Defeat for extremes on left and right (conservative newspaper applauds compromise)

Sen. John Warner and 13 centrist colleagues who yanked the U.S. Senate back from the edge of catastrophe deserve the thanks of a grateful nation.

Not only did the senators allow their beloved institution to preserve its long-standing traditions. But by patiently navigating a thorny dispute over use of the filibuster to derail judicial nominations, they showed that compromise and concern for the greater good are not dead arts.

In a political era that applauds stridency and treats negotiation as weakness, the bipartisan group of seven Republicans and seven Democrats revive hope that statesmanship can still, at times, trump politics.

Because the fight was more about anticipated vacancies on the U.S. Supreme Court than a handful of stalled federal appeals courts nominations, those angling for a showdown aren't happy. Under the deal, a senator can still filibuster a judicial nomination in "extraordinary circumstances."

But several Bush nominees viewed as anathema to some Democrats now stand to be quickly confirmed. And, in the long run, the nation will be better served if a hand brake remains on lifetime appointments to the federal bench. It takes 60 votes to stop a filibuster, rather than the usual 51 needed for an up-or-down confirmation.

Presidents who move far outside the mainstream to select judicial nominees will do so at their own risk.

Virginia's junior senator, George Allen, joined those lamenting the compromise. A presidential hopeful, Allen does himself no harm by that position with many of the GOP stalwarts who will pick the party's 2008 nominee. Allen reflects the political culture of brinkmanship in which he came of age.

But showdowns over principles so dearly held that violating them threatens government operations, as Democrats promised, are rarely in the common good. Hopefully, if Allen remains in the Senate for many years, he will grow in appreciation of that fact.

That John Warner needs no instruction shows why three decades of Senate service, when he comes up for re-election in 2008, isn't long enough.

However, the 'Ratic gracelessness and display of moral arrogance will disarm the Republican "moderates" and drive them back into the GOP caucus, handing the leadership of the situation to the conservatives.

I wish I was as optimistic as you are. I just don't see it happening. The rats gracelessness and moral decadence and arrogance has been on display for everyone to see for quite some time and the pubbie "moderates" haven't changed yet. I don't see what would make them change in the future.

On another note, I think this whole mess could easily be avoided in the future if we would just REPEAL THE 17TH AMENDMENT and have the state legislatures appoint senators as the Constitution originally called for. As it is now the senate is basically the same as the House of Representatives only they serve for 6 years rather than 2. Get rid of the 17th, put the power back into the hands of the states, and watch republican senators actually act like republican senators. Of course I know that will never happen.

It looks like some weak-kneed spineless RINO Republicans and Democrats conspired to compromise away three critical clauses of our Constitution that require only a simple majority vote in the senate unless specified otherwise (50 votes plus the Vice President in the current case) to "advise and consent" to presidential judicial appointments, and to change the Senate rules. The compromised clauses of our Constitution are given below.

Instead of amending the Constitution, let's hold the Senator's feet to the fire to get them to follow the long standing provisions of the existing Constitution. These senators should be targeted for defeat in an ongoing publicity campaign until the next time they are up for re-election. Remember, the socialist Democrats campaign every day of every year. Conservatives need to do the same just to level the playing field.

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, regarding the powers of the President:

Clause 2: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

Article I, Section 5, Clause 2:

Clause 2: Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

Article I, Section 3, Clause 4:

Clause 4: The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

- Michael D. Robbins, FraudFactor.com

Support Redistricting Reform For Better Government !

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.