmus test" on any
nominee who goes before the Senate Judiciary Committee. For several years,
Senator Specter has chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee and has used his
position to affect candidates for the federal judiciary. In 1987, Specter
led an effort to defeat Judge Robert Bork's appointment to the Supreme
Court.
It is now time for Senator Specter to go!
As the Senate prepares to assign chairmanships to the many committees in the
new Congress, the pro-life community has a golden opportunity to place a
real pro-life leader to chair the Judiciary Committee. As one of the
strongest advocates for the unborn and their mothers, we can count on
Senator Jon Kyl to be a solid leader in moving President Bush's judicial
nominees through the approval process fairly and efficiently. We need
leaders like Senator Kyl to reinforce the mandate that President Bush
received on Election Day.
Please contact Senator Bill Frist and urge him NOT to approve Senator Arlen
Specter as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Senator Bill Frist
must allow the new Judiciary Committee to bypass the senate seniority rules
(which assumes that the most senior member of the committee will chair the
Judiciary Committee). The committee must be allowed to conduct a secret
ballot in order to choose who will head the committee.
We also ask that you urge Senator Leader Frist to push for the assignment of
Arizona Senator Jon Kyl to head this committee.
After all the hard work and prayers by those in the pro-life community to
re-elect President Bush, we cannot allow the President's mandate to be
fruitless in protecting innocent human life through the courts. The American
people spoke loud and clear on November 2nd and we must again let our voices
be heard for those who have no voice. Please act today![/quote]

I don't think he's causing trouble...These seem to be good sources, according to [url="http://www.catholicculture.org/sites/site_view.cfm?recnum=23"]CatholicCulture[/url].

[quote]That won't happen if Senator Arlen Specter is the chairman.[/quote]

And LifeNews does as well.

Edited November 6, 2004 by qfnol31

[Good Friday]

[quote name='Anna']CMom, as always, you're the voice of reason.
The lurker's initial post is full of scandal, calumny, and detraction.
Senator Arlen Specter is not vehemently pro-abortion ~ not in the least.
Ok, so he isn't always where we want him to be on all the Life issues, but he has been there on sooooooo many in recent years that NARAL (the National Abortion Rights Action League) supported his opponent (Hoeffel) in the recent election.[/quote]
I can't believe I'm hearing this. This is a case of true partisanship, not just from Anna but from several others, if I've ever seen one.

Lest there be any doubt, Sen. Arlen Specter is thoroughly pro-abortion. Granted, in 2003-2004, Arlen Specter received a 64% rating from National Right to Life because a Republican in an election year [b]had better[/b] start voting pro-life if he wants to get re-elected, and Specter knew that. Prior to that, his rating was not so good. By not so good, I mean that in 1999-2000, he received only a 22% rating from National Right to Life. Both Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) have [b]always[/b] held higher ratings than that from National Right to Life, and they're Democrats. In 2001-2002, Specter received a 0% rating from National Right to Life, meaning that he voted pro-life zip, zilch, nada, ZERO times. There can be no question that the man is as pro-abortion as any liberal Democrat, and any desire to state otherwise is motivated by partisanship, not the one, holy, catholic and apostolic faith.

If that's not enough for you:

Planned Parenthood (Senate), 1996-2003: 67% rating
Planned Parenthood, 1999: 71% rating
Planned Parenthood, 2001: 75% rating
[b][i]***************NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA, 2000: 90% RATING**************[/i][/b]
NARAL Pro-Choice America, 2001: 0% rating (but that conflicts with Planned Parenthood)
NARAL Pro-Choice America, 2003: 21% rating

Folks, there are Democrats who have better statistics than these from National Right to Life, and there are Democrats who have lower ratings from Planned Parenthood and NARAL, Democrats who many of you would never consider voting for or supporting. It is a mortal sin for a Catholic to support Arlen Specter in any situation unless his opponent is [b]more[/b] pro-abortion than he is, just as was the case with John Kerry. Any suggestion otherwise is partisanship.

As for Specter's candidacy to the Senate Judiciary Committee and the need for opposition to it, [url="http://www.capwiz.com/nrlc/issues/alert/?alertid=6611956&type=CU"]National Right to Life thinks so too.[/url]

[Anna]

Nathan, your accusation of me being partisan is laughable, since I am not a Republican!
In fact, I am a registered member of the Right to Life Party in my state, have represented them in my Congressional District and county for years, and have also served on the political action committee of my state's Right to Life Committee.

I'm not going to tout Specter as a pro-lifer; he doesn't deserve it.

He is a moderate. He blows whichever way the political winds blow.

Guess which way the winds are blowing? (Hint: it ain't pro-abortion)


His record on abortion is, "eh" at best.
But he has supported all George W. Bush's nominees to the federal bench thus far, and they've all been very visibly pro-life.

[Guest Aluigi]

but admit it would be better if a more pro-life person was head of the judiciary comittee.

[Good Friday]

[quote name='Anna']Nathan, your accusation of me being partisan is laughable, since I am not a Republican!
In fact, I am a registered member of the Right to Life Party in my state, have represented them in my Congressional District and county for years, and have also served on the political action committee of my state's Right to Life Committee.[/quote]
What other conclusion can I come to if you're supporting a man who has received 0% ratings from National Right to Life and 90% ratings from NARAL Pro-Choice America? That certainly doesn't seem like a fair and balanced approach to the pro-life cause, does it?

[quote name='Anna']I'm not going to tout Specter as a pro-lifer; he doesn't deserve it.[/quote]
I'm so glad. Not only does he not deserve it, but it would be a lie.

[quote name='Anna']He is a moderate. He blows whichever way the political winds blow.[/quote]
What's moderate about a 90% rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America, 70+% ratings from Planned Parenthood, and 0-30% ratings from National Right to Life? That doesn't seem very moderate to me -- again, there are [b]many[/b] Democrats with better ratings, and they would not even be considered as viable options in the voting booth or for chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Par-tis-an-ship.

[quote name='Anna']His record on abortion is, "eh" at best.[/quote]
No, it isn't. A 90% rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America is only 10% away from voting how they want him to [b]ALL THE TIME[/b]. Anna, please, use common sense: what is "eh" about that? What is "eh" about a 0% rating from National Right to Life? Those seem pretty extreme to me.

[Guest Aluigi]

we should get someone better for the judiciary comitte!

[Anna]

You see, Nathan, and all, here is where I have a problem with knee-jerk reactionism:
The Right to Life website claims:
[color=green]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 -- [b]but he did not pledge to support President Bush's nominations to the Supreme Court.[/color][/b]

Reading Specter's statement in its entirety, however, we find:
[color=green]“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 am committed to such prompt action by the Committee on all of President Bush’s nominees.

... I expect to work well with President Bush in the judicial confirmation process in the years ahead.” [/color]

Certainly, Specter isn't THE best man out there to Chair the Judiciary Committee. But this is a position which is generally granted to the senior most member of the Committee, and that happens to be Specter.

I believe we have an opportunity here to bring Specter onboard with the conservatives on the Committee. I do not believe that he is a dyed-in-the-wool pro-abort. He's voted on abortion to further his own career ~ pro-life when to his advantage, and pro-abortion when to his advantage. That's despicable, indeed. But to deny pro-life justices during a time when the nation is calling for moral reform would be political suicide. I don't think he's about to do that.

For me, it has nothing to do with partisanship. It has to do with political analysis, not spinning our wheels, not getting hysterical just because the media wants us to, and not coming off like a bunch of hateful exclusionists and elitists, thereby driving moderates who might otherwise support us into the arms of the waiting liberal left.

[i]Capisce[/i]?