Update [2006-1-28 16:19:59 by sdf]: georgia10 has the lastest state of the field over at The Big Orange:

This is a follow-up to Armando's great posts this morning on the filibuster. Improbable? Yeah. Impossible? Never. Take 15 minutes out of your weekend for democracy's sake. Track the updates on the cloture count here. Here is the latest update: NO on cloture (announced support for a filibuster):

Barbara Boxer (D- CA)
Dianne Feinstein (D- CA)
Christopher J. Dodd (D- CT)
Richard J. Durbin (D- IL)
John F. Kerry (D- MA)
Edward M. Kennedy (D- MA)
Paul S. Sarbanes (D- MD)
Debbie A. Stabenow (D- MI)
Harry Reid (D- NV)
Hillary Rodham Clinton (D- NY)
Charles Schumer (D- NY)
Ron Wyden (D- OR)
Russell D. Feingold (D- WI)
Barack Obama (D-IL)
Robert Menendez (D-NJ)

Senators To Call:

Blanche Lambert Lincoln (D- AR), 202-224-4843
Joseph I. Lieberman (D- CT), 202-224-4041
Thomas R. Carper (D- DE), 202-224-2441
Daniel K. Inouye (D- HI), 202-224-3934
Tom Harkin (D- IA), 202-224-3254
Evan Bayh (D- IN), 202-224-5623
Barbara A. Mikulski (D- MD), 202-224-4654
Carl Levin (D- MI), 202-224-6221
Mark Dayton (D- MN), 202-224-3244
Max Baucus (D- MT), 202-224-2651
Frank Lautenberg (D- NJ), 202-224-3224
Jeff Bingaman (D- NM), 202-224-5521
Jack Reed (D- RI), 202-224-4642
Patrick J. Leahy (D- VT), 202-224-4242
Maria Cantwell (D- WA), 202-224-3441
Patty Murray (D- WA), 202-224-2621
Herb Kohl (D- WI), 202-224-5653
John D. Rockefeller, IV (D- WV), 202-224-6472
James M. Jeffords (I- VT), 202-224-5141
Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (D- DE) , 202-224-5042
Bill Nelson (D- FL), 202-224-5274
Daniel K. Akaka (D- HI), 202-224-6361
Mary Landrieu (D- LA), 202-224-5824
Byron L. Dorgan (D- ND), 202-224-2551
Olympia Snowe (R- ME), 202-224-5344

The bold are those in most need of some convincing. Senators Biden, Nelson, Akaka, Landrieu, Dorgan, and Snowe have stated they would likely not support a filibuster. Not a firm stance, like Chaffee, Salazar, Pryor, and Conrad, so there is reason to keep calling them.

Georgia has more details over there, so go take a look.
Original post below the fold:

The daily stories on the AP wire are thick with the certainty, the inevitability of the confirmation of Radical Judicial Activist Samuel Alito.  The possibility of a filibuster, if mentioned at all, is either hidden at the bottom or dismissed with a quick, "it is clear that the Democrats don't have the stomach for that."  My tendency as I've read these stories is to sigh, shake my head, and chalk up yet another instance of the SCLM parroting Republican propaganda points, Republican truthiness.

A filibuster is still possible, given the adamant opposition of many good Senate Democrats to Alito.  Most have not ruled it out.  But there are indications that at least a few Democrats, if not a whole bunch of them, are going to vote "No" on Alito but will not support a filibuster.  To which I want to say, just to be clear:

Voting "No" on Alito but "Yes" on cloture is the same as voting "Yes" on Alito.  No matter what they say.  No matter how many speeches they give.  When a filibuster is your only option to stopping the nomination, and you know that, then you must support a filibuster -- unless you just don't care.

(Some may recall that Lieberman did exactly this on the bankruptcy bill -- that is, he voted for closure and against the bill, when it was more than clear that a filibuster was the only way to stop it.)

It is unclear whether Harry Reid and other Senate Democratic leaders have decided to filibuster Dubya's genuflection to the Radical Right, Samuel Alito.  The official word is wait and see, which suggests (shockingly!) an examination of the record to see what arises before and during the proceedings (you know that whole quaint advise and consent clause), and, pehaps more importantly, to see how the political winds coalesce, to see what the likely results and ramifications of the likely showdown would be.  So far, it appears that the public is unconvinced, meaning that, unlike with Roberts, the potential for a movement of the winds favorable to opposition is indeed present.

Whatever it is that Democratic leaders are planning behind the scenes, what they absolutely do not need are stories like this one, entitled "Democrat Says Alito Unlikely to Face Filibuster."  (Or this one:  "Biden:  Alito Should Get Up-or-Down Vote.")

"My instinct is we should commit" to an up-or-down vote by the full Senate, said Biden, a member of the Judiciary Committee. "I think the probability is that will happen.

"I think that judgment won't be made ... until the bulk of us have had a chance to actually see him and speak to him," Biden told ABC's "This Week."

Why is this seemingly innocuous comment and the resultant headlines so irritating?  Well, let's count the ways.