This is one of the more short-sighted statements I have read on FR in a long time. It is only because of the filibuster that the long dry period from Hoover till now was not a whole lot worse. Given the open war between the relious right and constitutional conservatives, with some intelligent democrats circling the battle like hyenas, this republican majority may not last long.
I see no difference between judicial filibusters and filibusters in general. Each results in a tyranny of the minority. Either they are both okay or they both should go.
The case for ending judicial or presidential appointment filibusters is because the Constitution specifically set up a process of executive/legislative coordination that preceded the adoption of any housekeeping rules by the Senate.
The filibuster does NOT appear in the constitution.
The appointment process does.