An explanation of the filibuster process is in order.

[The Backlash Cometh]

Why do we have to have all the Democrats in agreement to do it? Why can't one person do a Mr. Smith and do it on his or her own? What's the worse thing that can happen? They'll just possibly lose their next local election.

It just seems to me that if it only takes one person to filibuster, why we can't find someone who is willing to give up his political life for America.

[Coexist]

1. but... but...

if we only wait it out, and pick only the fights we can win, we live to fight a bigger battle, see.

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. Are you frickin kidding me?

Am I actually hearing that it really only takes one person to filibuster? Holy Jaysus. Don't those fools realize that THIS moment is the one thing that many of us live for? A reason to justify our existence.

An act of patriotism is needed here. We just need one man or woman to remember that America is more important than a political career that will soon be heavily regulated.

[Coexist]

2. Actually, I should add the rules regarding the filibuster have changed

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Filibuster_Cloture.htm
<snip>
Three quarters of a century later, in 1917, senators adopted a rule (Rule 22), at the urging President Woodrow Wilson, that allowed the Senate to end a debate with a two-thirds majority vote, a device known as "cloture." The new Senate rule was first put to the test in 1919, when the Senate invoked cloture to end a filibuster against the Treaty of Versailles. Even with the new cloture rule, filibusters remained an effective means to block legislation, since a two-thirds vote is difficult to obtain. Over the next five decades, the Senate occasionally tried to invoke cloture, but usually failed to gain the necessary two-thirds vote. Filibusters were particularly useful to Southern senators who sought to block civil rights legislation, including anti-lynching legislation, until cloture was invoked after a fifty-seven day filibuster against the Civil Right Act of 1964. In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths, or sixty of the current one hundred senators.

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. Well, who's keeping count?

What kind of numbers do we have in favor of the filibuster? I thought there were only a handful of Dems that were against it.

[Coexist]

5. 40 is the magic number.

http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneurs/feeds/ap/2006/01/13/ap2449418.html
<snip>
Most - if not all - of the Senate's 55 Republicans are expected to line up behind Alito.

Judiciary chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., predicted that all eight of the committee Democrats would vote against Alito, whenever the vote is held. But on the final Senate vote, "I think there will be a little deviation," he said.

The 44 Senate Democrats have been mostly silent about their intentions, although committee senators like Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Charles Schumer of New York have indicated they will oppose Alito's confirmation.

<snip>
But five of the seven Republican members of the "Gang of 14" - centrist senators who defused a Senate showdown over judicial filibusters last year by saying "extraordinary circumstances" would be needed - already have said they will not help Democrats if they attempt to filibuster Alito's confirmation.

Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, both Judiciary Committee members, made that commitment before the confirmation began, and Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, agreed Thursday that a filibuster would not be justified.

On Friday, two other GOP "Gang" members jumped in. Sen. Susan Collins "does not see a justification for and would not support a filibuster," spokeswoman Jen Burita said. Sen. Lincoln Chafee, R-R.I., "has said he has not seen any extraordinary circumstances," spokesman Stephen Hourahan said.

The last two - GOP Sens. John McCain of Arizona and John Warner of Virginia - have not commented, but one of the Democratic members of the "Gang" has.

"So far I have seen nothing during my interview with the nominee, the background materials that have been produced or through the committee process that I would consider a disqualifying issue against Judge Alito," said Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb.

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. Well, as I said in a previous post, Alito should be a litmus test

for any candidate who tries to pass himself off as a moderate. Voting for Alito indicates that you support the present erosion of rights, therefore, are a modern-day conservative.

[Innocent Smith]

7. interesting

"In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths, or sixty of the current one hundred senators."

I'm guessing that just post-Watergate mid-term election that the Dems had more than 60 but less than 67 votes in the Senate when this rule change was made. If the Repubs invoke the nuclear option they may want to consider this and what happens when they no longer control the Senate.