Reply #4: Yes, I've thought about the lost opportunities for the '06 elections, too.

[pacalo]

My interpretation of the fast-falling approval ratings of Congress (& this administration) is that there is a majority of rational people who don't approve of the Republicans' bullying tactics; nor do they approve of the Democrats' tentativeness in fighting back. But a lot can happen between now & the '06 elections. I don't think this is the end of the bullying attempts. I think the "it's my way or the highway" bullying cowards in the WH are going to put pressure on Frist & DeLay to do their dirty work; it's advantageous to them that the fighting continue.

That's why I think it's important that the Democrats emphasize at every opportunity that it's because the WH has not been following the Constitution's advise & consent provision for the Senate that has caused much of the division over his judicial nominees. Rush Limbaugh & other hate-radio hosts are spreading the false notion that filibustering these nominees is unconstitutional. When one party has majority rule, the filibuster is a welcoming safeguard against ramrodding inequitable legislation. The Republicans may not have used the filibuster on the Senate floor against Clinton's nominees, but that's because they made sure the nominations didn't make it past the committee level.

These judges are being nominated at the appeals level. There is a good chance that they could rule against the Democratic platform on those controversial issues. I say let them. If they make a ruling that is not based in law, but on personal convictions, you take away the Republican argument that only “liberal judges” legislate from the bench. And since these judges are being appointed to the appeals level, a ruling on any controversial matter is bound to make it to the Supreme Court before it is considered to be a legal precedent. The Supreme Court would be the safety net for the Democrats on those issues.

After 2000, I don't trust the Supreme Court's sense of fairness as much as you do. I wouldn't count on it serving as a safety net for the Democrats. Don't forget about the arrogance & in-your-face attitude of Cheney's hunting partner. And that he ruled in favor of Cheney in the FOIA lawsuit right after their infamous hunting trip together.

This compromise illustrates the beginning of more independence of disgusted conservatives against the WH. It's even happening in the House with the stem cell research bill. I've always been hopeful that the religious nutjobs would wear out their welcome. It looks like the time has come.