Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MattK
Do your research man, Trent Lott (R-Miss.) coined the phrase.
LA Times (03/16/05): "Such a ploy is considered so politically explosive within the Senate that when it was first proposed in 2003, Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.), a former majority leader, described it as the "nuclear option."
|
I dont agree - originally the republicans said "if you are going to break 230 years of tradition and block the presidents qualified and commitee approved judges by refusing to table the debate indefinately and allow a simple majority vote (as the constitution requires), then we have enough votes to make it clear that fillabusting appointments is not acceptable"
Nuclear in the sense that the democrats would not be able to stop the clarification of fillabuster rules.
But the democrates and the press have jumped on the term, and threatened a federal government shutdown (meltdown)
which would have been an act of desperation, and would have caused a huge backlash against the democrats in the senate.
Its only became 'politically explosive' because the democrats have threatened to 'take their ball and go home' so nobody can play, if they dont get their way.
the minority parrty in the senate
does not have the right to dictate the religious beliefs or moral values of the judges appointed by the president. These appointees are fully qualified.