Leftist Argument: Weak & No More Blogging Until Sunday

This is a sample of the quality of argumentation coming from the left about the impending use of the constitutional option to end the unprecedented filibuster of judicial nominations.

Sample: "Judges are the chief remaining brake on one-party government . . .

Actually, no. Voters are the brake on one party government. But it is revealing of the liberal mindset -- they know the only chance for stalling the President's agenda and implementing their own is through the use of the one unelected branch of government.

Sample: "[I]n the late 1990s, Republicans, with control of the U.S. Senate, were blocking as many as 50 Clinton judicial nominations."

Yes -- well, the key phrase there is "with control of the U.S. Senate." As the majority, Republicans presumably had the votes to defeat the nominations at issue on the Senate floor. They were not a minority attempting to prevent nominations that DO have majority support on the floor from even coming to a vote. That's the difference.

The piece then goes on to attack nominee Wiliam Myers personally, and then concludes by asserting hyperbolically: "Our religious rightists would subject an independent judiciary, in a free society, to mob intimidation and tyranny of the majority. We must resist these people."

Making sure that the judicial branch is subject to checks and balances -- like the executive and legislative branches are -- isn't "mob intimidation." Insisting that the Democratic minority cannot change Senate precedent and use a procedural device to exercise a de facto veto over judicial nominations isn't "tyranny of the majority."

But perhaps it's easier for left-wingers to resort to hysteria than actually try to win the votes that would let them exercise power legitimately.

Blogging will resume on Sunday.