[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Once-Ler sez: The danger in changing the Senate rules on filibuster is it may set a precedent on all filibusters and should the Republican Party fall out of favor with the voters this tool would not be available to stop a one seat rat majority from complete control. Then we might as well do away with the US House which currently operates under those rules.

OO sez: The constitution enumerates that a majority of Senators are needed to confirm judicial nominees. That is what should apply - Republican or Democrat. If the 'Rats can regain power and convince 51 Senators to support a nominee, God bless them, that nominee will be (and should be) confirmed.

What you will not find in the Constitution is any reference to a de facto 60-vote supermajority needed for confirmation of judges, which is why the bogus filibuster rule must go, consequences be damned.

[Hendrix]

"What you will not find in the Constitution is any reference to a de facto 60-vote supermajority needed for confirmation of judges, which is why the bogus filibuster rule must go, consequences be damned."

Amen. That is the most important issue we face for getting judges through in my opinion. I am worried that the Republicans will be too afraid to change the rule because of what might happen if they get tough. MEMO TO REPUBLICANS: STOP WORRING ABOUT WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN! HAVE YOU NOT LEARNED FROM HISTORY (every time we play nice with the democrats, they stab us in the back).

[Hendrix]

"What you will not find in the Constitution is any reference to a de facto 60-vote supermajority needed for confirmation of judges, which is why the bogus filibuster rule must go, consequences be damned."

Amen. That is the most important issue we face for getting judges through in my opinion. I am worried that the Republicans will be too afraid to change the rule because of what might happen if they get tough. MEMO TO REPUBLICANS: STOP WORRING ABOUT WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN! HAVE YOU NOT LEARNED FROM HISTORY (every time we play nice with the democrats, they stab us in the back).

[Once-Ler]

The filibuster itself is not mentioned in the Constitution. It is a Senate rule that the Senate has agreed to. In order to change the rules and pass the nuclear option we need 60 votes to break cloture and bring it to the floor. If we had 60 votes we wouldn't need to change the rules.

There is a lot of precedent for successive Senate bodies abiding by the rules of previous Senates. They been doing it for about 200 years now. I don't think the Supreme Court would allow the Republicans to make up the rules as they go.

If we actually could legally change the rules then we will have to live with the consequences when rats or another party gain a majority and the "tyranny of the minority" is no longer available to stop them.