let's make you a Senator from Minnesota Sure, then I could get off Morgan's insurance, make a little more than I do now, and have access to a better Caf.
Could you envision a nominee to the Supreme Court that you would vote no on, but would not filibuster? Is there some "bad, but not bad enough" threshold?
Moving from a specific case to a hypothetical case is problematic. The question really comes down to this: do I want my "no" vote to matter or not? These people created a context in which their "no" votes would not matter.
Yeah, I can think of an example for you - Roberts replacing Rhenquist. And you'll note, nobody even tried filibustering that. Alito replacing Thomas or Scalia would likely also be a "bad, but not bad enough" situation. But Alito replacing O'Connor? This is an "if not now, when?" situation. I could go into the reasons, but we'd just disagree; that's why we affiliate differently. Many of the senators on this list are part of a group that made a deal when Roberts was first nominated to refrain from using the filibuster except in an extreme situation. I've examined Alito's record, which is one of the most anti-citizen that I've seen, and if this does not qualify as extreme, I am left to wonder what does.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2006-02-02 04:35 am (UTC)Sure, then I could get off Morgan's insurance, make a little more than I do now, and have access to a better Caf.
Could you envision a nominee to the Supreme Court that you would vote no on, but would not filibuster? Is there some "bad, but not bad enough" threshold?
Moving from a specific case to a hypothetical case is problematic. The question really comes down to this: do I want my "no" vote to matter or not? These people created a context in which their "no" votes would not matter.
Yeah, I can think of an example for you - Roberts replacing Rhenquist. And you'll note, nobody even tried filibustering that. Alito replacing Thomas or Scalia would likely also be a "bad, but not bad enough" situation. But Alito replacing O'Connor? This is an "if not now, when?" situation. I could go into the reasons, but we'd just disagree; that's why we affiliate differently. Many of the senators on this list are part of a group that made a deal when Roberts was first nominated to refrain from using the filibuster except in an extreme situation. I've examined Alito's record, which is one of the most anti-citizen that I've seen, and if this does not qualify as extreme, I am left to wonder what does.