Jill! Jill! Jill!
I thought we had at least put the 'nuclear option' word game mumbojumbo to rest. Even most Republicans are embarrassed to call it the 'constitutional option' now.
But now we find <$NoAd$> this from Jill Zuckman in the Trib ...
Fearful of the political fallout from such a confrontation, some Democratic and Republican senators were attempting to craft a compromise.
But there was little indication they had made much progress or attracted the support necessary to avoid the so-called nuclear option. That is the term Democrats have given to the possible end to the filibuster, which requires 60 votes in the 100-member Senate to cut off debate, and instead allow up-or-down votes in which only 51 votes would be needed for confirmation.
(Your heart just sinks, doesn't it?)
Tell Jill Zuckman, no more nuclear-backsliding!
(ed.note: Thanks to TPM Reader GC for keeping Zuckman under surveillance.)
Late Update: Here's the correction the Tribune had to run about the 'nuclear option' the last time they goofed on this point.