Do you think the biggest reason for the fillabuster is payback?

[napi21]

I'm listening to Sen. Spector. He is criticising both sides for this kind of activity. Seems it started with Bork and has gone on ever since.

I'm not saying these 7 nominees of GW's are good, but I doubt I'd agree with ANY of his nominees.

Spector is now talking about how the Pubs blocked Clinton nominees too.

I agree with him. Listen to what he's saying!!! On cspan2 NOW

[skooooo]

1. I'm listening.....

...at least he's not a "rah rah" Republican. Sounds like he's got some sense on this issue, at least. Talking about the consequences of both resolutions to the "problem."

[napi21]

4. I'm not a Spector fan, but he's is one of the few rational Pubs.

He's seems to be trying to be as honest as possible and blaming both sides, and although I hate to say it, I think that's fair! They have BOTH been wrong at one time or the other!

[dbonds]

2. Not payback.

Just trying to stop the wackiest of the RW nuts from getting through. These are truly unacceptable. The vast majority of shrubs appointees went through.

[still_one]

3. Sorry, they started this crap

let them get rid of it if they can

one day we will take back control, and we will remember what happened

If this comes to a vote watch for any democrats who vote with the repukes to get rid of the filabuster, these are the people we should replace

[applegrove]

5. No - the supreme court should never represent one extreme or the

other. The only judges who make it should have such high reputations that is surpasses any world view.

They are not supposed to be political.

[housewolf]

6. The nuclear option is because the right wing religious extremists

have got it in their minds that all the problems in life are the result of so-called "activist" judges who "make law" rather than interpret law. So, since they can't get lawmakers to make laws that satisfy their desire re: the social issues, they're going after the courts. They think they can pack the courts with "strict constructionist" judges who will interpret laws according to the letter of the constitution only - i other words, if something isn't specifically stated in the constitution it's unconstitutional.

Now they believe that they are responsible for the election of all the republicans in 2004 and the one thing they want is to get the courts packed with conservative judges. They feel thwarted that none of their nominees have been approved yet, and they've become impatient.

Dodson and his crowd have got their arms around Frist's neck and that of his fellow far-right senators and congressional reps. They've decided that the time is NOW, they' run out of patience, they want results NOW and Frist is trying to give it to they. They own Frist and his cronies and they're extracting their payback.

[Sydnie]

7. Not payback at all

Just watching what happens with these will tell us what will happen with the SC nominations that are going to follow soon.

Once they get a good foot hold in the SC, we can kiss all of that last progress we have made in the last century. Good bye civil rights, good bye human rights, hello despotism, hello theocracy.

I can't imagine having to choose between going to a state sponsored "house of worship" or jail ... can you? Slippery slope, this nuclear option.

[napi21]

10. I understand your point, but both sides have been doing this payback

shit for years! It's like the Hatfields and the McCoys story. At some point, nobody really knows why you hate the other guy, you just do, and if you don't you're a traitor!

[BurtWorm]

12. Several of these Bush appointees would be better called PREjudges

They're ideologues who base their opinions on something other than the law. They are, in other words, not just political, they're incompetent. They should not be on board making rulings on federal cases for life.

Is this really the best the Republicans have to offer? Then they're in worse trouble as a party than I thought.

[Pithy Cherub]

8. Actually, this has to do with a power motive.

Years ago, Hedrick Smith wrote a book on Power, especially DC politics, that highlights its fluid movement with sophisticated and sloppy attempts by politicians to control it. Mix in very large egos that want to prove they are in charge and the nation goes into this briar patch.

From the founding of this nation there have been these bloody battles over power, Hamilton vs. Jefferson, Andrew Jackson blamed the other party for his wife's death, and on and on. Clarence Thomas and Bork still HURT them.

This is the latest battle because republicans wanted to prove that they have agenda. Clinton's impeachment lost more republican reputations than they expected. The SCOTUS 2000 Disaster took legitimacy away from republicans. There is a need to PROVE that republicans have more power and the strength to use it. Republicans are hellbent to prove they are in power. Weak republicans want to punish not preserve.

The Public has shown them they are not - which just pushes more of their insecurity buttons, hence need more power...

[housewolf]

9. Not payback,

talking about what happened during the Clinton era is just a convenient political point

[The_Casual_Observer]

11. Nope, the issue here is protecting the citizens from nutjobs

Bork was a nutjob too.