In light of Roberts court decisions, why didn't Dems filibuster? [View All]

So far, the court with addition of one corporate lawyer and one out and out fascist, Alito, we have had an attack on the Fourth Amendment and foreigners have lost the right to due process. The decision today about military tribunals was a squeaker when it should have been unanimous.

Exactly what would the Senate Democrats have lost by filibustering those two and forcing the GOP to either exercise the nuclear option and show their true anti-democracy colors or shut up with the stupid threat?

The worst possible outcome would have been those two ended up on the bench anyway. Or are the Democrats saving that filibuster for when Bush appoints John Bolton or Ann Coulter to the Supreme Court? Or is there ANY nominee so insulting to our system of checks and balances that the Democrats would take a principled stand against them?