The rats cheat and lie and steal. That is sad, but I admire the Republicans for not following in the rat's footprints. Over the last 4 years we have confirmed some excellent judges. Your characterization of the Republican Party as "pacifist" is an opinion and an ignorant one IMO.
If we set the precedent that we will change previous Senate rules without regard to rules that are now in place then anything goes. I don't see how one assumes that a brand new rule allowing filibuster for legislation but not for judicial nominations, will not evolve into a no filibuster rule on all legislation once if and when the 'rats gain control again.
It's based in reality. There was no fight against Ruth Bader Gisberg and she had as much legal opinion baggage as anyone ever to face Supreme Court nomination.
If we set the precedent that we will change previous Senate rules without regard to rules that are now in place then anything goes. I don't see how one assumes that a brand new rule allowing filibuster for legislation but not for judicial nominations, will not evolve into a no filibuster rule on all legislation once if and when the 'rats gain control again.
Senate rules are just that, Senate rules. They are not etched in stone or in the Constitution or anything. Senate rules change all the time. The best example is this term limits for committee chairs. That was a 1994 change. The Dems will change any rule they darn well feel like changing when they get back in. They are nervy enough to exercise power when they have power. I begrudgingly admire them for that, and that alone.
In fact filibustering circuit court nominees is a change in tradition and based on an (broad) interpretation of the Senate rules.
Filibusters are for LEGISLATION. Always have been.