![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLv93aw_-I36e_CHsqkKawyhYp1KJ2otC8ooUuLqFLhgsg2S2k-Qz-zkURFgYZ70rPb4BEcaENGfiiOn4BqGFIGRnE58dG06OE74kVx4TUDgA93RZBbX6kyQ7AG_xeMBpaX5RD/s400/GOPTN.jpg)
Republicans and Filibustering Hypocrisy
Dahlia Lithwick, a liberal columnists at Slate has a longish article there entitled, "How many ways can Senate Republicans Show Breathless Hypocrisy".
Part of the article is on the issue of filibustering in the Senate. Part of the article is on the issue of claiming that the nominee hasn't been forthcoming on answers.
The second issue is impossible to address because I would need to do a legitimate statistical analysis of questions before nominees by party by type of nominee, etc.
The first issue is, at least at first take, easier to understand. The Lithwick hypothesis is that some Republicans accused Democrats of unethically (or unconstitutionally) filibustering judicial nominees and now Republicans threaten to filibuster judicial nominees.
This would be a reasonable hypothesis but for the fact that: Lithwick does not identify a single Republican who made that claim (she cites a newspaper article in the LATimes which says that both sides are changing their filibustering tactics). Similarly, she doesn't say the Republicans have filibustered anyone (they haven't) and she doesn't identify a single Senator who says he (or she) will filibuster.
I'm presuming that Lithwick is not so lazy or stupid as to be incapable of these citations. Thus I'm going to conclude she just likes the word 'hypocrisy' and the phrase 'breathless hypocrisy" (and they she herself is blinded by ideology).