Skip to main content

View Diary: Filibuster history that refutes latest GOP talking points (7 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Good info all around (none)
    People, lets get this Recommended.  

    Did anyone else choke on the first sentence?

    Charles Krauthammer today in the Washington Post declares that in the past two centuries Abe Fortas was the only filibuster of a judicial nominee, and then going to the Frist defense, said it's not the same because Fortas was being elevated, not appointed to the court in the first place.

    Whaaaa!!??!?!?!?

    So a justice who has already passed muster as fit to serve in the judiciary is entitled to less deference than someone nominated to the federal level for the first time?  Does Krauthammer actually read this stuff before it sees print?

    I had another idea for a research project.  Krauthammer is not taking on the constitutionality of the filibuster so much as the notion that it is a Senate tradition.  Can we dig up information about judicial choices being made or changed or withdrawn due to the threat of a filibuster?  In other words, if the filibuster has always been assumed as a reality and presidents have chosen their nominees, well, judiciously as a result, that would certainly defeat Krauthammer's thesis.

    "The only way we can ever beat/These crooked politician men/Is to cast the moneychangers out of the temple/Put the Carpenter in." -- Woody Guthrie

    by Pho on Fri May 13, 2005 at 02:03:02 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site