RUSH: Snerdley looked it up. He found it. April 5th, 1992, this is during the campaign, Bill Clinton said, “And I will appoint judges to the Supreme Court who believe in the constitutional right to privacy, including the right to choose.” So there Clinton did establish his litmus test. So it’s okay for the libs to say, “We’re going to get a pro-choice nominee. They’re going to be pro-Roe vs. Wade,” but somehow Republicans can’t say this. Republican nominees say it. Republican presidents can’t say it. “Weeeell, I have never talked to our nominee about that! You know, I don’t have any litmus tests, oh, no, no, no! I wouldn’t dare presume how our nominee is going to rule on such an issue.” So here we have to hide what we’re doing and have to, behave in a totally different way than the left gets to behave — and not just on this, but other crucial issues. But it is a good point.
So what I’m referring to here is the Novak column today in which it is said that these hearings for Harriet Miers could feature “unspeakable ugliness,” and what he’s referring to is a conference call made to 12 or 13 religious leaders in America by two friends of Harriet Miers who assured these religion leaders in the conference call that she will vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade when it comes before her if she’s confirmed. Now, fine examine dandy. I have no problem with that. But the White House has been out saying just the opposite. They don’t even know what she thinks about it, and so it gives the appearance they’ve lost control of the process or are not telling the truth, which means the Democrats now are free, if they want to, to subpoena these two guys. One of them is the chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court, Nathan Hecht.
So if they get subpoenaed come before the committee. “What did you say to these religious, these Christians? What did you say to these Christians when you were talking to them about Harriet Miers?”
“I don’t know.”
Then they’ll subpoena John Fund. Well, John Fund did the story. He’s got the notes. This could quickly see this thing spiral out of control but it might be well worth it. Put this out on the table. Why hide this anymore? It’s not something that needs to be behind. Why do you have to be embarrassed about being pro-life? Why do you have to be embarrassed about not wanting to kill babies in the womb? Why should that be an embarrassment? Why should that be something you have to hide? Why should that be something you have to tiptoe around?
“Well, Rush, what about the polls?”
The polls? We’re going to put the polls over a matter of core principle such as life? You know, let the chips fall, but it’s not something you have to hide.