So, getting rid of the filibuster on judicial nominations ONLY both obeys the Constitution (where Advise and Consent requires only a majority) and preserves Senate traditions, going back two centuries. Four months ago I laid this whole porcess out in writing on FreeRepublic.
The only reason it has not been done is that Bill Frist doesn't want to upset the Democrats too much. Does that remind you of anyone? Trent (Vacant) Lott, perhaps?
John / Billybob