I know it has been a while since anyone has posted, but I felt the need to comment one last time on this issue.
To ban filibusters is to further destroy the spirit of contemplative consultation, the mutual agreements and compromise (as Arendt would put it) which are the base of real statesmanship.
One thing that we have forgotten is that partisanship, not cooperation, is what protects our freedoms. Cooperation is what caused the exponential growth in government and subsequently activist judges. If one reads the Federalist papers, they will find the framer’s belief that factionalism will protect the country from the tyranny of the majority. Therefore, we may need cooperation on national defense, but when it comes to things like judges, I say “partisanship all the way.” It is this balancing act, or “partisanship” if you will, that makes the two party system work so well.
This goes for both Republicans and Democrats. Those issues should be resolved through the wise interpretation of the constitution and other attendant laws, not through liberal activism or conservative activism or religious (or nonreligious) morality.
The premise of conservatives is that their “activism” is the correct interpretation of the constitution. Liberal activism is giving the courts the power to legislate as they have done in regards to abortion, gay marriage, and affirmative action. “Conservative activism” means appointing judges who will allow congress to make laws.
Therefore, Frist was not trading one kind of activism for another. He was explaining to a large section of his constituency why he was taking a certain action. He explained that liberal activists judges have misread the constitution which has in turn hurt Christians. According to his view, the framer’s based the constitution on the foundation of Christian morals. Liberal activist judges have thrown away that base and thus their interpretation of the constitution is “baseless.”