Specter wins fifth term in Senate, will chair Judiciary Committee

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by JGrubbs, Nov 3, 2004.

  1. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter survived the toughest election year of his Senate career Tuesday, securing a fifth term and proving his moderate appeal by defeating challengers from the political left and right alike.

    With the win, Specter, 74, a Republican, will chair the Senate Judiciary Committee starting in January – a post that will give him broad authority to reshape the Supreme Court as ailing justices look to retire.

    With 75 percent of precincts reporting, Specter had 1,703,053 votes, or 49 percent. Democratic challenger Rep. Joe Hoeffel had 1,574,150 votes, or 46 percent, while conservative Constitution Party candidate Jim Clymer had 4 percent and Libertarian Betsy Summers 1 percent.

    The election proved Specter's durability in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans by more than a half-million votes. He was already the first Pennsylvania senator to be elected to four terms.

    Source: Associated Press
     
  2. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    As a confirmed abortion supporter, Spector survived a strong challenge by a pro-life candidate in the Republican primary, and a tough race by a democratic opponent in the general election.

    In both cases, vigorous support by Bush made the difference for him.

    One less pro-life senator, thanks to George W. Bush.
     
  3. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    Specter has vowed that as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee he will block any pro-life judges. So now the GOP has control of the Senate, but the Senate will still block the judges.
     
  4. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    But we had to vote for Bush, because if we didn't Kerry might have won, and then we'd have abortions.

    As we will now...
     
  5. swaimj

    swaimj
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    How can this be true? Specter won in PA quite handily while Bush lost.
     
  6. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    It might be a stretch to say that Bush made the difference in the general election...it was evangelical Christians who voted overwhelmingly for Specter and his murderous agenda.

    But if it were not for Bush, though, Specter would have been out in the primary.

    Christians are happy, though, the GOP reigneth. Who cares about abortion, anyway?
     
  7. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you have a link for that? I tried to do a search but didn't find anything like that. I seriously doubt when push comes to shove that he will keep qualified judges from being voted on by the Senate. I can only imagine what the other Republicans would do. If they thought that, why put him on as the Judiciary chair?
     
  8. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    In fact the article posted said, "He repeatedly reminded voters how Specter, during the primary, called attention to his support for conservative Bush administration judicial nominees." and "Specter, risking the antagonism of conservative voters, maintained he would not impose any abortion litmus test on judicial nominees." If there is no litmus test on abortion, then how can you say that he would block pro-life judges?
     
  9. aefting

    aefting
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    874
    Likes Received:
    0
  10. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your quotes are from the Democrat he was running against, he was trying to sway the liberal voters back to himself. I will find the quote where Specter vowed to block the pro-life judges. It was shortly after Bush campaigned for him to help him beat the pro-life, conservative Christian Pat Toomey.
     
  11. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    Or you can read the article that Andy just posted, I read it after I posted my reply. ;)
     
  12. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    "I would look for justices who would interpret the Constitution, as Cardozo has said, reflecting the values of the people."

    So does that mean that if the majority of people are opposed to abortion on demand that he would allow those to be voted on?
     
  13. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    I didn't know that he was one of the people who spearheaded the drive to not nominate Jeff Sessions from Alabama. Jeff Sessions is a class act (I used to be an Alabama guy.) I really hope that some of the other Republicans can knock some sense in him. (Maybe he'll turn Democrat, so we can get a "regular" Republican there.)
     
  14. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    He also believes Roe v. Wade was correctly decided and helped sink the Supreme Court nomination of conservative judge Robert Bork.

    In 1987, Specter grilled Federal Appeals Court Judge Robert Bork, President Reagan’s conservative nominee to the Supreme Court. In his book Passion for Truth, Specter explained why he resisted Bork’s nomination, which was eventually voted down by the Senate. "The Constitution has turned out to be much more dynamic than [Bork believes]: a living, growing document, responsive to the needs of the nation," wrote Specter. "Bork’s narrow approach is dangerous for constitutional government."
     
  15. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    Specter isn't the only GOP leader, that has a say in which judges get appointed, who believes the Constitution to be a "living document".

    The man charged by President Bush with screening potential U.S. Supreme Court justice nominees believes the Constitution is a living document and that only the nine black-robed brethren have sufficient understanding of the document to explain to the people what it means.

    This should be an astonishing and disturbing revelation from Judge Alberto Gonzales, counsel to the president, for all those citizens who voted for Bush primarily because they thought his Supreme Court appointments would be remarkably different and better than his opponent's.
     
  16. aefting

    aefting
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    874
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bush's support for Specter really irritated me. Sure we got a "Republican" senator, but at what cost?

    I suppose I would not make a very good politician.

    Andy
     
  17. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    You would have my vote. ;)
     
  18. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    Specter warns Bush on high court nominations

    PHILADELPHIA -- The Republican expected to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee next year bluntly warned newly re-elected President Bush today against putting forth Supreme Court nominees who would seek to overturn abortion rights or are otherwise too conservative to win confirmation.

    Sen. Arlen Specter, fresh from winning a fifth term in Pennsylvania, also said the current Supreme Court now lacks legal "giants" on the bench.

    "When you talk about judges who would change the right of a woman to choose, overturn Roe v. Wade, I think that is unlikely," Specter said, referring to the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion.

    "The president is well aware of what happened, when a bunch of his nominees were sent up, with the filibuster," Specter added, referring to Senate Democrats' success over the past four years in blocking the confirmation of many of Bush's conservative judicial picks. "... And I would expect the president to be mindful of the considerations which I am mentioning."

    Source: Associated Press
     
  19. Debby in Philly

    Debby in Philly
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    2,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    And Joe Hoeffel would have been better??????
     
  20. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joe Hoeffel wouldn't have been chairing the committee. In fact, another, probably more conservative Republican would.
     

Share This Page

Loading...