The New York Times has this editorial, with the above title.  The NYT blasts the filibuster as an "undemocratic procedure" and the Senate's "most infuriating rule."  It is "unthinkable," says the Times, that federal judges should be subject to supermajority requirements for confirmation.

But the Constitution gives presidents the right to nominate top officials in their administration and name judges, and it says nothing about the ability of a Senate minority to stop them. (The practice barely existed before the 1970s.) From now on, voters will have to understand that presidents are likely to get their way on nominations if their party controls the Senate.

Wait a minute ... This editorial is from 2013.

Never mind.