BREAKING THURSDAY 2 pm: JOHN KERRY WILL LEAD A FILIBUSTER!!!!!!!

Harry Reid met with progressive lobbyists on Tuesday and told them he has nearly 44 votes against Alito. But 44 "no" votes isn't good enough, because Alito would be confirmed 56-44.

To stop Alito, we need a filibuster - which can be started by one Senator - backed up by 41 votes to prevent "cloture."

But Reid said there are 8 Democratic Senators who will not support a filibuster.

If Reid has nearly 44 votes against Alito, every one of those Senators should support a filibuster or their vote against Alito is meaningless.

Reid also said he will not pressure Democratic Senators on Alito because it's a "conscience vote."

Bullshit. The Constitution - not to mention young women - are tied to the railroad track and the train that will kill them is named Samuel Alito.

So call the Democrats who are leading this battle and demand a unified Democratic filibuster:
Harry Reid (NV)
Dick Durbin (IL)
Chuch Schumer (NY)
Debbie Stabenow (MI)
Pat Leahy (VT)

Use these toll free numbers to call the Capitol: 888-355-3588 or 888-818-6641. If you can't get through, look up your Senator's District Office number in your phone book or here:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt?command=congdir

Reid would not name the "Alito 8" who are blocking a Democratic filibuster - so we need 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.

The most likely suspects are the "Red State" Democrats:
Tom Carper (DE)
Kent Conrad (ND)
Byron Dorgan (ND)
Tim Johnson (SD) endorsed Alito
Mary Landrieu (LA) is speaking publicly against a filibuster - see Update #2 below.
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) endorsed Alito
Mark Pryor (AR) (see above)
Ken Salazar (CO) is speaking publicly against a filibuster - see Update 5 below.

Ben Nelson and Tim Johnson said they will vote for Alito. Screw them, but we can still get 41 votes to sustain a filibuster as long as we do not lose 2 more (including Jeffords).

You can also call the Republicans who have not declared their support for Alito according to C-SPAN (thanks Dinamic!) and our volunteers:

Lincoln Chafee (RI)
Susan Collins (ME)
Olympia Snowe (ME)
Ted Stevens (AK)

And 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 1 Senator to start the 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)

If you learn anything from your calls, post the information below.

Update 1: If Alito is confirmed and overturns Roe, we'll put this on Arlen Specter's tombstone as the monument to his pathetic betrayal of his pro-choice base and his unforgiveable sellout to the radical right:

Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., an abortion rights moderate, said part of the reasoning for his vote for Alito was to ensure the judge’s support crosses ideological lines when it comes to abortion.

“I think it is important for Judge Alito have supporters who favor a woman’s right to choose, so that he does not feel in any way beholden to or confirmed by people who have one idea on some of these questions,” said Specter, who has been criticized by abortion rights supporters for his Alito support.

Update 2: Call Mary Landrieu as many times as it takes for her to get a clue, as Armando makes clear:

"Because we have such a full plate of pressing issues before Congress, a filibuster at this time would be, in my view, very counterproductive. It is imperative that we remain focused on creating the tools New Orleans, Louisiana and the Gulf Coast will need to rebuild. This includes passing the Baker bill and allowing our state to keep its fair share of offshore energy revenues. We simply cannot afford to bring the Senate to a halt at a time when we need its action the most. If called to vote for cloture on Judge Alito's nomination, I will vote yes."

You see, the lifetime appointment of a SUPREME COURT JUSTICE is no big whoop to Sen. Landrieu. It is one thing to be against a filibuster, but to pretend the confirmation of a Supreme Court Justice is no big deal is offensive. I don't know what Senator Landrieu believes she is accomplishing with this idiotic and downright offensive press release, but it tells me that she really is not up to the job of United States Senator if she can not understand how important this is. No one has made me angrier in this process. Not even Specter.

Thinking on it, I have a suggestion for Senator Landrieu - why not put off consideration of the Alito nomination until AFTER we deal with all those important issues she has outlined. I mean, since the Supreme Court is not important according to her, surely Alito's nomination can wait a few months before we address it. Why doesn't Senator Landrieu propose that?

Update 3: NY Times joins us in calling for a filibuster

Senators in Need of a Spine

It is hard to imagine a moment when it would be more appropriate for
senators to fight for a principle. Even a losing battle would draw the
public's attention to the import of this nomination.
...
in what he has said in the past, and what he refused to say in the hearings, Judge Alito raised warning flags that, in the current political context, cannot simply be shrugged away with a promise to fight again another day.
...
But portraying the Alito nomination as just another volley in the culture
wars vastly underestimates its significance. The judge's record strongly
suggests that he is an eager lieutenant in the ranks of the conservative
theorists who ignore our system of checks and balances, elevating the
presidency over everything else. He has expressed little enthusiasm for
restrictions on presidential power and has espoused the peculiar argument that a president's intent in signing a bill is just as important as the intent of Congress in writing it. This would be worrisome at any time, but it takes on far more significance now, when the Bush administration seems determined to use the cover of the "war on terror" and presidential privilege to ignore every restraint, from the Constitution to Congressional emands for information.
...
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.

Update 4: This is Tim Johnson's pathetic statement in support of Alito

"I am troubled by Judge Alito's apparent views on matters such as executive power, his past opposition to the principle of one person, one vote, and his narrow interpretation of certain civil rights laws. Even so, I cannot accept an argument that his views are so radical that the Senate is justified in denying his confirmation."

Update 5: AP says Ken Salazar opposes a filibuster - I'm working on confirmation.

.