Comments on: The Conservative Case for the Filibuster Deal

By: Barry

Barry — Fri, 27 May 2005 14:05:42 +0000

Bull. How often can you turn on the TV and see the Evul Leftist Meedya point out that the GOP gleefully denied over 60 Clinton nominees the sacred 'up or down vote' that the GOP now insists upon?

By: McGehee

McGehee — Fri, 27 May 2005 12:53:16 +0000

In the hypothetical, I can guarantee that if the filibuster remains available for judicial nominees, and if the then-minority Republicans were to use it, they would be slammed six ways from Sunday by the LSM over daring to filibuster Madame President's picks -- and would attempt to justify their actions by saying, in effect, "they started it" and bringing up the present situation. And the Democrats would use the nuclear option that the Republicans were too wimpy to trigger when they had the chance.

If the filibuster is no longer available, the Republicans would grind their teeth and complain, and send out a lot of fundraising letters griping about Madame President and her radical judicial nominees.

In other words, it would be the first two years of Clinton 42, all over again.

By: aTypical Joe: A gay New Yorker living in the rural south.

aTypical Joe: A gay New Yorker living in the rural south. — Fri, 27 May 2005 12:11:20 +0000

Is the filibuster a conservative tool?

I bet Nathan Newman would agree with Bainbridge: The filibuster is a profoundly conservative tool, which advances each of [Russell] Kirk's goals. It slows change by allowing a resolute minority to delay -- to stand athwart history shouting stop. It...

By: wavemaker

wavemaker — Fri, 27 May 2005 12:00:53 +0000

James, your archived post on Ponnuru's piece ends questioning what advantage Tribe would obtain from his "self-aggrandizing." I'm not sure it is that calculated. I think it's just that Tribe is an exceedingly self-centered and egotistical person, and could not help himself given the opportunity.

And you are certainly right -- if the Dems win the Presidency and the Senate majority (any time soon) and a Democratic President nominates Larry Tribe, the anti-filibuster Republicans will have a hard time choking on crow. It will take all of the collective intellectual honesty of the caucus (perhaps not bountiful enough) to resist demonstrating (repeating?) the monumental hypocrisy that both sides have shown in arguing both sides of the filibuster coin over time.

On a selfish note, I think a Scalia-Tribe running battle would be fascinating to watch.