That is the point.
Oh, a new goalpost! That wasn't my argument. My claim was the filibuster's use by the Republican's is unprecedented in history.There are other reasons to threaten a filibuster including making amendments to the bill. Now answer the question, does it really matter how many filibusters the Republicans had of Democratic Bills in 2008 with Bush in the WH?
Delay, Delay, Delay!What does any of that have to do with 2009?
As we have established, they do not need the votes to block to be able to delay.You seem to be having a problem with the basic fact that the Republicans didn't have the votes to filibuster Obama and required Democrat support if indeed a filibuster occurred in 2009?
Even Graham has admitted a record number of filibusters, as I have documented.
What have you documented?