I'm going to pose two topic related questions which I haven't seen addressed...
1. When the Dems attempt to justify their obstructing Bush's nominations, they always trot out the stat..they've confirmed 95% of them..whatever the numbers are..210 out of 220..YET the GOP never comes back and pounds the point about the % of appeals court judges that have been filabustered. WE need to frame the argument better..and it's so easy to do..
2. Re the nuclear option, last year there was a Senate hearing before the Rules subcomittee, I believe. It was on C-span, and is probably in their archives.. Sen Cornyn testified, and he made the point that the Senate is NOT a continuing body..therefore the rules don't apply to the next Senate, unless by unanimous consent..which has been done every time, of habit. He said that because he was NOT elected when these rules were adopted, in effect HIS constituents in Texas are being denied their constitutional rights. I may not be expressing this correctly, but it was a very compelling, and cogent argument. Again, why isn't the GOP making it..? It wuld seem to be one that peopel could easily grasp. The Dems are attempting to equate Senate custom with constitutional procedure in the public mind..If Frist is indeed going nuclear, as I also believe he should, the GOP needs to start making the case IN ADVANCE..prepping the battlefield so to speak..