You are absolutely correct.
This deal is a load of cr@!` It is not compromise, but capitulation. And I say that as somebody who did agree that a certain form of compromise was acceptable. But this comrpomise treats a couple of nominees, Saad and Myers, as pawns. It makes them not people, but expendable objects. And that is unconscionable. When BOTH of those men were nominated, years ago, there was no reason to believe they would be denied up-or-down votes. Their expectations, based on 214 years of history, were that they would be afforded up or down votes. I’ve seen, first-hand, the torment that judicial nominees go through. They don’t deserve to be treated like expendable pawns. That’s why ANY agreement that failed to afford fair votes for all the already pending nominees is not a compromise but a sell-out. Now, if the deal had been fair votes for all pending nominees, PLUS filibusters only in “extraordinary circumstances” for FUTURE nominees, then anybody who is asked to have his/her name submitted would know in advance what he is getting into. Everybody would understand the rules going in, and, while not optimal (optimal is killing all filibusters), it would have been better than an attempt that fails (fail because of gutless GOP senators) to kill all filibusters. I should be rejoicing right now because Bill Pryor, the guy I’ve most championed, will get a fair vote. But my heart goes out to Saad and especially Myers — Myers, because I see no way that he would fail to get 50 votes plus Cheney if he actually was afforded a fair chance. (more…)