The "Nuclear Option"

I have never understood all the fuss about the filibuster and judicial nominations. To me, the issue appears quite simple: The people voted in 2004. The elected President makes judicial nominations, the elected Senate votes to confirm or reject. There is no place for a filibuster intended to prevent the elected majority from governing. The Democrats "minority rights" argument sounds very much as if they are saying elections do not -- and should not -- have consequences in terms of governance. "Even though we lost," they claim, "we are entitled to prevail on important issues as though we won." Seems that, at bottom, the Democrats are just, well, not . . . Push the button already and be done with them.