End Pro-Abortion Litmus Test

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maranatha
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think this is a bad idea and it sets a bad precedent. By ending the pro-abortion litmus test, you’re saying that one’s stance on abortion should not be a factor when choosing judges. That is 100% wrong, it absolutely should be a factor. No judge who allows the shedding of innocent blood is qualified for the judiciary and should not even be considered.
 
40.png
chicago:
I believe that one’s support or opposition for Roe V Wade should be a litmus test for judicial nominees and whether they are allowed to be voted upon. If a nominee doesn’t oppose it, I certainly would want good legislators doing all that they could to stop that person from getting confirmed.
Click to expand...
Chicago:

I would dearly love for us to have that option. Right now, the problem is that we can’t get the DEMOCRATS in the SENATE to ALLOW a vote on “Well Qualified” Appellate Court Nominees who happen to be “Ambivalent On” or Oppose some tenets of ROE v. WADE.

At one point, it looked like the Republicans were going to break this UNGODLY FILIBUSTER, but then some of them got cold feet. Some of them saw their relationships with those very same Democrats going down the tubes and began to question why they were doing “Constitutional Option” in answer to the DEMOCRATS “Nuclear Option” to preserve the LIBERAL Judiciary and ROE v. WADE.

Our job is to see if we can restore that courage, to remind these REPUBLICANS that there are things that are FAR MORE important on this earth than their relationships to the “DEMONCATS” on the Other Side of the Aisle who have been besmurching the names of decent people in order to justify denying them the UP or DOWN Vote the Constitution requires.

Let’s see if we can restore that Courage, and convince tham of the REAL difference between doing the RIGHT THING and doing the CONVENIENT THING.

Thank you to all who have written and are writting to the Senators.

Blessed are they who act to spare God’s Little Ones, Michael
 
40.png
Sheck:
I think this is a bad idea and it sets a bad precedent. By ending the pro-abortion litmus test, you’re saying that one’s stance on abortion should not be a factor when choosing judges. That is 100% wrong, it absolutely should be a factor. No judge who allows the shedding of innocent blood is qualified for the judiciary and should not even be considered.
Click to expand...
Sheck:

I don’t think that you understand what he problem is or what we are trying to do here.

Right now, the only way people who are Pro-Life are EVER going to be considered for the JUDICIARY is if they KEEP SILENT or LIE on the Issue of ROE v. WADE!

IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT?!? or, Are you just confused as to what’s happening and what we’re trying to do?

A large part of WHY Robert Bork wasn’t confirmed when he was nominated was HIS KNOWN OPPOSITION to ROE v WADE! Have you ever HEARD Dr. Bork speak or read one of his writings?? If so, do you believe would he have been an asset to the Court, INSTEAD OF Justice Kennady or Justice Ginsberg?

A large part of the opposition to Clarence Thomas was his ALLEGED OPPOSITION to ROE v. WADE. That’s why they made stuff up about him and he was confirmed by such a NARROW MARGIN!

If both were NOMINATED TODAY, both would have more than enough votes to be CONFIRMED, but both would be FILIBUSTERED by the DEMOCRATS!

Sheck, the CONSTITUTION says that there shall BE NO RELIGIOUS TEST for ANY FEDERAL APPOINTMENT. Can’t you see that the DEMOCRATS are IMPOSING A RELIGIOUS TEST on JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS?? Can’t you see that they’re saying, "If you’re a CATHOLIC or any other form of CHRISTIAN, and you TAKE YOUR FAITH SERIOUSLY, You CAN’T become a FEDERAL Judge! or, At least NOT a FEDERAL APPEALS Judge?"

Do you REALLY want that to continue?? or, Do you agree with me that it’s wrong to deny WELL-QUALIFIED Judicial nominees an UP or DOWN Vote BECAUSE OF THEIR RELIGION? And, BECAUSE they WOULD UPHOLD A BAN on Partial birth Abortions and just might OVERTURN ROE V. WADE?

Sheck, It was up to the States and the Federal Government to pass the laws against Abortion. That was never an issue for the courts to decide. In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court Arrogated authority to itself that it should NEVER have had.

Since most Justices who are Pro-Life are also fairly conservative in their interpretation of the Constitution and the powers given by it to the Courts, figure they would divest themselves of the POWER (by OVERTURNING THOSE Decisions granting the Courts those Arrogated Powers) and return it the appropriate bodies, who would then HAVE to vote on the issues.

This is simply the first step, WHICH MUST BE TAKEN!

If you don’t want ROE V. WADE to be OVERTURNED, you don’t have to write, but then please don’t complain about God’s wrath when it comes! OK?

Blessed are they who act to save God’s Little Ones, Michael
 
Traditional Ang:
… the CONSTITUTION says that there shall BE NO RELIGIOUS TEST for ANY FEDERAL APPOINTMENT. Can’t you see that the DEMOCRATS are IMPOSING A RELIGIOUS TEST on JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS?? Can’t you see that they’re saying, "If you’re a CATHOLIC or any other form of CHRISTIAN, and you TAKE YOUR FAITH SERIOUSLY, You CAN’T become a FEDERAL Judge! or, At least NOT a FEDERAL APPEALS Judge?"

Do you REALLY want that to continue?? or, Do you agree with me that it’s wrong to deny WELL-QUALIFIED Judicial nominees an UP or DOWN Vote BECAUSE OF THEIR RELIGION? And, BECAUSE they WOULD UPHOLD A BAN on Partial birth Abortions and just might OVERTURN ROE V. WADE?
Click to expand...
OK, let me play devil’s advocate for a moment.

What if some nominee’s “religion” (whatever that might be) demanded that they must support what the consider “a woman’s right to choose”? All the more, what if it was apparent that this nominee (let’s make it a Supreme Court nominee for sake of discussion) would get confirmed by a simple majority if a floor vote were allowed? Would the opponents of this person’s position be required to just lie back and fold rather than blocking the progress of the vote by filibuster, if necessary? Should we, under those circumstances, be expected to call upon the Senate to stop blocking the nomination and change the rules to elimante the filibuster?
 
40.png
chicago:
OK, let me play devil’s advocate for a moment.

What if some nominee’s “religion” (whatever that might be) demanded that they must support what the consider “a woman’s right to choose”? All the more, what if it was apparent that this nominee (let’s make it a Supreme Court nominee for sake of discussion) would get confirmed by a simple majority if a floor vote were allowed? Would the opponents of this person’s position be required to just lie back and fold rather than blocking the progress of the vote by filibuster, if necessary? Should we, under those circumstances, be expected to call upon the Senate to stop blocking the nomination and change the rules to elimante the filibuster?
Click to expand...
Chicago:

We already have that situation and are trying to remedy it. If you want it to continue, then do as you said in the survey.

I know of NO religion that requires it’s adherents to SUPPORT a woman’s “Right” to Murder her BABY, although some officially support the position.

Chicago, what you are doing is to suggest that we shouldn’t remedy a PRESENT EVIL because of the threat of a POSSIBLE FUTURE EVIL. That position is simply wrong and immoral.

If the situation were to occur that you are suggesting, it would either make NO DIFFERENCE as Roe would still be the LAW OF THE LAND (i.e., you won the National Debate and the Republicans did NOTHING about a PRESENT EVIL for fear of a FUTURE POSSIBLE EVIL), or we would be talking about a Judge who would have NO respect for the LAWS passed by the very SENATORS asked to confirm him/her. I don’t see the second person getting a majority if the Senators are thinking straight or if they have any PRIDE in what they’ve done!

Chicago, we have a PRESENT EVIL which requires a remedy. The activists paying the Democrats their campaign cash have made it quite clear that these last 2 years of FILIBUSTERS have been a warmup to the fights over the NOMINEES to the SUPREME COURT! and, They’ve promised to do a FULL-COURT FILIBUSTER on ANY Supreme Court who isn’t an enthusiastic supporter of ROE V. WADE & of “ABORTION RIGHTS”.

During the next 2+ years, President Bush will have a chance to Nominate at least 2 Justices to the Supreme Court.

If they are Pro-Life, do you want them FILIBUSTERED? or, Do you want them to have an UP or DOWN Vote?

Chicago, do you want Justices who’ll OVERTURN ROE V. WADE? or, Do you want Justices who’ll be bound to SUSTAIN ROE V. WADE?

You do want ROE V. WADE gone. Don’t you?

You do want the BABIES to be saved. Don’t you?

Blessed are they who act to spare God’s Little Ones, Michael
 
Traditional Ang:
Sheck:

I don’t think that you understand what he problem is or what we are trying to do here.

Right now, the only way people who are Pro-Life are EVER going to be considered for the JUDICIARY is if they KEEP SILENT or LIE on the Issue of ROE v. WADE!

IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT?!? or, Are you just confused as to what’s happening and what we’re trying to do?

A large part of WHY Robert Bork wasn’t confirmed when he was nominated was HIS KNOWN OPPOSITION to ROE v WADE! Have you ever HEARD Dr. Bork speak or read one of his writings?? If so, do you believe would he have been an asset to the Court, INSTEAD OF Justice Kennady or Justice Ginsberg?

A large part of the opposition to Clarence Thomas was his ALLEGED OPPOSITION to ROE v. WADE. That’s why they made stuff up about him and he was confirmed by such a NARROW MARGIN!

If both were NOMINATED TODAY, both would have more than enough votes to be CONFIRMED, but both would be FILIBUSTERED by the DEMOCRATS!

Sheck, the CONSTITUTION says that there shall BE NO RELIGIOUS TEST for ANY FEDERAL APPOINTMENT. Can’t you see that the DEMOCRATS are IMPOSING A RELIGIOUS TEST on JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS?? Can’t you see that they’re saying, "If you’re a CATHOLIC or any other form of CHRISTIAN, and you TAKE YOUR FAITH SERIOUSLY, You CAN’T become a FEDERAL Judge! or, At least NOT a FEDERAL APPEALS Judge?"

Do you REALLY want that to continue?? or, Do you agree with me that it’s wrong to deny WELL-QUALIFIED Judicial nominees an UP or DOWN Vote BECAUSE OF THEIR RELIGION? And, BECAUSE they WOULD UPHOLD A BAN on Partial birth Abortions and just might OVERTURN ROE V. WADE?

Sheck, It was up to the States and the Federal Government to pass the laws against Abortion. That was never an issue for the courts to decide. In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court Arrogated authority to itself that it should NEVER have had.

Since most Justices who are Pro-Life are also fairly conservative in their interpretation of the Constitution and the powers given by it to the Courts, figure they would divest themselves of the POWER (by OVERTURNING THOSE Decisions granting the Courts those Arrogated Powers) and return it the appropriate bodies, who would then HAVE to vote on the issues.

This is simply the first step, WHICH MUST BE TAKEN!

If you don’t want ROE V. WADE to be OVERTURNED, you don’t have to write, but then please don’t complain about God’s wrath when it comes! OK?

Blessed are they who act to save God’s Little Ones, Michael
Click to expand...
I guess I overreacted to it. Looking at it and the text of the e-mail (All human beings deserve respect and protection from harm, especially those who are most defenseless. Yet the U.S. Supreme Court, in* Roe v. Wade*, violated these principles when it created a new “right” to abortion throughout pregnancy) it says specifically that abortion is wrong and unacceptable, rather than should not be an issue when selecting judges which I originally assumed it was. I sent the e-mail.
 
40.png
Sheck:
I guess I overreacted to it. Looking at it and the text of the e-mail (All human beings deserve respect and protection from harm, especially those who are most defenseless. Yet the U.S. Supreme Court, in* Roe v. Wade*, violated these principles when it created a new “right” to abortion throughout pregnancy) it says specifically that abortion is wrong and unacceptable, rather than should not be an issue when selecting judges which I originally assumed it was. I sent the e-mail.
Click to expand...
Sheck:

Thank you for sending the e-mail.

Blesed are they who act to spare God’s Little Ones, Michael
 
I started a Thread in the “parent” forum, before I saw this one.

Cardinal George has asked all the faithfull in Chicago Archdiocese to fill out and sign postcards which were made available. The Church’s are supplying the postage… I tried to throw in 50 cents, but they had nothing set up for donations.
 
40.png
jimmytoes:
I started a Thread in the “parent” forum, before I saw this one.

Cardinal George has asked all the faithfull in Chicago Archdiocese to fill out and sign postcards which were made available. The Church’s are supplying the postage… I tried to throw in 50 cents, but they had nothing set up for donations.
Click to expand...
Jimmy:

Thank you for sending in the postcard - but I’ve listed something from a political activist who’s gotten people elected, and i’ve had other activists check it out. and, You CAN contact Senators from other States than your own!

The DEMOCRATS are maintaining “Party Unity” on this one, because the people who do their FUNDRAISING are calling the shots. If we get REALLY LUCKY we might turn a COUPLE of the DEMOCRATS, but our best hope lie with the Republicans, who have an obligation to support the President from THEIR PARTY.

We have 2 now who are pretty much going with the DEMOCRATS:

John McCain
Chuck Hagel - just announced today

6 others on the fence;

Lamar Alexander,
Lincon Chafee,
Susan Collins,
Olympia Snowe,
John Sununu and
John Warner

and 5 “Unknowns”:

Mike DeWine
Lisa Murkowski
Gordon Smith
Arlen Specter
George Voinovich

It seems the longer Majority Leader Frist waits (because of trying to negotiate with the Democrats), the harder it is to keep people in the Coalition.

Concentrate on the 6 and on Chuck Hagel (his announcement is RECENT), then go after the rest, IF YOU HAVE THE TIME. They each need a phone call, an e-mail and either a fax or a letter. Each one MUST be assured that this is IMPORTANT to you PERSONALLY, and that you will contribute time, money and effort to his/her prospective opponents if he/she can’t bring him/herself to do the RIGHT THING.

CONTACT INFORMATION:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=603302&postcount=10

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=632350&postcount=40

State of Illinois:

Richard Durbin (D - IL)
332 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2152 (202) 228-0400 - fax
Chicago Offices: (312) 353-4952 (312) 353-0150 - fax
Web Form: durbin.senate.gov/sitepages/contact.htm

Barack Obama (D - IL)
713 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2854 (202) 228-4260 fax Toll free: (866) 445-2520 (for IL residents only) Chicago Office: (312) 886-3506 (312) 886-3514 fax
Web Form: obama.senate.gov/contact/

The NRA has its members do the postcards, too. They’re EASY, but they’re not very effective, because they lack the personal touch. If you call, e-mail and fax/mail, it’s a different story.

The Senators are supposed to be in their home districts this week, so, get them in their LOCAL offices.

Thank you for your efforts. Keep those phone calls, e-mails, faxes and letters going.

Blessed are they who act to spare God’s Little Ones, Michael
 
I’ve had a request to list the SENATORS for New York

They are both Democrats and SOLIDLY behind the FILIBUSTER, but HILLARY CLINTON is RUNNING for RE-ELECTION NEXT YEAR (2206), and WANTS TO RUN for PRESIDENT in 2008! She might, therefore, be persuadable if she believes that her continued and UNCONSTITUTIONAL OPPOSITION to an UP or DOWN Vote would COST HER the VOTES OF CATHOLICS in BOTH of those ELECTIONS…

In Senator Clinton’s case, I want you to tell her office that you’re a CATHOLIC! and, I want you to tell her that her continued insistance in not allowing an UP or DOWN Vote to Judicial Nominees strictly because they are “People of Faith” will cost her the vote of you and every CATHOLIC you can persuade to join you, Also state that you are prepared to contribute and campaign for her opponents in the upcomming elections, NO Matter who they may be.

Her office will try to tell you about OTHER FILIBUSTERS - Don’t buy it! I have the facts, and they are so embarrassing for the Democrats as to be pittiful and laughable. They are simply trying to lie to and confuse you.

New York general info is here:

senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?State=NY

Hillary’s information is here:

Hillary Clinton - (D - NY)
476 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4451 fax (202) 228-0282
New York City Office (212) 688-6262 Fax: (212) 688-7444
Web Form:clinton.senate.gov/email_form.html
Other Offices - clinton.senate.gov/offices.html

I don’t believe that Chuck Schumer will change his mind under ANY circumstances. But, here’s his info anyway:

Charles E. Schumer - (D - NY)
313 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6542 Fax: (202) 228-3027 TDD: (202) 224-0420
New York City Phone: (212) 486-4430 Fax: (212) 486-7693 TDD: (212) 486-7803
Web Form: schumer.senate.gov/webform.html
Other Offices - schumer.senate.gov/SchumerWebsite/contact/contact.html

Remember, the Senators are HOME for most of this week, so you want to contact their HOME OFFICES!

And, I don’t need a book or even an article. A couple of heartfelt paragraphs that YOU WRITE are really what’s needed for the E-mail/letter/fax, and 30 seconds worth of remarks is plenty for the phone call - Sincerity is the word. The 30 seconds need to be comments that you mean.

Blessed are they who act to save God’s Little Ones, Michael
 
Remember that I said that Chuck Hagel had joined john McCain?

Well, Here it is

**Monday, May 2, 2005
Posted at 6:00 PM, Pacific

Senator Hagel gets pretty much everything wrong.**

Senator Chuck Hagel’s appearance on Face the Nation yesterday suggested he really does not understand the stakes surrounding the filibuster battle, and certainly does not understand the Senate’s role with regards to presidential nominations. You can contact his office via 202-224-4224 or via the Congressional switchboard at 2020-225-3121, (or fax him here Fax: (202) 224-5213) or e-mail him here.

hagel.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Offices.Contact

*The key exchange:

Bob Schieffer: How are you going to vote, senator? Have you decided?"

Senator Hagel: Well, I hope it doesn’t come to a vote, Bob. Legislative institutions in a democracy operate with one currency and that’s trust. And when you debase that trust it doesn’t make any difference what the rules are, what the procedures are, what the structure is, you will fail your nation. What we need to do is bring some trust back into this process. I have great confidence in Bill Frist and Harry Reid. I think if we leave them alone, these outside forces, these extreme forces running television and radio ads across this country on both sides of the issue --they certainly have a right to do that-- but we as senators have to figure this out ourselves. We have to sit down ourselves and look each other in the eye and talk not just about short term consequences, but more importantly, long-term consequences for the institution of the Senate. the Senate was primarily built around protection of minority rights. Should a president get an up-or-down vote on his judicial nominees? Absolutely. I think he should. But as you heard in the first segment, neither party’s hands are clean on this. Republicans torpedoed 60 Democrats. I think the Democrats are making a mistake in how they are going about this, in holding 10 of these appeals court nominees hostage, but we have got to work our way through it. The old-timers in the Senate, the respected wise men in the Senate --and I listen to them-- tell me this isn’t the first bump in the road that we have had. Howard Baker, Bob Dole, George Mitchell have all had to work things out. That’s the wise course of action we should take, not change the rules.

Bob Schieffer: “Let me just ask you this, then. If Senator Frist came to you and said, you know, ‘We are going to go…we are going to go, and senator Hagel I need your vote.’ Would you give him your vote right now, or are you prepared to say?”

Senator Hagel: Senator Frist and I had a long conversationthis week, just the two of us, and he knows where I stand and he will be the only one to know where I stand. But again, if I have to vote, I’ll vote, but I hope it does not come to that. I have confidence that we can be mature and divert this catastrophe that’s about to collide."*

Read Hughes summary of why Senator Hagel is just wrong in the reast of the article here:
hughhewitt.com/

If you LIVE ANYWHERE NEAR HEBRASKA - Contact Sen. Hagel in his Nebraska Offices:

Omaha Office
11301 Davenport Street, Suite 2
Omaha, NE 68154
Tel: (402) 758-8981
Fax: (402) 758-9165

Lincoln Office
294 Federal Building
100 Centennial Mall North
Lincoln, NE 68508
Tel: (402) 476-1400
Fax: (402) 476-0605

Kearney Office
4111 Fourth Avenue, Suite 26
Kearney, NE 68845
Tel: (308) 236-7602
Fax: (308) 236-7473

Scottsbluff Office
115 Railway Street, Suite C102
Scottsbluff, NE 69361
Tel: (308) 632-6032
Fax: (308) 632-6295

Be Polite, but let him know that, unless he’s willing to support the President and the PRO-LIFE NOMINEES, that he’s kust plain WRONG, and that he can FORGET ABOUT THAT RUN FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008!

MAKE HIM NUMBER ONE ON YOUR LIST before he hardens and cools into place. Oh, MOMOFONE, this is your assigned REPUBLICAN, and I release you from contacting CHUCK SCHUMER! Don’t worry about him! Leave him to the Internationalists!

Blessed are they who act to spare God’s Little Ones, Michael
 
BROTHERS AND SISTERS:

THIS IS NOT GOOD.

I understand that I was a bit of a “Slave-Driver”. But the FILIBUSTERS OF JUDICIAL NOMINEES and ROE V. WADE are 2 of the biggest things of our age!

You see, if we can’t get JUDGES in there who’ll INTERPRET LEGISLATION and LEAVE LEGISLATING to the the ELECTED BODIES who are responsible to ENACT legislation, ROE V. WADE will NEVER get OVERTURNED!

But, if we can get JUDGES into the APPEALS COURTS who understand that their job isn’t to CREATE LAW but to INTERPRET LAW, we just might be able to force another showdown on ROE V. WADE.

GUYS, if the PRO-DEATH forces win here, we can forget about a PRO-LIFE SUPREME JUSTICE! If the PRO-DEATH forces win here, we can forget about ROE V. WADE EVER being REHEARD by SUPREMES, let alone RECONSIDERED or OVERTURNED!

This is for ALL the marbles, and the PRO-DEATH FORCES know that, that’s why they’ve put so much effort into this campaign.

Do you want to see a return to the LAWS AGAINST “Sidewalk Counselling”? We will if we lose this fight!

Do we want NEVER to see Congrees enact, and the President sign, a Law banning ANY abortions that actually has TEETH? WE’ll never see the likes of the laws we were seeing during the last couple of years, let along COMPREHENSIVE BANS, if we lose this fight?

Do we want a return to Court rulings striking down even Parential Notification and Right NOT to be Forced to Participate Laws? We will if we lose this fight!

Brothers and Sisters, the potential benefits from winning this fight, are great. But, so are the pitfalls and dangers. and, You can bet the FORCES of Darkness will push their advantage (just like they always do) once they’ve won the battle if they do.

Brothers and sisters, I beg you to e-mail and call your state Senators and to do the same with the Senators on the list from my Posts #40 & 49:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=632350&postcount=40

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=636704&postcount=49

If you need contact Information for your Senator, just let me know your state and I’ll post it, along with any relevant links.

But please, time is getting short. We need to make sure that OUR SENATORS know how important this is to US!

If we lose, it’ll make the worst days of the Clinton Administration look like PARADISE, and we won’t be able to do ANYTHING about it, because it’ll just be too late.

Blessed are those who act to save God’s Little Ones. Michael
 
Brothers and Sisters - This from the Washington Post:

Democrats, GOP End Talks on Filibusters
Senate Showdown Over Nominees Nears

By Shailagh Murray and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, May 17, 2005; Page A01

*Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) announced yesterday that he and Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) had broken off negotiations aimed at averting a showdown over President Bush’s judicial nominees, moving the Senate to the brink of a constitutional confrontation and a battle that holds peril for both political parties and the White House.

Reid, emerging from an afternoon meeting with Frist, declared that the two leaders had reached an impasse after weeks of talks. “Negotiations are over,” he said. “It’ll have to be decided on the Senate floor.”

Frist did not speak with reporters but issued a statement. “Republicans believe in the regular order of fair up and down votes and letting the Senate decide yes or no on judicial confirmations free from procedural gimmicks like the filibuster,” he said, “and I hope Senator Reid and others know our door is always open to reasonable proposals for fair up or down votes for judicial nominees.”

The confrontation has been brewing for weeks and could begin tomorrow, when Frist puts forward two judicial nominees, Janice Rogers Brown of California and Priscilla Owen of Texas. Democrats have vowed to filibuster both to prevent their confirmation.

At some point this week or next, Frist is expected to seek a change in Senate rules that would bar the use of the filibuster for judicial nominations. That change has been dubbed the “nuclear option,” because of its potential to disrupt the Senate and shatter what little comity remains between Republicans and Democrats.*

washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/16/AR2005051601434.html?referrer=email&referrer=email

Hugh Hewit’s sources have stated that the Senate Majority Leader, Dr. Bill Frist has decided to bring either Janice Rogers Brown or Priscilla Owen to the Senate Floor TOMORROW MORNING! After a NORMAL DEBATE, Dr. Frist plans to CALL THE QUESTION!

We will know by TOMORROW AFTERNOON whether DEMOCRATS and the FORCES OF DEATH will be able to FILIBUSTER PRO-LIFE Supreme Court NOMINEES!

Remember, the FORCES OF DEATH are throwing everything they have into this. ROE V. WADE WILL REMAIN the LAW OF THE LAND if they win.

It’s destined for the SCRAP HEAP if we win!

As incredible as it may seem, it really is that simple.

Please e-mail the 2 Senators from your State and the "Wobbly Republicans discussed previously TONIGHT, and, if you have time, CALL THEM!

Thank You! and, May God bless those who act to save God’s Little Ones!
Michael
 
Brothers and Sisters - Another Article on the Impending vote:

The Christian Underground - In the Senate, “DefCon 1” Nears

By Vincent Fiore
May 17, 2005

*In the Senate this week, what promises to be a contentious culmination to what Republican Senator Trent Lott originally coined as the “nuclear option” will almost certainly take place. Majority leader Bill Frist will call for a vote on Texas Nominee Priscilla Owens, first nominated by President Bush to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in May, 2001. At that point, the Senate chamber might be said to have gone to DefCon 1.

The term, “DefCon,” short for Defense Condition, is the chief operating procedure of NORAD, or North American Air Defense, located in the Cheyenne Mountains of Colorado. Little known until MGM’s thriller “War Games” in 1983, DefCon has five strict protocols, five meaning “at peace” to one, meaning the nation is “at war.”

With the GOP stopping Senate Democrats from filibustering seven federal appeals court nominees, coupled with United Nations nominee John Bolton heading for a possible filibuster of his own, it will be political warfare not seen in the Senate chamber since the combative days of 1964. Then, the Senate set out upon a 57-day marathon to filibuster the Civil Rights Act of 1964, finally culminating with Democratic Senator Robert Byrd, who railed for some 14 hours against fundamental rights for blacks.

So what of all the proposed deals and cloakroom accords that were winding their way around Capitol Hill? Various senators are still trying to hammer out a last minute deal, but it may be too little too late.

And so let it be. If the fundamental issue here is an up or down vote for a sitting president’s judicial nominees–which have been held back by Senate Democrats for four years now–raising the political warfare level to DefCon 1 is not only appropriate, but a necessary and practical option.

There is no precedent for the Democratic obstructionism that has plagued Bush since his inauguration in 2001. The closest that comes to mind–and what Democrats continually point to–is the filibuster against Abe Fortas in 1968, whom President Lyndon Johnson attempted to appoint as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

The differences here are many. Johnson was a lame-duck president, and Fortas was already elevated to the Supreme Court in 1965. Along with the twenty-four Republicans, nineteen Democrats voted against ending the filibuster against Fortas, a truly bipartisan effort. Proven to be ethically challenged as well, Fortas would not have had the votes to pass muster on the Senate floor, so he soon withdrew his nomination.*

christian-underground.com/archive/read.php?sid=1642

As I said previously, Senator Frist has stated he will take ONE of president Bush’s LONG-SUFFERING NOMINEES to the Senate Floor tomorrow in order to force a vote on that NOMINEE.

The MSM has called that “The Nuclear Option”. I believe “The Nuclear Option” is what the DEMOCRATS have been exercising by denying these PRO-LIFE NOMINEES the UP or DOWN Vote required by the Constitution, and that that is what has destroyed whatever COMITY existed in the Senate, and that Senate Republicans are trying to RESTORE Constitutional Order by using the “CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION” to repair the demage inflicted by the DEMOCRATS’ use of THEIR “NUCLEAR OPTION”.

On this one, as on several others, the MSM has just got it wrong.

Even if you’ve ALREADY E-MAILED the Senators, please, please do so again. Just remind them that this is every bit as important to you as it is to the FORCES OF DEATH!

Remember, the FORCES OF DEATH are doing a MAXIMUM EFFORT!

I thank all of you who’ve e-mailed your State Senators as well as those on the list, and, I beg you to send MORE e-mails to the same Senators TONIGHT!

Thank You, and, May God bless those who act to save His Little Ones.
Michael
 
Brothers and Sisters - This sent to Senator Lamar Alexander:

*Dear Senator Lamar:

In 2001, the DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP of of the Senate promised to give PROMPT UP or DOWN Votes to ALL of President Bush’s Judicial Nominees who received the “WELL-QUALIFIED” Rating from the ABA. For the past 3 years, we’ve watched as those same DEMOCRATS have refused to give UP or DOWN Votes to 11 of President Bush’s Judicial Nominees, 8 of whom had the “WELL-QUALIFIED” Rating from the ABA!

As I listened to the Radio, I found out that, the DEMOCRATS aren’t FILIBUSTERING these NOMINESS because of the desires of any large groups of voters, but because of the desires of PRO-ABORTION LOBBYING ORGANIZATIONS! That this UNGODLY AND UNCONSTITUIONAL FILIBUSTER was being forced on us, not by DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE, but by PRO-ABORTION ACTIVISTS who took exception to the fact that these NOMINEES were people of Faith who just might vote to OVERTURN ROE V. WADE if given the chance!

So, it did my heart glad to find that the REPUBLICAN were going to take a stand for RELIGIOUS FREEDOM and for LIFE and try to BEAK this UNGODLY and UNCONSCIOABLE FILIBUSTER.

Then I found out that you weren’t so sure that you wanted to vote to use the “Constitutional Option” To Break this UNGODLY FILIBUSTER, that you weren’t so sure that it was worth destroying whatever shreds of comity were left in the SENATE for such a thing as PRINCIPLE.

Senator Alaxander, this PRINCIPLE matters to me a LOT more than any shreds of COMITY might be left after the abuse of the SENATE by the DEMOCRATS ovr the past few years. Now, I had a DEMOCRATIC Party Official (Gary South - he got Gray Davis elected 2x) saying that his RELATIVES from back East were quoting a “blogger” as they tried to talk him into voting for Bush last November. I WAS THAT BLOGGER. I promise you that I will blog against you if you can’t see fit to vote for the CONSTITUTION, THE PRESIDENT, THE NOMINEES AND YOUR PARTY when you run for re-elction, or if you decide to run for PRESIDENT IN 2008.

You will also find a LOT of Catholics and other Christians who’ll agree with me on this one.

Please, vote for the CONSTITUTION, THE PRESIDENT, THE NOMINEES AND YOUR PARTY by voting to BREAK this UNGODLY and UNCONSCIONABLE FILIBUSTER! You will find that I can be very grateful.

Sincerely,
*

Contact info:

Alexander, Lamar (R - TN)
302 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4944 Fax: (202) 228-3398
Web Form: alexander.senate.gov/index.cfm

I’ll try to get one more done, and then off to bed.

To those who e-mailed today - Thank you, and May God richly bless you, Michael
 
Brothers and Sisters - The News from Washington D.C.:

The name of PRISCILLA OWEN was brought to the Senate Floor by Dr. Frist at 9 AM. Priscilla Owen used to be the Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court, and was RE-ELECTED to that position TWICE! When originally nominated in 2002, PRISCIALLA OWEN received a RATING OF “WELL-QUALIFIED” from the ABA.

The DEMOCRATS refused to keep the word in spite of that fact, and the fact that she would have received 56 VOTES TO CONFIRM in the Senate, because she is PRO-LIFE and believes the ROE V. WADE was “wrongly decided”. She has publicly stated that, as a LOWER COURT Judge, she would be bound by the precendent (in spite of the fact that she doesn’t agree with that precedent). but that’s not good enough for the rabid PRO-DEATH crowd who require absolute allegience to the cause of the “woman’s right to choose” to murder her baby.

Dr. Frist has stated that he will allow 100 hours of debate on Justice Owen (that 's a change from what I heard last night). and that he would “CALL THE QUESTION” Thursday or Friday of next week.

That should give everyone here a chance to get their e-mails and calls in to the Senate by the end of this week!

As I’ve said, this might very well be the most important PRO-LIFE fight of this decade.

If we win, ROE V. WADE will be OVERTURNED, maybe not this year or next year, but it will be OVERTURNED. That’s why the PRO-DEATH ORGANIZATIONS and their financiers have spent SO MUCH money & effort on this fight.

If we lose, ROE V. WADE WILL REMAIN the Law of the Land for as long as we live. NOT only that, but, as soon as the DEMOCRATS take over the While House and Congress, we can be assured that all of the laws against “Sidewalk Counselling” and the like will be RE-ENACTED, and that the new LIBERAL PRO-DEATH COURTS will AFFIRM THEM!

I know NOBODY likes hearing that sort of talk, but I don’t know what else to say when the above IS THE TRUTH!

Those are the stakes. and, UNLIKE THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT, we don’t have to get into a car and risk our lives. All we have to do is write some SHORT E-MAILS and make a few phone calls. I’m NOT asking you to spend money or to break yourself against the brick walls that are the DEMOCRATS who are doing this FILIBUSTER, unless they are YOUR STATE’S SENATORS. I’m asking to concentrate on "wobbly REPUBLICANS’, in the hopes of bringing a couple of them back into line, so that they DO THE RIGHT THING and BREAK THIS UNGODLY FILIBUSTER!

For those who’ve writting and are writing again, thank you.

If you haven’t written, and the only thing keeping you is the lack of a letter, please post the question.

If you’ve written a letter you thought was inspired, please share it. Just remember to delete your personal information for the letter.

Thank you, and May God richly bless those who act to save His Little Ones.
Michael
 
Brothers and Sisters - Some news from the SENATE:

Frim Today’s Blog by Hugh Hewitt:

Friday, May 20, 2005

Posted at 7:35 AM, Pacific

The New York Times has an interesting look at the battle behind the battle to end the disfigured filibuster. The Washington Times puts the showdown on Tuesday next, and also looks at the preparations underway for the confirmation battle that would follow the expected retirement of Chief Justice Rehnquist.

hughhewitt.com/

The three articles are here:

Behind Scenes, Aides Take On Filibuster Fight
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: May 20, 2005

nytimes.com/2005/05/20/politics/20players.html?hp

An interesting article about the role of Consultants and ohers in this fight.

Deadlock on judicial picks spurs ‘nuclear option’ vote on Tuesday
By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

*Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist last night scheduled the “nuclear option” vote for Tuesday, an expected announcement that came shortly after a bipartisan group of senators failed yet again to reach a last-minute compromise on judicial nominees.

Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, said earlier this week that Republican leaders won’t yield on their demand that all judicial nominees get final up-or-down votes on the Senate floor.

Sen. Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican who is not among those still negotiating, said Democrats will never promise not to filibuster a Supreme Court nominee.

“There’s nothing going to come out of it,” Mr. Coburn said of the current talks. “But they are the deal makers and let them work it all they want.”

Republicans, meanwhile, picked up an important new vote in Sen. Gordon H. Smith, Oregon Republican. Mr. Smith had long resisted agreeing to vote for the “nuclear option,” but said on the Senate floor yesterday that he is an “unqualified supporter” of the effort.

Mr. Frist said last night he will file a “cloture motion” today, which would end debate on the nomination of Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen, who was picked more than four years ago for a spot on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.

That cloture vote will require 60 votes for passage and occur Tuesday. If a compromise is not reached before then and Democrats maintain their filibuster by denying cloture, Mr. Frist will then employ the “nuclear option,” which will ban filibusters of judicial nominations. *

washtimes.com/national/20050520-121238-3530r.htm

Short list begins for Supreme Court
By Joseph Curl
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

*The solicitation of potential names for the Supreme Court comes as the Republican-controlled Senate is locked in contentious debate over the “nuclear option,” which would ban filibusters of judicial nominees and let Republicans approve a Bush pick with a simple majority vote.

Many Supreme Court observers say the current battle will be dwarfed by what happens should Justice Rehnquist announce his retirement at the end of June, when the court finishes its session.

The last nomination by a Republican president was Justice Clarence Thomas. Liberals trying to defeat him announced public searches for anyone who could remember discussing abortion with him and delayed his confirmation with nationally televised hearings on Anita Hill’s decade-old charges of sexual harassment.

Not since 1823 has the nation gone 10 years without a vacancy on the Supreme Court — the last appointment to the high court was 11 years ago.

Actuarial tables alone suggest that Mr. Bush would be able to name at least two new justices, and perhaps as many as four. *

washtimes.com/national/20050520-121231-2088r.htm

I decided to let the news frame the issue and the timetable.

The Deadline is Tuesday morning.

Whether or not we will have any hope of sending any PRO-LIFE Justices to the Supreme Court, let alone enough to to form a majority to OVERTURN ROE V. WADE is the issue, and that’s exactly what the people on the other side have said…

We have the weekend. I’m going to ask those e-mailing to place a note on the forum to let us know when you’ve sent some e-mails or made any phone calls.

To whoever got Senator Smith from Oregon, Good work!

May God richly bless those who act to save His Little Ones, Michael
 
Brothers and Sisters - This sent to Sen. John Sununu:

*Dear Senator John Sununu:

I’m not going to go into the long story - That’s for another day. Suffice it to say that, in 2001, the DEMOCRATS promised they would give PROMPT “UP or DOWN VOTES” on all of President George W. Bush’s Judicial Nominees who received the “Highly Qualifed” Rating from the ABA.

And, that, in the 3 years since the REPUBLICANS gained a MAJORITY in the Senate, the DEMOCRATS have BROKEN their word and REFUSED to give ANY “UP or DOWN VOTES” to 8 (EIGHT) Nominees who HAD RECEIVED the “WELL QUALIFIED” RATING from the ABA. Then these same DEMOCRATS FILIBUSTERED these “WELL-QUALIFIED” NOMINEES, bringing up accusations which had as much resemblance to the truth as you and I do to an anoerexic.

Then I heard the DEMOCRATS were doing this shameful behavior, not because of the needs of the voters they allegedly represent, but because of the wishes of some PRO-ABORTION EXTREMISTS. These Activists were so confident of themselves that they actually said this on a nationally syndicated Talk Show hosted by Hugh Hewitt.

After hearing that, I was quite upset to hear that you were considering voting WITH the DEMOCRATS and the PRO-ABORTION Extrmists and AGAINST the President and you fellow REPUBLICANS as well as the CONSTITUTION and RELIGIOUS LIBERTY and a TRULY INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY.

Senator Sununu, I assume that you kust know that ALL the nominees being held up are People of Faith who take their as seriously as they do the Constitution of this country, that MOST are CATHOLIC and that MOST are PRO-LIFE and would uphold LAWS LIMITING ABORTIONS if they weren’t bound by previous precedents.

Senator Sununu, that is why the PRO-ABORTION EXTREMIST AND THE DEMOCRATS OPPOSE THESE NOMINEES. The rest of the reasons you are hearing are out and out LIES!

Senator Sununu, please side with LIFE, THE TRUTH, THE CONSTITUTION, THE PRESIDENT and your fellow REPUBLICANS, and vote to BREAK THE FILIBUSTER using the CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION as proposed by Dr. Bill Frist!

Thank you.

Regards, *

Name and address on original

You can use that a s sample letter, just not to sen. Sununu, at least not until Sun…

Thank You,

May God Richly Bless those who act to save his Little Ones. Michael
 
Brothers and Sisters - I’ve had a request for a “SAMPLE LETTER” for LIBERAL PRO-ABORTION Senator"

I live in California, which is represented by Senators Feinstein and Boxer. That’s about as LIBER and PRO-ABORTION as two Senators can get

Here’s my letter to Senator Feinstein, sent earlier this month:

*Dear Senator Feinstein:

I realize that we don’t agree on very many issues, and that, because of that, there’s a strong temptation to take this and throw it in the circular file. In spite of that, I’m begging you to FOLLOW the CONSTITUTION of the US and to stop this UNCONSCIONABLE FILIBUSTER and to allow UP or DOWN Votes for President Bush’s Judicial Nominees.

I’m not saying that you have to vote for them. in fact, with your opinions about them, I’d rather you didn’t. But, you and the other Democrats have been heard, and, now all you’re really doing is stalling and obstructing, forcing a system on the Senate whereby the Chief Executive would be required to have a “Super-Majoritiy” of 60 for every Judicial Nominee who might be opposed by some special interest group. that has never happened in the 223 year history of the Senate, and you know it. and, Remember, what you’ve done to this President’s nominess, the Republicans now have every right and reason to do to those from a Democratic President.

Do you really want that create and perpetuate that type of “tit-for-tat”, that type of acrimony, simply because some of YOUR special interest groups wanted their “Pound of Flesh” during the past couple years? Madam Senator, are you really sure you want to go down this road?

And, while we’re at it - Since when did the CONSTITUTION ALLOW for the imposition of a RELIGIOUS TEST to Keep People of Faith (Mainly Catholics) from serving on the Federal Appeals Bench? Since when did the CONSTITUTION SAY that People who take their Christian faith seriously should not be considered for the Federal Bench?

Madam Senator, are you really sure you want to go down this road, too?

Again, I beg you to stop doing something that by any objective standard is wrong, to stop defending the indefensible, to stop the FILIBUSTER of President Bush’s Nominees to the Appeals Courts and to allow them UP or DOWN Votes as required under the US CONSTITUTION, as well as basic common decency.

Regards,
Name and Address on Original*

It’s not my best writing, partly because I know that Senator Feinstein disagrees with me on a PLETHORA of Issues.

Naturally, those of you who have LIBERAL, PRO-ABORTION Senators representing in your States in the US Senate are welcome to use this letter or any part you see fit.

You can find the contact information on YOUR SENATORS here:

Senators of the 109th Congress
senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

The contact information on the ones we need to contact is available here:

Re: End Pro-Abortion Litmus Test Traditional Ang Post #40:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=632350&postcount=40

As I said above, Gordon Smith has announced that he will be supporting the CONSTITUTION, the PRESIDENT, RELIGIOUS FREEDON and his PARTY by voting both AGAINST THE FILIBUSTER and for the “CONSTITUTIONAL”/“NUCLEAR” OPTION.

If you happen to write him, just say “Thank You”, and that you appreciate the gesture. The same with anyone else who announce publicly his support for BREAKING this UNCONSCIONABLE FILIBUSTER.

We have until EARLY TUESDAY MORNING.

Thank you. and, May God richly bless those who act to save His Little Ones.
Michael
 
Traditional Ang:
In Senator Clinton’s case, I want you to tell her office that you’re a CATHOLIC! and, I want you to tell her that her continued insistance in not allowing an UP or DOWN Vote to Judicial Nominees strictly because they are “People of Faith” will cost her the vote of you and every CATHOLIC you can persuade to join you, Also state that you are prepared to contribute and campaign for her opponents in the upcomming elections, NO Matter who they may be.

Her office will try to tell you about OTHER FILIBUSTERS - Don’t buy it! I have the facts, and they are so embarrassing for the Democrats as to be pittiful and laughable. They are simply trying to lie to and confuse you.

New York general info is here:

senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?State=NY

Hillary’s information is here:

Hillary Clinton - (D - NY)
476 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4451 fax (202) 228-0282
New York City Office (212) 688-6262 Fax: (212) 688-7444
Web Form:clinton.senate.gov/email_form.html
Other Offices - clinton.senate.gov/offices.html
Click to expand...
Notice Senator Clinton did not speak on the Senate floor during the three days of debate last week?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top