[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

All I can say is, when a Democrat is in the WH, our guys better BLOCK BLOCK BLOCK BLOCK BLOCK any and all liberal judges. If this is the game, then it's the game for us too.

[RedEyeJack]

When a Democrat is president the requirement is to judge nominees based on their qualifications. This is how it is supposed to be and how the Republicans tend to play it. With Robert Bork the Democrats changed the rules and judged the nominee based on political ideology.

There is no longer any pretense, Schumer has publicly stated that it is acceptable to challenge a nominee not on the quality of his record but on the content (politics) of his record. When the public rejected the Democrats obstructionism on judges by increasing the number of Republican Senators in 2002 and 2004, the Democrats, now in the minority created the concept of the judicial filibuster and with the help of the press made it a "tradition".

This is a watershed event and we need to face up to it... either end the filibuster because it is being abused by the Democrats in an attempt to hold on to their last bastion of political power, the federal judiciary, or return to the truly "traditional" form, the real unlimited debate and all the pain it causes. There are no other rational courses of action. Remember, if we end it now we will not have it later to block liberal appointees when that comes to pass again.