Thursday, November 04, 2004

A tale of two winners...

Yahoo! has an AP report on Bush's press conference today where he promised to spend the political capital he has earned....

"I earned capital in the campaign — political capital — and now I intend to spend it," he said at a news conference 24 hours after securing his second term.

Exactly right. Why in the world would he back down now, when he got such a huge vote of confidence from the American people?

In another story from Yahoo! Arlen Spector, the soon to be chairmen of the Senate judiciary committe, my least favorite non-Democratic Senator has other ideas. Even though he pushed back a strong challenger in his primary, a solidly conservative challeneger, largely with the help of President Bush, Spector now plans to waylay any prolife judicial nominees. As America clearly gets more conservative, Spector doesn't want any conservatives 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 number 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."

How dare he scold the President like a school boy? He likely wouldn't have won his primary without Bush, and now he tells Bush to be "mindful of the considerations which I am mentioning"? I thought on election night that it wouldn't be a bad thing for Spector to lose, now I am even more uncertain his reelection was a good thing. I have already written my Senators to urge them to block Spector's nomination to the Judiciary charimanship. He further whines...

A former district attorney, Specter also bemoaned what he called the lack of any current justices comparable to legal heavyweights like Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Benjamin Cardozo and Thurgood Marshall, "who were giants of the Supreme Court."

"With all due respect to the (current) U.S. Supreme Court, we don't have one," he said.

You know why we don;t have any? Because you rolled over for Ted Kennedy and helped keep Robert Bork, one the greatest legal minds in American history, of the High Court and you rolled over every time liberals attacked a Bush nominee. The great legal minds will not accept nominations because they don't want to go through the approval process that you helped make so personal and brutal. The ad hominem attacks mean that candidates have to have no postions at all or be really quiet about them to get on courts. It is your fault we lack "giants" on the court Senator!

FYI, I consider Scalia and Rehnquist to both be great legal minds, despite what Spector says. I am guessing he thinks HE is a great legal mind and worthy of a seat on the High Court. Think again.

No comments: