fucking republicans

most people who know me would - i hope - stop short of calling me a "liberal activist." i try to avoid knee-jerk reactions, and i like to believe that there's always at least a semi-reasonable argument to support the other side. i'd like to think i'm a pretty moderate liberal, and i'm unsure of a lot of issues, from taxes to law interpretations and other things. i'm still figuring a lot of this stuff out, and i acknowledge it.

but the senate is really hitting below the belt. fucking fuck.

read this very good article by the LA times. you'll have to google for background articles if you need more information; i'm too angry to spend the time finding them now.

basically, judicial nominees are confirmed by a simple majority vote in the senate, 51-49 takes the cake. however, debate is allowed during confirmation votes, and filibusters, which are basically time-grabbers, are often used by the minority to delay and block votes. it takes 60 votes to end debate (and a filibuster). currently the senate has 55 republicans and 45 democrats.

the senate republicans - i'm lumping them all together - have recently begun openly attacking the filibuster, campaigning to remove filibusters from federal judge confirmation hearings. if this succeeds, and votes go by party lines, every single judge nominated by president bush will be confirmed. so far this year, democrats have only used filibusters to block 12 of the president's nominees, which (as i've read) is about the same rate at which republicans blocked clinton's nominees. but they're putting up a big stink about it because of the light at the end of the tunnel: supreme court nominations.

republicans are greedy fuckers--they want to be able to completely suspend debate if the president ends up nominating an ultra-right-wing conservative judge to the supreme court, should rehnquist/o'connor/kennedy retire. given the number of critical decisions that have been handed down by 5-4 votes from the justices, with moderate conservatives (nominated through compromise between parties by republican presidents) taking the "liberal" side. abortion. affirmative action. these are key issues, and asking for forced compromise between parties - through a filibuster - doesn't seem like that much to ask.

as i said to mara, they are acting like bullies in the schoolyard, picking on the kid with the glasses. i don't know if they anticipate a reversal of majorities in the next election and want to get in whatever punches they can now, or if they're overly confident in their success in years to come, but obstructing the democratic process isn't the way to work.

i can only hope that, if they succeed in banning the filibuster in judicial nominations, it'll come back to bite them in the ass tenfold when they lose their grip on the country's psyche.