But if you want to talk about "thwarting the democratic process," tell me how a small number of senators filibustering to prevent the rest of the duly elected senators from voting on judge appointments as called for in the Constitution is not thwarting the democratic process. Tell me how a bunch of legislators illegally scampering across the state line to prevent the rest of the duly elected Texas state legislators from attaining a quorum to vote on redistricting is not thwarting the democratic process. Recall that the same politicians are happy enough to vote for redistricting when their own party has the votes to benefit. Tell me how running off to an unelected judge or judges to get a law properly voted and passed by the people or by their duly elected legislators thrown out on the basis of presumed and unproven (but nonetheless perfectly legal and valid, even if they were true) motives in the voters is not thwarting the democratic process. Tell me how it's not thwarting the democratic process to try to get a state supreme court to nullify the properly voted Presidential election; recall that when they finally counted the ballots, the state court was found to be wrong, and the actual results was what that one party was trying to get nullified. President Bush was properly elected by the people by a valid democratic and Constitutional process, and the Federal Court only hastened (but did not reverse) the process.
It's always that one political party that is actually thwarting the
democratic process by subverting the will of the people as expressed directly
or by their duly elected representatives. When that party has the votes
to get their agenda passed, it becomes the law of the land; that's the
democratic process. When that party is out of touch with the will of the
people and lacks the votes to get their agenda passed, they go to the courts
to effect their agenda. That is not the democratic process, nevermind
the name of their party. It never happens the other way around, folks.