I'm actually thinking that may have been the case. I dunno if Andrew Grossman has any special sources, but look at the way he phrased this: "Frist opened a marathon all-night filibuster debate that’s scheduled to go on until at least midnight on Thursday—30 hours or more in total."
Qwinn
That would be intriguing strategery--use the element of surprise. Extending the debate at least offers a chance of wearing down the unsuspecting Dems to the point where they might be willing to allow cloture on a couple of the nominees in exchange for ending debate. If nothing else, the unexpected continuation of debate would demonstrate resolve and produce even more coverage of this event.
This is exactly what I envisioned prior to the debate starting. Frist certainly understands that the 30-hour debate will not change a single scumbag vote, and so I am hoping that he will take to the floor at the end of this "debate" and say something like:
"It seems that we in the Senate have resolved little during the past 30 hours of debate. Since the unprecedented Democrat filibuster of eminently qualified judicial nominees is such a critical Constitutional issue, we feel that additional debate is deserved, nay, necessary. And so, I have scheduled an additional 30 hours of debate to commence immediately upon the conclusion of this 30 hours. Thank you."