So what if Frist has the votes ? So what!

[kentuck]

They will get 7 more right-wing judges. You don't think all of those 210 already appointed were all moderates, do you? But, let he Repubs vote vote for them. They may pay a bigger price next election? Would it be worth it to them? Seven judges today or hundreds in the future? That might be the stakes?

[rndmprsn]

1. supreme court is the big prize...

if they can do away with the filibuster now for these seven relatively unknown judges then when supreme court vacancies come up...they can cram them in with an up down vote...

meanwhile pres bushco gets to appoint by himself the unelected third branch of our govt.

[kentuck]

2. But it will serve no purpose to shut down the government..

If the minority cannot hold the Republicans responsible, then it will be in the hands of the people. If the people don't do it the next election, then what are the other options?

[abburdlen]

5. No matter what Broder* thinks

Shutting down the Senate will not shut down the government. In fact I believe a great deal of americans would prefer the Senate shut down rather than have more crap get through.

*Broder's article of why the Dems should back down. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10692-2005Apr22.html

[iamjoy]

3. It Is A Huge Deal!

Take Priscilla Owen.
She has taken money from Enron and then heard cases affecting Enron. How do you think she ruled? She is openly hostile to abortion rights, how do you think she has ruled on cases involving reproductive freedom? As a judge in Texas, she has engaged in "judicial activism", she knows the result she wants and massages the law to get it.

And, it is not just about Supreme Court vacancies now, but lets say in four years we have a Democrat in office and there is another opening on SCOTUS. The President is likely to pull from the Federal or Appeals courts, which Dubya and the Republicans are trying to pack with Right Wing Judicial Activists.

Now, lets look ten years in the future. Let's say some one is convicted of a crime. But, the defendent claims the confession used in the conviction was obtained under duress (torture?). But some of the lower courts say that there was DNA evidence anyway and uphold the conviction. It goes to federal courts, even SCOTUS - how do you think Dubya's appointees will rule? And say we have some one like our current Attorney General splitting hairs on what constitutes torture anyway...Now you have the courts sanctioning the police beating, etc. suspects. Many other cases that would infringe on our Bill of Rights (except of course, the "sacred" Second Amendment)

I try not to give in to despair, but sometimes it seems our country is heading for dark days...

[Dave Sund]

4. Bring it on

I almost want him to do it, now. In fact, I'm counting on it. I'm going to be disappointed if it doesn't happen. Why? Because, for one, it'll blow up in his face and every other vulnerable Republican. Furthermore, if you think getting rid of the filibuster is going to allow these judges to get a vote, you don't know Reid. He'll use every trick in the book. And, we get our agenda on the floor. They're the extremists, we're the ones with an agenda. If Frist is dumb enough to pull the trigger, I say, bring it on.