"In light of the spirit and continuing commitments made in this agreement, we commit to oppose the rules changes in the 109th Congress, which we understand to be any amendment to or interpretation of the Rules of the Senate that would force a vote on a judicial nomination by means other than unanimous consent or Rule XXII."
Then it IS AS BAD AS WE FEARED. That language in the agreement means the 7 RINO senators have committed themselves to never supporting the "constitutional option" before 2007 (when the 110th Congress will begin). The only way to get past this pathetic sell-out is to enlarge the R. majority in the senate (in the 2006 elections) with real conservatives. No real progress can be achieved before 2007 at best, for the RINOs have just handed the Demagogues a whole stack of "get out of jail free" cards for the remainder of 2005 and 2006!!!! This really is hideous.....
am I not understanding something, but does it mean that the Dem signers promise not to filibuster, except when they find the case is extreme,
but that agreement isn't binding on other dem filibuster activity...or am i not understanding. Can dems not party to the deal still filibuster?
And couldn't the dems who signed claim that "this nominee is too extreme" and still get out of the deal?
Meanwhile, we have Rep senators promising to prevent the rule change no matter what
Maybe I'm stupid, but I don't see how this is a great republican victory...
The part that you quote is a distraction.
This is the poison dart:
""We believe that, under Article II, Section 2, of the United States Constitution, the word “Advice” speaks to consultation between the Senate and the President with regard to the use of the President’s power to make nominations. We encourage the Executive branch of government to consult with members of the Senate, both Democratic and Republican, prior to submitting a judicial nomination to the Senate for consideration.""