Sunday, October 24, 2004

More on Bush and Abortion

Howard Phillips made an excellent point that I had forgotten about in his endorsement of Michael Peroutka in the latest issue of ‘The American Conservative.' Phillips wrties:

…most “conservatives” plan to vote for George W. Bush. Some say the reason they plan to vote for Bush is judicial appointments. But that argument lost its validity when President Bush intervened to prevent the nomination of Congressman Pat Toomey over pro-abortion Sen. Arlen Specter in the recent Pennsylvania Republican Senate primary. If Senator Specter is re-elected on Nov. 2 and the GOP holds its majority in the U.S. Senate, Specter will become chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, situated to act in collaboration with his liberal Democrat soul mates to prevent the confirmation of pro-life judicial nominees—and positioned to argue to Bush, if he is re-elected, against the appointment of judges who are comprehensively opposed to abortion. For these reasons and others, it is specious to vote for George W. Bush on the basis of supposed advantages for our side with respect to judicial confirmations.


I had completely forgotten about the intervention of George Bush, and his Svengali Karl Rove, in the Pennsylvania senate race. Rather than stay neutral in a party primary battle between the senator and a respected member of congress, the administration came down hard in support of Specter.

Remember that this is the same Arlen Specter who torpedoed Robert Bork because Bork’s reading of the constitution was “narrow” and Bork, in Specter’s words, did not appreciate it as “a living, growing document.”

How much more evidence is needed to impeach Bush's "pro-life" credentials, anyway?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home