Hypocrisy: Senate Democrats Blast Republicans for Halligan Filibuster

Just one hour before the epic filibuster of Rand Paul, Senate Republicans unanimously filibustered the judicial nomination of former New York solicitor general Caitlin Halligan, which has caused uproar within the Senate Democrats caucus: accusing Republicans of abusing the gang of 14's 2005 framework on judicial filibusters.

The Gang of 14's agreement, which although not actual Senate policy remains the unofficial framework, was crafted after Senate Democrats filibustered several of President Bush's judicial nominees (yes, they did, and they will, once in the minority again, filibuster) and Senate Republicans responded by pushing for a nuclear option to bar judicial filibusters.

It set a broad agreement among those fourteen signatories, and has since become an unsaid rule of almost  everyone since then, that no judicial filibusters would be sought except in "extraordinary circumstances" as determined by individual conviction.

But according to Senate Republicans, namely Senator Grassley: Ms. Halligan, while serving as solicitor general, argued that "gun manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers contributed to the 'public nuisance' of illegal handguns in the state," and essentially stated that the aforementioned could be held legally liable.

And it could be argued with the second amendment's rightful meaning constantly being challenged in the courts, her position is potentially one of extraordinary circumstance to the future of American gun rights.

However, in all honestly, lets face it - both sides are hypocrites on judicial filibusters. Neither wants their ideological counterpart assuming control of one court district in this nation and both have a long and rich history of using hyperbole in their efforts to derail such nominations. When Republicans regain control of Senate leadership, the Democrats will return to their filibuster role and so on and so forth.

So could Senate Democrats stop using the bully-pulpit for judicial filibuster reform that they will only be whining is unfair when they one day return to the minority and just admit obstructionism is a feature of a minority faction in 21st century American legislative politics, and is ingrained within both parties.

What say you?