The option can't be exercised except faced with an unreasonable refusal to agree to vote - or, more particularly in parliamentary context, immediately in the context of a failed cloture motion, following undisputably adequate time for debate.
Since the excitement of May 2005, Frist has been careful to not bring any judicial nominations forward that the DEMs were willing to stall with cloture. Likewise, Specter has held a number of nominations in Committee, based on threats from the DEMs. So, in the sense of failing to bring contentious nominations forward, I agree that Frist has stopped the use of the nuke option.
But any thought that Frist can "nuke at will" is based on a misunderstanding of the parliamentary procedure.
Think of it as a contested election. The law doesn't provide a way for the winner to contest the election results. If cloture passes, the vote goes on, and those who want to get to the vote have no complaint.
I understand that quite well. However, the filibuster never had any history in judicial nominations, and the one opportunity to banish it from the Senate was wasted by MCLame for no good reason other than "face" time.
I do not believe he cares about the Republican party at all, if he did, he would never have promoted CFR. It nearly cost us the election as well as being fundamentally un-American.
After attaching his no torture amendment to the defense appropriation bill (by doing so forgetting precedent) in order to embarrass the President, the only faith I have in him is that he will do whatever gets him the most publicity.
This filibuster attempt will give him the chance to play king maker again, and I truly wonder if he will be able to restrain himself. /rant