>> If they had 53 certain votes then why didn't they simply have the vote? You're writing about not trusting the President's judgment but you take the gang of 7's word? If they were serious about the issue they would have addressed it right then...instead they created a little gang in the middle to sign off on the President's nominees and keep the civility of their club intact. <<
I consider motives when I decide to trust someone. The gag of seven claim to be concerned with resorting to contentious rulings. I suspect they may have been cowardly, and wanted to solve the problem (end filibusters) without the political war. What are you suggesting, that they would actually support a filibuster? Chaffee and Specter, maybe. Graham? Warner?
Keep in mind, I'm not doubting anyone's word. It's just that Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush, Sr. all took gambles on "stealth" candidates, and, with the exception of Clarece Thomas, they lost every time. Is it too much to ask for an openly conservative nominee, now that we have more Senators than at any time since the 1920s?