[elwoodblues]

Most of these "myths" are actually things that nobody (at least nobody of any significant prominence) is actually arguing. Rather, they are the conservative spin on what democrats are arguing. So you have a conservative telling conservatives what the democrats are arguing (incorrectly) and then refuting those arguments.


[ QUOTE ]
Senate Republicans Are Attempting To Abolish All Filibusters.


[/ QUOTE ]

Who has argued this?


[ QUOTE ]
Myth: Democrats Treatment Of Bush’s Nominees Is Analogous To Republicans Treatment Of Clinton’s Nominees...Fact: President Clinton’s Judicial Nominees Were Not Filibustered And Never Before Has A Judicial Nominee With Clear Majority Support Been Denied An Up Or Down Vote In The Senate By A Filibuster

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I guess if you require an analogy to be exactly identical, then this is correct. Otherwise, not so much.

[ QUOTE ]
Myth: Filibusters Of Judicial Nominations Are Part Of Senate Tradition.


[/ QUOTE ]

To the extent that they have been done in the past they are part of senate tradition. Defining "tradition" to mean something as common as apple pie and ice cream changes the argument significantly. Nobody is claiming that this is a common occurrance.


[ QUOTE ]
Myth: Filibusters Of Judicial Nominations Are Based on the Constitution

[/ QUOTE ]

To the extent that the Constitution gives congress the power to determine its own rules and unlimited debate in the senate is one of those rules, it is part of the Constitution.

[ QUOTE ]
Myth: The Nomination Of Abe Fortas Was Filibustered By Senate Republicans.

[/ QUOTE ]

Democrats weren't bringing up the Abe Fortas example as a way of saying "See Republicans do it too"; rather it was brought up to demonstrate that there is historical precedent for it...a "tradition" if you will.

[ QUOTE ]
Myth: The Constitutional Option Is Unprecedented.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is an important (though subtle) distinction between the Byrd example and the "nuclear option." The distinction is that in one the rules are being changed midstream. In the other, an existing rule was used (Byrd invoked an existing rule regarding amendments to end the POST CLOTURE action).

[ QUOTE ]
Myth: Democrats Want To Continue Debating These Nominations So They Can Reach A Compromise With The Republican Majority

[/ QUOTE ]

I suspect that recent history says something about this one...