Bye bye, Chairman Specter? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 02:49:21 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Bye bye, Chairman Specter? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Bye bye, Chairman Specter?  (Read 26225 times)
danwxman
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,532


« on: January 21, 2005, 02:38:11 PM »

More then half of Pennsylvania Republicans voted for Specter over Toomey....and he then won re-election. I'm sorry that you are in the minority Phil.
Logged
danwxman
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,532


« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2005, 03:13:26 PM »

first of all let me add, that im a strong supporter of president bush, and i support *most* of his judicial nominees.

however, the white house has no right to be pissed at specter.  they want him to rubber-stamp all of bush's appointments.  that is not the job of the senate.  if specter were to do that, hed be abdicating his reponsibilities as a senator.

He's not being asked to be a rubber stamp. He was the one who promised something to those that promised to support him. He went back on it. Also, bringing up judges that have already been confirmed is a ridiculous idea.

What's more important...politics or integrity? I guess we see which side you stand on.
Logged
danwxman
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,532


« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2005, 03:50:36 PM »

Correct me if I'm wrong here but I don't think Specter made this promise during the election, did he?  Kemerer is responsible for the vetting process.  If he fails in that responsibility surely he would be fired and replaced.  If anything he's going to be extra cautious in the vetting process because he'll know there's a target on his back.  Remember, Specter can always override him.

He made a promise to those that promised to support him for Judiciary Chair and he went back on his word. Is that integrity?

Yes, it is, because he is more concerned about representing those who voted for him, and protecting American's freedom, than giving in to a bunch of intolerant religious.

Agreed. I'd rather have him stand up for the people who elected him.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 12 queries.