Republicans Threaten To Filibuster Any Future Obama Appointments Unless He Picks Right-Wing Activists-- Or Was The Letter They Sent Him Just A Prank?

Today's word: chutzpah

Senate Republicans-- all 41 of them that haven't been thrown out of office yet-- have come up with a new one: Obama should just appoint the right wing extremist loons that Bush had been unsuccessfully been trying to insert into the federal judiciary. Most observers think there are already far too many Federalist Society wingnuts on the bench. Where are these kooks from? Limbaughland, apparently. All 41 of them-- yes, including Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter-- signed a letter to Obama threatening to filibuster his judicial nominees, sight unseen, unless he grants them veto power over any appointments he tries to make from their respective states.

But the voters gave Obama a mandate to get the judiciary back in balance after 8 years of the most blatant and egregious partisan hackery in the history of America. Obama, a constitutional scholar, is determined to appoint judges who understand the Constitution and believe in equality under the law, not judges who will protect Republican Party donors from society.

In a letter to the White House, the Republican senators said Obama would “change the tone in Washington” if he were to renominate Bush nominees like Peter Keisler, Glen Conrad and Paul Diamond. And they requested that Obama respect the Senate’s constitutional role in reviewing judicial nominees by seeking their consultation about potential nominees from their respective states.

“Regretfully, if we are not consulted on, and approve of, a nominee from our states, the Republican Conference will be unable to support moving forward on that nominee,” the letter warns. “And we will act to preserve this principle and the rights of our colleagues if it is not.”

In other words, Republicans are threatening a filibuster of judges if they're not happy.

The letter is an opening salvo in what could be a partisan battle in the Obama years. Democrats regularly complained that Bush nominated conservative judges without consulting them, then the Republican-controlled Senate ran roughshod over them even if the nominees lacked support from homestate senators. Obama’s lawyer Gregory Craig has begun his outreach with senators about potential nominees, and several Republicans have warned Obama that the quickest way to squander bipartisan goodwill is to nominate far-left judges.

The vast majority of Bush's nominees, including the really awful partisan hacks and incompetents, were confirmed by the Senate, even when the Democrats could easily have prevented that. I never quite understood that. Apparently, neither did the members of the Grand Obstructionist Party... and they don't plan to return the favor. Anyone have any idea what "far left judges" Obama might have in mind? Or is that just how the Repugs define moderates, progressives and Democrats-- like the ones the Republicans refused to confirm when Clinton was president?