[USArmySpouse]

Yup. Spines of Jell-O. Useless.

[Bahbah]

That was the deal, and a very fair one, too.

No, it isn't.

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

The Democrats would promise not to use the filibuster, except under extreme circumstances.

Who gets to define extreme circumstances? Lemme guess--the dems. An extremist judge is one who believes a pregnant 12 year-old should check with mom and dad before getting an abortion.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Twelve independent and moderate senators - six Democrats and six Republicans...

This is utter nonsense. I challenge anyone to name me six moderate Democrat Party Operatives in the Senate. There aren't six. NO way.

Now, six "moderate" Republicans? Sure. But not six Dems.

I can name maybe one or two. Maybe. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and, at times, Landrieu of Lousiana. But even Mary is drinking the 'rat Kool-Aid on judges. She does, I think, believe in oil exploration--she'd best do that, since her state benefits.

Bottom line--there aren't six moderate Democrats in the Senate.

The NY Slimes is wrong. Again.

[Socratic]

So, Byrd-brain orated on the floor of the Senate about how the rules were sacrosanct and then, behind closed doors, offered a wheedling compromise to change the rules. He blew his chance for this year's Mr. Integrity for the 25th year in a row.

[MamaLucci]

Brooks is the perfect example of a mushy, milquetoast, moderate.

[golfisnr1]

Why bother to post a NY Times article.

[BobL]

It looks like Mr. Brooks has jumped ship.

If the judges are EXTREME, then the Dems can point that out real clearly, in a protracted debate. If the Dems are right, they will pick up these same 'moderate' Republicans and the nominee will lose the vote, with less than 50 votes in favor. Just as Robert Bork lost (unfortunately for us).

What the hell is it that scares Mr. Brooks into thinking that this new 60 vote majority is now needed? Where was he when Clinton and Carter were putting the absolute NUTCASES on the courts?

No Mr. Brooks, join the Dems on some other issue, President Bush deserves the same up and down votes that Clinton and Carter got.

[davidtalker]

NO DEAL. The only reason the Dems are negotiating is because they will lose the floor vote. There is no need to give an inch. This is a dress rehearsal for the SCOTUS confrontation. "Extreme circumstances" allow Dems to filibuster. Forget it. Every nominee will be seen as "extreme" by Kennedy, Schumer, Biden and Sheets.

This is another example of how the NY Times picks "safe" Conservatives for their op-ed writers. Brooks and Tierney are "wienies." They couldn't allow real movement Conservatives on the op-ed page.

[Bush 100 Percent]

Who is going to protect them from the everyday Average Republicans or, even, the Moderate Republicans? I think they are sadly mistaken if they think that it is only "pressure groups". Many people won't bother to contact them ahead of time because they do not really think anyone in their party would ever make such a miserable deal on their behalf. However, it will surface in future elections and the time, effort, and money given to the party.

[ModelBreaker]

This is such a stupid article. All the compromise did was, at most, defer the nuclear option until the supreme court nominations.

[Milhous]

John McCain, Lincoln Chafee, John Warner and maybe Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe will vote against the nuclear option

In all fairness, a few Democrat moderates ought to vote for the constitutional option so the right wing will like them.

[goldstategop]

Moderates are liberals who don't know who they are. Name me a book in the library named "Great Moderates Of History." When you lack real principles, you inevitably slide left.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[lstanle]

" Senator Robert Byrd joined the proceedings with a complicated proposal that threw everybody into confusion."

If the old Klansman, sheets byrd, is a moderate, there are no partisans.

[StonyBurk]

worry more about their precious Institution -and the show of getting along with people they despise more than they are interested in doing the nations work. The Philly -Buster was introduced about 1830 or so-- has been changed several times. The minority Party always insists it be kept as a rule -the ruling class always want to change it.
It has Never been used to bloke a Judicial nominee from an up or down vote. Fortas was already a Judge and the problem was neither Dems-nor Repubs wanted him as Chief Justice. I wish the silly boys would be served a dose of REALITY and voted off that island by "we the people"

[Norman Rogers]

Here's a letter I just wrote to Mr. Brooks: What exactly is "fair" about consigning two or three qualified jurists to the ashbin? Pragmatic, perhaps. But why fair? The Republican party has fairly won the Presidency and the Congress. The Democrats lost, because they have no message -- other than the other guys are "losers". Was (then majority leader) Robert Byrd "unfair" when he invented the parlimentary trick the Republicans will likely exercise on Tuesday? Will the Republicans be "unfair" to the Democrats? I voted for President Bush because he has the courage of his convictions. I don't expect him to throw two or three qualified people overboard to "get a deal done". I'd rather see him lose all his appointments and throw this mess back to the electorate than have him accept the "compromise" you endorse. And, I expect much of the support for the Republicans feels the way I do. Acceptance of your "fair deal" is a ticket to minority status.

[Tannerone]

A fair deal?? You live in booger land if you think that is fair. The dems have said none of the pending people are qualified. That they are too mainstream or some such other drivel.

now the dems say choose any four they will be good. So if they are all bad to start with what suddenly made any four good?

Yep, the majority of American voters are stupid enough to buy this crap!

[Soul Seeker]

Brooks will never match Buckley but he does get in a few good knocks at the moderates. Glad to hear the talks are still currently collaping. Maybe a few RINO's still have a little grey matter left in their heads? At very least if they wish to protect their own hides they had better be smart enough to realize we WILL front challenges in their primaries or cast them out for a Dem. I have about had my feel of RINO's, and I used to be of opinion they had SOME value. they've convinced me otherwise.

Neither party is prepared for the quagmire and for how the public will react.

Wrong.

I am fully prepared for the hysteria of the Left and their PR organ. I am fully prepared for them to sink even lower than calling the President a Loser, Liar and Hitler. I am fully prepared for something of greater significance than the Boxer rebellion. The Dems will try to torch the building to the ground if they continue losing, I suffer no delusions. They'll attempt to take our Republic with them. I also suffer no illusions that we must fight to the bloody end to defeat them permanently. Otherwise we might as will surrender to France.

[Malesherbes]

This is another instance in which the comments by Freepers are far and away more interesting than the original article.

[Semper Paratus]

If moderates dominated the Philadelphia Convention in 1776 we'd be discussing when Prime Minister Bush should again dissolve the American Parliment.