Who’s up for some more abhorrent racial demagoguery from the second-ranking Democrat in the United States Senate?  Illinois’ Dick Durbin has already played the Selma card during the Loretta Lynch confirmation fight, but perhaps that was just too subtle for his tastes (and subtlety isn’t his forte, especially when it comes to discussing the troops).  Next up on his rhetorical roster is a flagrant segregation smear:

Dick Durbin says AG nom Loretta Lynch is being “asked to sit in the back of the bus when it comes to the Senate calendar.”

— Alex Bolton (@alexanderbolton) March 18, 2015

The slow-walking of Loretta Lynch’s nomination as Attorney General has nothing to do with her race or gender, and her “plight” bears zero resemblance to the institutionalized bigotry Rosa Parks bravely defied. To imply, or openly state, otherwise is cheap and disgusting. Back in reality, Republicans have held up Lynch’s confirmation because of her endorsement of President Obama’s immigration lawlessness, and more recently, as leverage to force Democrats to stop filibustering an anti-human-trafficking law.  Yes, that’s actually happening:

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell dug in on Tuesday, demanding the chamber finish work on an anti-human trafficking measure before considering Lynch. The Kentucky Republican said the Senate would hold repeated votes on the bill in the coming days. That leaves the Senate in a bind because Democrats have promised to filibuster the trafficking bill unless an abortion-related provision is stripped out. On Tuesday, 43 Democrats voted to block the measure on a procedural vote — denying Republicans the 60 votes needed to advance the legislation for final passage. “We’re going to stay on the bill,” McConnell told reporters. “I’ve said all along I thought that the president’s nominee to be attorney general is entitled to be considered on the Senate floor. And she will be considered as soon as we finish this very important bill.”

Democrats’ breathtaking obstructionism has earned scorn from editorial boards and anti-trafficking organizations alike.  Their alleged newfound opposition to the bill stems from unremarkable language barring the use of taxpayer dollars to fund abortions within a fund created by the legislation.  Not only is such a provision standard procedure (reflecting strong opposition to using public dollars to pay for abortions), Democrats unanimously supported the bill — abortion language included — in a committee vote weeks ago. Democrats have also been forced to acknowledge that Republicans notified them about the abortion language months ago; they initially lied, claiming that the item was “sneaked into” the bill.  Oh, and when Mitch McConnell offered Reid and Durbin an up-or-down, simple majority vote to strip out the popular restriction on taxpayer-financed abortion, they objected.  Caught up in this embarrassing mess of his own creation, Dick Durbin has decided that the best way to bully the GOP into backing down is to brazenly call them segregationists.  This is a man, I should add, who began his political career as a professed pro-lifer.  Now he’s blocking a law to help victims of sexual abuse (mostly young girls) because it won’t pay for abortions, and abusing the memory of Rosa Parks in a cynical attempt to muddy the waters.  Harry Reid also once positioned himself as pro-life, even pretending to oppose taxpayer-funded abortion on principle (“my belief in the sanctity of life is why I have repeatedly voted against using taxpayer money for abortions”) during the 2010 Obamacare debate.  Today, he’s leading this egregious filibuster.  It’s abundantly clear who’s in charge of the Democratic Party’s agenda.  Here’s a local Nevada news segment exposing Reid’s indefensible position:

As you reflect on Durbin’s metaphor, I’ll draw your attention this classic column, which somehow seems appropriate.  Also, be sure to click through and scroll down for a refresher on Durbin’s ugly history of race-based opposition to a high-profile presidential nominee.  

Exit Question (Allahpundit™): How long until Durbin makes a “Lynching” pun on the Senate floor?  I doubt he resists that temptation for more than a week, especially if Dems keep taking heat for their filibuster.

UPDATE – A fun Durbin fact, via Sen. Tim Scott, the black Republican overwhelmingly elected by an extremely conservative electorate: “It is helpful to have a long memory and to remember that Durbin voted against Condoleezza Rice during the 40th anniversary of the March [on Selma]. So I think in context it’s just offensive that we have folks who are willing to race bait on such an important issue as human trafficking. Sometimes people use race as an issue that is hopefully going to motivate folks for their fight. But what it does, is it infuriates people.” This is an elegant way of sending the message I linked above.