Before Firing 'Nukes,' Senate Should Debate Bush's Judicial Picks

Mort Kondracke has an interesting thought on this judicial nominee filibustering. Too bad the dems will never go for it. Here is Mort's take on this.

Democrats have proved over the years that they are perfectly capable of mounting public relations campaigns to block nominees they regard as unqualified and defeating them by majority vote. Think of Supreme Court nominees Robert Bork in 1987 and Clement Haynesworth in 1969.

The process wasn't pretty. The nominees were misrepresented as throwbacks to the era of Jim Crow and back-alley abortions. But arguably, character assassination is preferable to systematic vaporizing of Senate procedures.

In the case of Bush's nominees, Democrats have scarcely tried to mount a campaign on the merits. The quick, now-routine resort to the filibuster suggests that Democrats don't think they can muster convincing, substantive arguments that the nominees are extreme.

Sorry Mort, but you said it all when you said that they have nothing to block these nominees on. Most have the ABA most qualifiied rating. That is exactly why the dems will never go for this.

Nice try Mort, but it will not fly. - Sailor