Dear Dr. Frist: Nominees also deserve an "up or down vote" in committee.

[flpoljunkie]

Nominees cannot be sent to the floor and voted on by all the Senators until they are voted out of the judiciary committee. Someone needs to call this to Dr. Frist's attention. The cowardly, disengaged media certainly will not.

Dr. Frist whines that Senator Reid called him "radical." We Democrats think it was "radical" to block Clinton's appellate court nominees from receiving an "up or down vote" in the judiciary committee. Thirty-nine percent of Clinton's nominees were blocked in committee, mostly through blue-slips.

But Orin Harch changed the rules in 2002 when the Republicans regained control of the Senate. Hatch made the long-standing tradition of blocking nominees by blue-slips only "advisory." This move, too, can be described as radical." This has left Democrats with only one weapon to block the most unacceptable of Dubya's choices--the filibuster on the floor of the Senate.

[TheFarseer]

1. I did not know that

"Hatch made the long-standing tradition of blocking nominees by blue-slips only "advisory.""

Repukes like pointing out that philibustering judicial nominees is unprecidented, but they fail to note that the rules were changed in 2002 to make that their only recourse. This bit of info would end all reasonable debate on this, I gaurantee it.

[madmom]

3. but this is not true....

read the front page of DU they filibustered Clinton more than they are being filibustered.

[JAbuchan08]

2. I didn't know that either, why isn't this in all the news reports? Oh wait

never mind I know why.

[indepat]

4. What goes around comes around and will relegate Repukes to oblivion

should we ever again have honest elections.

[flpoljunkie]

5. Your caveat is all, too, true!