The American Spectator

/p> p> One thing that RET failed to mention regarding the issue of judicial nominee filibusters. No one, and I mean no one, outside of pundits and politicians cares about this issue. It is yet another distraction for the Republican administration and Congress in order to ignore the deficit, illegal immigration, out of control spending, ethics violations, tax reform, and the lousy stock market. Did I miss anything? So far this term, the Republicans have focused on 11 people: 10 judicial nominees and Terri Schiavo. What about the rest of us? The American people are waiting for the Republicans to extricate themselves from the poetry of the campaign (FMA, Schiavo, filibusters) and engage in the prose of governance (deficit, tax reform, jobs, ethics). My apologies to Mr. Cuomo and from whomever he borrowed the original adage. br> — Ben Berry br> Washington, D.C. /p>

I nearly busted a gut reading your column the issue before the current one!

Your commentaries on Spectator.org are similarly illuminating like today’s “Filibuster Busters.” You and I may be the only ones who think Hillary has no chance. (Of course, we’re not.)

p>Personally, I see a comfortable 2.5 million vote victory by Condi and George Allen over Hillary and Mark Warner. This from someone who predicted two terms for George W. Bush back in 1998. br> — Michael Lee br> Clifton, Virginia /p>

Thanks to R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., my perspective has been altered, somewhat, about the Republicans’ handling of judicial filibusters. For weeks now, I have accepted the notion that my party (GOP) leaders have acted like girly-men in dealing with radical liberals in the Senate, and elsewhere. I have refused to give them money, and I have made threats to withdraw from any further support of the party until the leadership gets tough with the socialists.

Here’s a sample of an email I sent, this one of 30 April to the Republican National Committee Chairman, Ken Mehlman: