Do unto other's judicial nominees

Every time I read another Republican complain about the Democrats filibustering judicial nominations in the Senate, I wonder if they have forgotten their role in the Clinton era:

In fact, in the last five years of the Clinton presidency, Republicans blocked 20% of the nominees submitted to the Senate. In President Bush's first three years, only 3.4% of judicial nominees have been rejected. Already, the Senate has confirmed thirty Bush circuit court nominees—this is a greater number than President Clinton was allowed in his two full terms in office.

So you can see why opinion pieces like this smack of hypocrisy:

Under the Constitution, the president appoints judges by and with the Senate's "advice and consent." Nowhere is it written that a president's judicial nominee must secure a super-majority of Senate votes to win confirmation.

That's why President Bush, why the Senate Republican majority should to go to the constitutional mat with Senate Democrats over judicial nominations.

If the Democrats continue to filibuster the president's nominees, then Republicans should rewrite the rules that allow such obstructionist tactics.

This is another framing battle that Democrats need to start fighting before it's too late.