[Texas Federalist]

Are you seriously claiming that, if Luttig is nominated, it is probable that ALL of the following will occur: (1) Luttig's Senate hearings drag on for over a year; (2) Luttig is rejected by the Senate; (3) the next nominee, if conservative, is also held up for a year; (4) the next nominee is rejected; (5) O'Connor gets fed up and leaves the Court with only 8 members; and (6) the Dems win the presidential election in 2008 and get to select the next nominee. I'll take that bet.

Wow.

[nopardons]

Try to follow the debate! That was a reply to someone else, who asked me for a hypothetical. I gave one, and now you are taking it all out of context.

But, on a side note, just about everyone has been calling for a woman to replace O'Connor. Luttig isn't a woman. Luttig is also one of Roberts' oldest and best friends. The Dems could and WOULD use both of these things against him. They'd also pull out the argument used against FDR: "STACKING THE COURT." Of course that really would NOT apply, but when has the truth ever been used by the Fems and the MSM?

My scenario is eminently plausible; to anyone who knows history and understands how this stuff works.

[BigSkyFreeper]

A Luttig nomination won't happen now. The "Gang Of 14" deal only applied to the first and only nomination to come out of the queue, which was John Roberts. The "Gang Of 14" deal did not render a filibuster motion irrelevant for all subsequent nominations following Roberts. Run JRB through the process again, filibustered. Run Luttig again, filibustered.