Why can't they defend the "nuts and bolts," of their "fair," laws?

Sorry you hate democracy.

I want both sides to publicly debate the best way to ensure fair and safe, legal elections, and I "hate democracy?" The filibuster is, by design, anti-democratic. It was intended to thwart majority rule so that the minority would have the opportunity to air their best arguments. It is being used in this case, so that the political minority does not have to defend suppressing the votes of racial minorities. Here's your chance: Defend the Texas Republican Party's policy of fewer polling places per population in Black parts of Houston. Republicans are afraid of having to discuss such things in front of the voters.

Yet you had zero problems with the Dem's using the filibuster. You are nothing if not predictable.

Please cite an example of any time in my life that I have defended the filibuster. You will find evidence that I have praised Republicans who joined their leader Everett Dirksen in busting Democratic Senator Russell's filibusters and others. You will find that I have publicly agreed with Democratic Speaker Tip O'Neill calling on Democrats in the Senate to let Reagan have his programs, as the popularly elected president. I have always opposed the filibuster.

I didn't like the filibuster when Jimmy Stewart employed it in "Mr. Smith Goes To Washingon."

And the rewriting of the dictionary continues...words matter.

The vote was not to pass a law but to debate the necessity for one.