I was right on "nuclear option" fallout, or lack thereof
See my prior post on the importance of the Senate confirming judges...and fast forward to the part about the purported lack of support for the consitutional option (referred to by liberals and their mouthpieces in the MSM as the "nuclear option").
The MSM has been touting this poll showing that 2/3 of Americans are supposedly against making Senators fulfill their Constitutional obligations and voting for/against judicial nominees. As usual, the Media Research Center was all over this one, and nails the MSM in distributing DNC talking points. Full story here, excerpt below:
ABC and the Washington Post touted how a new poll found two-thirds opposed to a rul change to end Democratic filibusters of judicial nominees, but the language of the question led to the media's desired answer. "An ABC News poll has found little support for changing the Senate's rules to help the President's judicial nominees win confirmation," World News Tonight anchor Charles Gibson trumpeted Monday night. The Washington Post's lead front page headline, over a Tuesday story on the poll, declared: "Filibuster Rule Change Opposed."It's a good thing that nobody watches these shows or reads the MSM papers anymore. Their influence continues to dwindle.
But check out the slant of how the questions in the survey were formulated:
-- "The Senate has confirmed 35 federal appeals court judges nominated by Bush, while Senate Democrats have blocked 10 others. Do you think the Senate Democrats are right or wrong to block these nominations?" Right: 48 percent; wrong: 36 percent.
-- "Would you support or oppose changing Senate rules to make it easier for the Republicans to confirm Bush's judicial nominees?" Support: 26 percent; oppose: 66 percent.
Now, imagine how the results would likely have been quite different if the questions were worded a bit differently to include other information:
-- "In a change from long Senate tradition, Democrats have employed the threat of filibusters to block the confirmations of ten federal appeals court judges who would win majority support in an up or down vote. Do you think the Senate Democrats are right or wrong to use such tactics?"
-- "Would you support or oppose restoring the Senate's traditional procedures which provide for a majority vote of Senators to confirm judicial nominees?"
Always be wary of MSM polls, even if you like their results. They're just too sloppy and biased.