Short diary, should perhaps be a comment (most of it was a comment!), but whatever...I have a quick point/clarification to make -- one seemingly lacking for the current conversation -- that I think most people agree with!
I just want to say that the filibuster as it existed was not actually undemocratic. It sort of flew in the face of "majority rule", but in the end it was really just a Senate rule. And I generally liked it in practice, even though it allowed (let's say) 48 Senators to undo the will of 52 on certain topics.
But when it's (a) abused to the extent that one 5-year period can see as many filibuster uses as the previous few decades and (b) tied to issues totally separate from the nomination and approval process -- it's time for that rule to go.
The rule was in place to protect the rights of the Congressional minority in appointments. It did that for decades, and that's a good thing.
Then this new crop of legislators came in and used it, baldly and without disguise, as a substitute for being able to legislate competently.
If the current Congress would learn how to actually pass laws in the United States, I'll be more than happy to go back to the old filibuster rule.