[AbsoluteJustice]

The majority (Republicans) did not agree to this rule, furthermore fillibusters do not take place when items are in committee. It is unprecedented and is unconstitutional for ANY Senate committe to fillibuster a judicial nomination. ANY

[Robert A Cook PE]

But the "tradition-bound" RINO's WANT the democrats to continue the holdout - by leaving it in the committee! - because THEY (the RINO's) see "tradition" and their role init, as more important than irritating the democrats. And they (The RINO'S really don't support Bush anyway.)

Thus, the democrats can get by with breaking the legal and traditional "rules" of the Senate, because

(1) the press WANTS those rules broken and BUsh stymied, and

(2) they (the RINO'S, the press, and democrats) have no morals to see that the the democrats are holding repub to an ethical standard NOT met by ANY the democrats.

To the RINO's the fancy gowns worn in the Senate at the impeachment as they defended Clinton are mmore worthy of more respect than the Constitution itself.

[VRWC_minion]

The rules are agreed to when the senate forms for each session. Its not unconstitutional for the senate to set its own rules. Get over it, the GOP doesn't have enough votes unless it wants to dislodge a decades old agreement on how to handle filibusters.

Only those living in fantasy land cannot see that such an action cuts both ways and has a political cost for which one could win the immediate battle and lose the war.

For the present, the math is simple. 60 is greater than 40.