SwiftVets.com

[shawa]

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=7360

TOO LATE ABOUT ARLEN

By Shawn Macomber
Published 11/8/2004 12:08:53 AM

Scant days after President Bush's victory at the polls, conservative are already going to the mattresses again, to echo the famous refrain of Corleone family hit man Peter Clemenza in The Godfather. Their target? Perpetual problem senator, the liberal Republican Arlen Specter, currently in line to head the Judiciary Committee, and, thus, wielding considerable sway over potential Supreme Court nominations.

The election had barely been called for Bush when Specter strolled into a post-victory press conference, and breezily told reporters Bush had "no mandate," reassured the world that he believed Roe v. Wade "inviolate," and, finally, deemed the appointment of any pro-life justice "unlikely." A day later, in the midst of the maelstrom of letters, faxes, and calls into various Republican leaders' offices calling for Specter to be denied his long-coveted Judiciary Committee chairmanship, Specter backed off and claimed his statements had been misinterpreted. He even made the Sunday morning television rounds to reaffirm his fealty to…well, to whatever slogan would help him survive the siege.

But his words did not soothe the souls of social conservatives still basking in the media glow bestowed upon them for swinging the election Bush's way. Apparently, they were not willing to take Specter at his word -- and wait for a smoking gun that could come in the form of a sunken conservative nominee. And why should they? Senator Specter is, after all, the man who spent primary season promising to support "strict constructionists" when fighting true blue conservative Pat Toomey's challenge, only to revise that to "centrists" once Toomey was out of the way.

Specter's biggest asset in this fight is tradition. There is certainly nothing "inviolate" about the upcoming committee vote to recommend a chairman. It is done by secret ballot, and Specter's fellow GOP committee members could take the wind out of his sails quickly if they so desired. They could skip right over Specter and nominate the much more conservatively-palatable Arizona Senator Jon Kyl. But tradition dictates that the senator with the most seniority ascends, and, as we are endlessly lectured, senators are creatures of tradition. Shirking such tradition would be no small thing.

Social conservatives have other walls to scale, as well. The White House, via the comments of Karl Rove on Meet the Press, has made it clear it is in Specter's corner. Senators Lindsey Graham and Rick Santorum are said to be working feverishly behind the scenes to save Specter, as well. Senate aides I spoke with said there was a general uneasiness about the whole business, even among conservatives who would have just as soon seen Specter lose last Tuesday as come back to the Capitol and muck up the agenda.

But let's be honest for a moment here. This situation should not come as the least bit of a surprise to anyone. This is the senator who helped invent the verb to bork, for God's sake. He fought the Bush tax cuts -- vociferously, as Bush himself might say -- and has been variously supported monetarily by George Soros, Harold Ickes, Alan Dershowitz, and nearly-First Lady Teresa Heinz Kerry, who actually made a commercial for him in 1992. In a fundraising letter sent out to primary voters during his brief 1992 run for president, unearthed by the fine folks over at Grassroots PA, Specter proclaims a desire to, "give pro-choice Republicans a voice." Some 2004 campaign signs read, "Kerry & Specter For Working Families." Unions love the guy. Liberals, too. Few conservatives would argue with his designation by National Review's John J. Miller as "the worst senator."

Even this year, the liberal Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's endorsement said outright that the "best argument" for voting Specter would be his ability "to block some of the ideologically extreme federal judges likely to be nominated by President Bush in a second term, some of them for the Supreme Court." Even more specifically, the editors wrote, Specter had given his word that "no extremists would be approved for the bench." Why should we have expected anything less from him?

And yet, despite all that, the person most to blame for Specter being in a position to deep six President Bush's judicial nominees is…President Bush. He's the one, after all, who went before Pennsylvania conservatives when Specter was on the edge of defeat and intoned, "I'm here to say it as plainly as I can: Arlen Specter is the right man for the United States Senate." Bush explained that Specter might be "a little bit independent-minded sometimes" but, à la Seinfeld, there is "nothing wrong with that." Those are the words of our president; the guy we keep hearing has a mandate.
Not everyone is on board the anti-Specter train. Syndicated radio host and blogger Hugh Hewitt has recently pointed out that Specter just won both the Republican primary and general election in his state, and contends that that should count for something.

"Institutions that are destabilized for expediency's sake do not regain stability after a convenient alteration," Hewitt wrote, adding: "For the past four years Republicans have complained bitterly of Democratic obstructionism that upended the traditions of the Senate. Should the GOP begin its new period of dominance with a convenient abandonment of the very rules they have charged Dems with violating repeatedly?"

It's a reasonable question for even those of us who loathe the idea of Specter helping to shape the Supreme Court to mull over. It is easy to upset the apple cart. Not so easy to right it again. Should conservatives push this through now, they should be fully prepared for the day when a committee made up of liberal Republicans snubs a conservative with seniority.

Nevertheless, for asking such a question, Hewitt was dubbed a "confused conservative" on the website, Not Specter. I have yet to hear anyone similarly deride George W. Bush or Karl Rove. But, then again, maybe that's the sort of deference that got us into this mess to begin with. Perhaps the time to throw a fit was while Bush was lavishing praise on Specter and pulling his chestnuts out of the fire, not a week after the election.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shawn Macomber is a reporter for The American Spectator. He runs
the website Return of the Primitive.

[Roon]

Here's a petition you can sign to stop Spector from becomming Chairman:


http://www.conservativepetitions.com/petitions.php?id=286

[shawa]

From Townhall article of 4/19/04 by Robert Novak:

Arlen Specter's Friends
Robert Novak
April 19, 2004

....... Specter's supporters, have included George Soros,
Harold Ickes Jr., Ron Carey, Arthur Coia, Richard Ben-Veniste,
Alan Dershowitz, Barbara Kennelly and the International Association of Fire Fighters.

That's a left-wing all-star team, validating Specter's long career as
a political broken-field runner. He will become chairman of the Senate
Judiciary Committee next year as a Republican in good standing who
is also a favorite senator in liberal-labor circles. When organized labor
has needed a vote, Specter has been there, explaining why many of
Bush's enemies are Specter's friends............

Heading the list is billionaire investor George Soros, who so far has
spent $15.5 million to defeat George W. Bush. Soros has plenty left
for Specter, contributing $50,000 to the Republican Mainstream
Partnership as part of its earmarked $200,000 against Toomey.
In the 1998 election cycle, Soros and his wife gave Specter
the $4,000 legal maximum.

With a Republican primary approaching, Specter does not want
public association with Bush-bashers. When Rush Limbaugh reported
the Soros contribution on his radio program, Specter telephoned
the conservative talker last Wednesday to stress that he is "very, very
strongly supporting" Bush. The senator said he has "nothing to do" with
the Republican Mainstream Partnership or Soros's donation,
though he is listed on the organization's Web site as a member.

There are many other sources of Specter support who despise Bush:

-- The fire fighters union contributed $2,500 to Specter last September,
the same month in which it became the first labor union to endorse
Kerry for president. Specter has received contributions from two big
left-leaning unions, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU)
and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
(AFSCME). The Pennsylvania AFL-CIO and the Pennsylvania State
Education Association also have endorsed him.

-- In the last election cycle, Specter was given $10,000 by the Teamsters
under the leadership of Ron Carey (whose election to the presidency was
voided by court order). He received $8,000 from the Laborers Union
under President Arthur Coia, who then was under investigation for ties
with organized crime and later was barred from active union leadership.

-- The National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare,
headed by Democratic former Rep. Barbara Kennelly of Connecticut,
gave Specter $1,000 last fall. The organization fights Bush's plan for
private investment accounts.

-- Harvard Law Prof. Alan Dershowitz, a fierce critic of the way Bush
was elected, has contributed to Specter in the current and previous
election cycles.

-- Harold Ickes Jr., the former Clinton White House aide who runs
the Media Fund putting anti-Bush advertising on television, gave
Specter $1,000 last year.

-- Richard Ben-Veniste, the high-powered Washington lawyer serving
on the independent 9/11 Commission, is a Specter backer. He contributed
to Specter in 1997 when Ben-Veniste was representing Terry McAuliffe,
now the Democratic national chairman, in connection with the Teamsters
scandal. Ben-Veniste is generous to Democrats, but Specter is the only
Republican on record as being helped by him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do we really want to see these back-benchers involved in
Judiciary Committee hearings on President Bush's nominees???