The point made here by Jacob Sullum on www.reason.com echoes some of the ideas passing around in my head about the judicial filibuster. To me, it is the difference between the real world working of Congress and our idealistic view of what they would otherwise be doing.
I'm inclined to state that every judicial candidate should be put to the floor and voted upon using the existing rules of the Senate. Forget about the filibuster, the nuclear option and all the rest of this partisan bickering. But then I think if the Senate weren't gridlocked on this, they would most likely be voting for additional ways to spend my money or give it someone else and suddenly it doesn't seem so bad they are stalled out.
oh, and the hypocrisy on both sides of the aisle on this is positively sickening. Republicans hurling comments at Democrats, Democrats claiming they are doing this to preserve promises all the while pretending they have never been on the side trying to get rid of this practice.
Ain't Democracy grand? ;o)