all of that endeded when the supreme court with the active cooperation of the legislature started expanding the range of cases and the nature of cases it would take to the point where political issues instead of being resolved within the legislature, compromise and back and forth, were handed off to the court, bring is your biggest problems, we sit here to solve everybody's problems, no case too bigger too small and that trend has continued virtually uninterrupted. so given that, that it is going to be a long time before you hear back the scope of cases and the nature of cases the supreme court takes, it doesn't matter who gets appointed as long as it matters who gets appointed, given how long they set, it comes after obstacles as necessary. >> anyone else? >> it point i make about the filibuster. it is not in the constitution, it is up to the senate and senate rules but what it represents, it is a symbol of the way federalism is hardwired into the constitution. the senate does not represent the population. it is not proportional representation. the filibuster, the symbol of that, taking it