[Puliko]

What if we start demonstrating too, demanding a stop on federal "waste" for funding NOW?

[Redleg Duke]

Well, since they have each and every liberal DemocRAT by the balls, I guess they have a pretty good chance at succeeding.

[Digger]

...and we are going after the Taliban. THE ENEMY IS WITHIN!

[pray4liberty]

I wonder how these creatures would feel if their moms had 'chosen' to abort them.

No one's bothered to ask them that question.

[Inspectorette]

In calling its members to action, NOW...

Hah! All 15 of them?

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

NOW represents less than 1/10th of 1% of all women. Their remaining members consist of aging boomer women sitting around rehashing their so-called glory days of the late 60s and early 70s, and radical middle-aged lesbians.

[Mr Ducklips]

Filibuster what? Leahy won't allow deliberations to begin with. These people have poop for brains.

[NC Conservative]

anti-woman

I believe Barney Frank is anti-woman.

[RAT Patrol]

Imagine that. A special interest group demanding payment from liberal politicians for all those millions of dollars in campaign contributions. What a scandal.

[mgc1122]

Does anyone outside the lamestream give a rat's a** what 2 dozen old lesbians think? Time to give them all a reality check.

[MEGoody]

In calling its members to action, NOW — which is planning its office protests for March 8 — describes judicial nominees as "anti-woman," "ultraconservative" and "right wing ideologues."

In other words "We're terrified they might take away our right to slaughter innocent babies."

[LaGrone]

Rotten liberal scum. Ship them all to Central Asia. That should certainly open their eyes!

[montag813]

"I think this is just further evidence of the death-throes of that pro-abortion movement," Bauer said. "They're slowly losing the battle for the hearts and minds of the American people."

Wishful thinking. The "soccer moms" are getting more liberal every day. Without them x42 would never have been President. We need less ineffective retail protesting, and more and slicker media approaches.

[Sophie]

Since when does NOW have any say about a filibuster? They are not elected officials of the United States!

[demkicker]

NOW HAS OBVIOUSLY NEVER HEARD OF THE TERM "PICK YOUR BATTLES." THEY MUST BE SUICIDAL, THANK GOD!

[Castlebar]

Can I ask what may be a stupid question? Hypothetically, if the GOP were to regain control of the Senate by a bare margin - say 52-48 - could the GOP Senate Leadership, by a straight majority vote, declare that a straight majority of 51 senators (or 50 senators plus the VP) will henceforth be sufficient to end the filibuster of a judicial nominee?

I'm not suggesting Trent "Spineless" Lott would ever do this, but I don't see anything in the constitution about filibusters.....