Using the "nuclear option" would be wholly unwise regardless of which party is in the position to use it. The filibuster really is the great equalizer when it comes to minority politics, and should stay in place. The issue really isn't whether "appropriate" judges are confirmed... realistically, if we were going to have "appropriate" judges, they'd be middle-of-the-road folks. That simply doesn't happen these days. But I do agree wholeheartedly that it is appropirate to take actions against the dissolusion of the filibuster. It's a slippery slope... and I'd be nervous about anyone who supports the removal of rights.
Juliaki | Homepage | 05.22.05 - 6:35 am | #

The procedures for filibusters have been changed five times since the Constitution was ratified.

The most recent change created the "virtual" filibusters we have now.

More to the point though, the change in filibusters have already taken place. It was unthinkable to use a filibuster on judicial canidates, and it is something that the Democratic party opposed during the Clinton administration.
NeoWayland | Homepage | 05.22.05 - 9:17 am | #

Thanks for linking to me on your blogroll, I have returned the favor.
Jason Pitzl-Waters | Homepage | 05.22.05 - 1:51 pm | #