Senators, Spines, and Sam ScAlito

Harry Reid met with progressive lobbyists this week and told them he has 44 votes against Alito, but that there are eight Democratic Senators who will not support a filibuster.

Reid only needs 41 votes to sustain a filibuster. If he has 41, then every one of those Senators should support a filibuster, or their 'no' vote is meaningless.

Reid also said he would not pressure Democrats on this because it's a "conscience vote".

Reid would not name the "Alito 8" who are blocking a Democratic filibuster -- so it is important to identify them and tell them not to betray the Democrats who funded them and voted for them. If Democrats want our support to win in 2006, we need their support now.

Here's an easy directory for you to use, today, to contact them.

The most likely Alito 8 suspects are "Red State" Democrats:

Tom Carper (DE)
Kent Conrad (ND)
Byron Dorgan (ND)
Tim Johnson (SD)
Mary Landrieu (LA) -- she is speaking publicly against a filibuster
Blanche Lincoln (AR)
Mark Pryor (AR)

The "Alito 8" may also include some of the 7 Democrats in the Gang of 14:

Robert C. Byrd (WV)
Daniel Inouye (HI)
Joseph I. Lieberman (CT)
Mary Landrieu (LA) (see above)
E. Benjamin Nelson (NE)
Mark Pryor (AR) (see above)
Ken Salazar (CO)

Nelson has already said he will vote for Alito. Screw him, but we don't need his vote as long as we get nearly all of the others.

You can also, if you're feeling strong, call the Republicans who have not declared their support for Alito according to C-SPAN -- the best prospects are in bold:

Lincoln Chafee (RI)
Saxby Chambliss (GA)
Susan Collins (ME)
John Ensign (NV)
Lisa Murkowsky (AK)
Pat Roberts (KS)
Rick Santorum (PA)
Bob Smith (OR)
Olympia Snowe (ME)
Ted Stevens (AK)
John Vitter (LA)
George Voinovich (OH)

And most certainly call the five Democratic Senators who want you to support them for President in 2008. If they want to prove their leadership, they need to lead the filibuster. It only takes one Senator to start a filibuster. Call them with a simple message: IF YOU CAN'T LEAD A FILIBUSTER, THEN YOU CAN'T LEAD OUR PARTY IN A CAMPAIGN FOR PRESIDENT.

Evan Bayh (IN)
Joe Biden (DE)
Hillary Clinton (NY)
Russ Feingold (WI)
John Kerry (MA)

See, I don't think it's all that complicated. You use the filibuster because your instincts tell you it's the right thing to do. If you're afraid to use the filibuster because you're afraid you might lose it, then it's pretty apparent that you've already lost it.

If you use it, and Frist goes nukyuler, what have you lost? That which you were willing to concede anyway? And what have you won? The respect of the base of your party perhaps? Or the media or -- God forbid -- even the Republicans that you're willing to stand up and fight? An opportunity to again display the ruling monopoly as power-tripping and corrupt?

The Times sums it up for me:

A filibuster is a radical tool. It's easy to see why Democrats are frightened of it. But from our perspective, there are some things far more frightening. One of them is Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court.

Sometimes it's difficult to believe the people allegedly on our side need to be reminded of this. Nevertheless, let's be sure we remind them. Today.

Update (1/26, about 1 p.m.): Well, whaddya know. You were heard.

So did you hear about the oil spill in the Gulf?

Me neither:

A massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico that has escaped widespread notice provides graphic evidence that damage done by last year's hurricanes poses an ongoing problem for the Gulf's oil industry and coastal environment.

A double-hulled tanker barge now drained and floating upside down at a dock off Mobile Bay was responsible for what appears to be one of the Gulf of Mexico's largest oil spills, which received scant attention when it occurred after midnight Nov. 11. A gash in the hull 35 feet long and 6 feet wide released up to 3 million gallons of oil off the coasts of Louisiana and Texas.

Federal officials said the 442-foot ship's hull ruptured and spilled the oil after it collided with a submerged oil platform wrecked by Hurricane Rita in September. Federal records show at least 167 Gulf platforms were damaged or destroyed during the active 2005 hurricane season. Many of these are submerged or so damaged that the warning beacons on them no longer function, and federal officials acknowledge they have no idea how many have working marker lights.

At least two more vessels have collided with submerged platforms since the Nov. 11 incident, federal records show. As of Thursday, the Mobile Register was unable to obtain details of the other two incidents.

Coast Guard officials said the spill, and the $35 million cleanup associated with it, might have been avoided if the owners of the oil platform had marked the submerged wreck with a lighted buoy, as required under federal law. But the wreck was marked only with floating plastic balls described as "cherry fenders." Such buoys are not lighted and would be difficult to see at midnight, when the accident happened.

More troubling, officials with the U.S. Minerals Management Service, which regulates the offshore oil fields, told the Register that they don't know if lighted buoys have been placed at any of the 115 wrecked platforms that remain in the Gulf. Three weeks after the spill incident, the agency published a "Safety Alert" that lists the locations of damaged platforms and warns mariners the platforms "were destroyed and might be potential obstructions."

Annnnnd there's more, and it gets worse.

I wonder if Halliburton got a no-bid contract to clean it up...

Photos of Bush and Abramoff have appeared

via Pink Dome, from Yes But No But Yes.

The winning caption? "I wish I knew how to acquit you."

As Jon Stewart said the other night, thank God there was no nudity.