"Yes, you are correct, It is about intellectual honesty, but also consistency."
The Pubbies are being very consistent. When 19 Dems, including Harkin, Kerry, Kennedy, Levin, wanted to eliminate the use of filibusters in ALL cases, every Repub and most Dems voted it down. Whether you were or were not against eliminating filibusters in the past is irrelevant to me. My concern is what did our politicians say and do in the past particuarly those that are still in power. The Pubbies delayed votes in committee (as have Dems) but NEVER filibustered a candidate that had a known majority support.
Obviously it is easier when one has a 55-seat majority but there is nothing inconsistent on the Pubbies side to say that this is a new requirement created by the MINORITY side, the very same side of which when they were the MAJORITY changed the rule that allows rule changes by a simple majority (Byrd).
Souter, Breyer and especially Ginsburg got through with virtually zippo dissent when it came to actually vote. Clarence Thomas could have been filibustered by the Dems but it would not have been necessary - they were the MAJORITY then.
Other than 1953-55 and 1981-87 the Dems had control of the senate from 1933-95. The Pubbies never filibustered a nominee - they were consistent and bided their time. In that same period when the dems were briefly in the minority the Dems also did not filibuster.
So please if you can show how the Pubbies are being inconsistent in regards to filibustering judicial nominees (particuarly those that have clear majority support) then your claim of inconsistency will be vindicated.
I never said the GOP was inconsistent regarding the use of the filibuster. You may disagree, but I feel strongly that if the tables were turned, we would be fighting for the right to filibuster judicial nominees that had designs on legalizing gay marriage, overturning abortion restrictions, and the like, and rightly so.
The consistent position is opposing elimination of the filibuster, no matter the majority party. If a nominee has a clear majority behind him or her, the cloture vote should be easily attainable, as it was for the Owen nomination.