OL, The calculus goes something nlike this.
What did Bush give up? Recess appointments for the remainder of this congress. (108th, Daschles words.)
Now, that bears a little examination. One, in order to recess appoint someone, they need to be willing, so If you want to criticise the president, find one of his Appointees, out of the list of Contrversials, that will Leave a secure bench for a one year deal.
That's first. Secondly, this congress will adjourn permanently sometime in december, Making way for the 109th.and ending his deal with Dasshole, who s/b on his way out anyway.
Now, The president by virtue of having half a dozen nominees filibustered, can still paint the Dems as obstructionists (his best line on the stump), he gets 25 more Judges on the bench who are more likely to be more conservative, net, then are already there, moving the judiciary rightward, while giving Daschle a fig leaf to cover them with their base, but one that doesn't counter the obstructionist charge.
Also, on an aside, the kinds of judges Daschle will still be obstructing will hurt him in his campaign against Thune. HE is trading off the ability to raise extra money, praying that it wont hurt him in actual votes.
So in reality Bush gives up nothing, gets a whole lot in return. Fairly impressive bargaining.
Actually, my comments to trillium were in regard to my post 34 and his response. My post 50 was a comment on his debating tactic in general, which is to declare that unless you dedicate a work week, and a career change, to investigating an issue, you don't know what you are talking about (when you disagree with him), but he won't actually explain himself. My original comments didn't actually include the recess appointment issue, but a host of others which I do think reasonable conservatives would find at least questionable or unpalatable.