Wushu is Mandarin for "arts of war." Today in China there exists a standardized school of Wushu based on many of its historical martial arts disciplines. You can occasionally catch exhibitions on ESPN. It looks very impressive. Practitioners are capable of dizzying acrobatic feats. They wield traditional weapons. They chop at the air and each other in tightly controlled movements that look more like an exotic dance than a fight. Wushu exhibitions are visually stunning. But today's Wushu has been emptied of its meaning. Lost are its deeper traditions and martial application. To serious martial artists, "wushu" is shorthand for spectacle without utility. The shiny weapons we see in exhibitions are hollow, light, and dull. Today the Shaolin monks, for instance, whose fighting styles are the stuff of legend, have been reduced to a cheap sideshow.

Wushu was neutered by the Maoist regime. The term was adopted by Chairman Mao and morphed from a fighting art into a physical fitness regimen. It became a tool of a statist regime intent on destroying all vestiges of traditional spirituality, culture, and independence.

Wushu is what came to mind as the Senate hearings for Samuel Alito unfolded.

I am obviously disappointed with the vote today regarding the destruction of the final check and balance on George Bush's Imperial Reign. I will never understand how the Beltway Brigade operates. I'm actually happy about that. Why should I be sympathetic to a powerful group of Senators who rely more on collegiality and spin rather than the will of the people who gave them that power?

As far as I'm concerned, the 20+ Democrats who voted for cloture today are traitors to their base, the everday Americans who canvassed and advocated for their votes in neighborhoods across this country. There is no excuse for their capitulation.

continued...

Tomorrow, you will vote on whether to end debate on the nomination of Samuel Alito.  In an atmosphere where too many mask their intentions in platitudes and coy terms, allow me to blunt. You dropped the ball. Before the hearings, you failed to establish a clear strategy approaching this nomination. At the hearings, you tried, but failed to convey to the American people how disastrous Alito's record really is. After the hearings, it became each member for himself. And finally, you let the media confirm this man without question.

You dropped the ball, and it would have been easy for us to heed the Republican call and give up. But when you dropped the ball, Senators, we picked it up. The second you approached us for help, we pounced into action.  We leaped to action not because we were sure of victory. We are the reality-based community, after all. We know the numbers are against us. We know the chances of a successful filibuster are near zero.  But we also know that if you don't stand up for your beliefs when so much is at stake, rhetoric of opposition rings painfully hollow.

I see reports of Senators waivering on the filibuster because of its "political ramifications." Some of you are afraid of being labeled "obstructionist" by the media.  I remind you, Senators, the American people want you to block this nomination. Some 56% of Americans say Alito should not be confirmed if he'll overturn Roe. 52% of Americans think the President should be impeached if he wiretapped Americans without a warrant--yet you're going to allow a judge who thinks there are virtually no limits to Executive Power on the highest court of our land? Had the media had done its job of informing the public about Alito's record rather than running it through the GOP-filter and sanitizing it for public consumption, I guarantee you the outcry against Alito would far surpass that of any other Supreme Court Nominee.

Our forefathers did not contemplate confirmation of a Justice "with the advice and consent of the media."   Ignore the pundits and listen to your conscience. Does standing up against Samuel Alito feel like "obstructionism"--or does it feel like one of the last stands against an unprecedented aggrandizement of executive power?  Does it feel like "politics," or does it feel like breathing life into our system of checks and balances?

More below...

Kerry's office has confirmed the Senator's intent to block Samuel Alito's nomination to SCOTUS by extending debate.

=========
UPDATE - The Democrats do not have to show a full 41 votes to slow this train down. The burden is on Bill Frist to round up 60 affirmative votes to proceed to confirm a nominee. The magic number is 60, not 41. Nearly all recent judicial nominees, for lower court and SCOTUS, gained this level of support, either for cloture or for the actual nomination. It is quite rare for a court nominee to prevail with less than 60 "yeas."   If some Democrats would rather abstain than vote no for cloture, then let Frist pull together a bipartisan consensus for this nominee, as many prior appointees have needed in the past.

Action Item:  Recommend constituents work on bolstering support and recruiting a member of the Gang of 14 to join in on the filibuster, such as Inouye, Pryor, and possibly Joe Lieberman (as remote as the likelihood may be for Joe L.) Salazar has already declined, as of Wednesday. A delay of this nominee is warranted at least until we find out how the President's agencies were spying on ordinary non-terrorist citizens.   (And why did the IRS last year start collecting party ID data on taxpayers?! An outrage!!)    Vote no or "present," do not vote yes for cloture.

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.)

While we have to generate the pressure on all Senators, the decision to filibuster (or not) will also be a leadership decision. Call the Leadership Offices! Harry Reid, NV Democratic Leader (202) 224-3542

Dick Durbin, IL Assistant Democratic Leader (202) 224-2152

Patrick Leahy, VT Ranking Member Judiciary Committee (202) 224-4242

Republican senators that have not yet come out in support of Alito:

Phone numbers:

1-888-355-3588

or

1-888-818-6641

Chafee, Lincoln- (R - RI)

Collins, Susan- (R - ME)

Snowe, Olympia- (R - ME)

Stevens, Ted- (R - AK) (Yeah, him)

And Jeffords, James- (I - VT) hasn't declared his position yet.

Senators leaning toward filibuster, call and urge them on: 1-888-355-3588

or

1-888-818-6641

Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas

Mark Pryor, Arkansas

Diane Feinstein, California

Joe Lieberman, Connecticut

Joe Biden, Delaware

Barack Obama, Illinois

Mary Landrieu, Louisiana

Ben Nelson, Nebraska

Kent Conrad, North Dakota

Tim Johnson, South Dakota

[cross-posted at And, yes, I DO take it personally and Daily Kos]

oh, god, i hope not... my gut tells me that our country is in extremely serious trouble and that, with an alito confirmation, we may just be seeing bushco's endgame...

robert parry of consortium news, a man who holds my deepest respect, seems to be just as concerned as i am...

If confirmed, Samuel Alito and his theory of a near-dictatorial "unitary executive" could doom the American democratic Republic and make George W. Bush a strongman with no meaningful checks and balances. With the fate of the U.S. Constitution in the balance, it's hard to believe that no senator is prepared to filibuster Alito's nomination. But even if there's only one senator brave enough to grab the floor and explain the stakes to the American people, one might be enough to start a national political rebirth.

"President Bush said Alito was 'imminently qualified.' Then he said 'Unless imminently means not.'" --Conan O'Brien

It's time I came out of the closet. Although many of you know me as judybrowni (or judybrownibot) the annoyingly persistent poster of links to anti-Alito actions, in real life I'm the mild-mannered (well, actually kinda bitchy) editor of a series of joke books (which include The Comedy Thesaurus).

I come from a yellow-dog Democrat family (of at least four generations back), who also believed in the power of humor. As Sigmund Freud wrote in his book, Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious, "Every joke is a judgement."

And I've even injected my general interest joke books with a progressive slant.

So much so, that I once received a letter from a wingnut with time on his hands, who complained that he'd counted 50 jokes in one of my books with a liberal bias. To which I replied, "If we have to deal with your dangerous clown of a President, the least you can do is take a joke -- or 50 of them."

Now that I've revealed myself, I've decided to combine my avocation with my vocation: every time I hit you up with an action, I'll reward you with jokes.

It ain't over until the fat lady sings (and I'm not even humming yet.)

We may not be able to sway even some Democrat senators, but we can let them all know where we stand.

As long as we still have that right, let's exercise it:

If Repug, tell them "No" to Alito; if Democrat: FILIBUSTER!

CALL YOUR TWO SENATORS

John Edwards has endorsed this petition for FILIBUSTER!

People for the American Way has collected over 60,000 signatures to send to the Senate, please add yours:Save the Court Petition

Bush has wasted little time in selecting another nominee for Sandra Day O'Connor's seat on the Supreme Court (it's almost as if he has done this before).  This one is the fight we have been waiting for since 2000 when Bush promised to appoint another historical revisionist (aka strict constructionist) to the Court.

This time the papers already have their research done and many Senators already have an idea of what to think, the wingnuts are cheering and we have started urging our Senators to fight.

The real questions are 10? 41? 50? and 50?  Are there 10 Senators on committee who might turn him down?  Do we have 41 votes to maintain a filibuster?  Do they have 50 Senators to implement the Nuclear Option (+Cheney)?  And after that do they have the votes to pass Alito in an "upperdown" vote.