I'd say this specious argument is entirely disingenuous.
First of all the Senate rules are changed all the time, and every time a rule is changed it's "midstream".
Second, this isn't a rule change. It's an interpretation of existing rules.
Third, this is the Senate, not the NBA or a chess championship.
Fourth, comity or "fairness" is a concept Democrats invoke only when it is to their own benefit- at all other times they don't have the slightest grasp of the concept.
Well said, and that was the point of my post.
What is "midstream" anyway? In the middle of a Congressional session? In the middle of a Presidential administration?
Kevin's Drum's argument defeats itself. If the majority has the right to change the rules, it can do so at any time. There is no "midstream".
The second point of the post, for Freepers anyway, is that this is a sign of desperation and defeatism on the part of the far left. They've given up on their other arguments (Bush's picks are extreme, filibusters are Constitutional, filibusters are intended as 'checks and balances" etc.) and now their only remaining fallback argument is "don't change the rules in midstream".
They've lost and they know it.