Here's the Deal (Why Senate Filibuster Deal Is VICTORY For Conservatives)

American Spectator ^ | May 25, 2005 | The Prowler

[PJ-Comix]

"There is no way this agreement that breaks Democratic obstruction can be spun any way other than as a victory for Republicans and the Bush Administration," said a Republican Senate leadership aide late Monday night, regarding the agreement reached by 14 senators to avert a showdown vote on the so-called nuclear option that would have ended Democratic filibustering of Bush judicial nominees.

The parameters of the deal insure that six of eight obstructed Bush nominees to the federal judiciary will receive an up or down confirmation vote in the Senate. The three most opposed Bush nominees to the court, Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor, will not have their nominations blocked any longer; also, three other Bush nominees will eventually receive an up or down confirmation vote as well; the only two nominees who still may be filibustered are Michigan judge Henry Saad and William Myers.

Also as part of the compromise, the Democrat moderates promise to prevent any future filibuster of Bush appeals court and Supreme Court nominees. While Democrats were able to have their "extraordinary circumstances" clause inserted in the deal, no one anticipates that such a situation will arise, assuming Democrats keep their promise. And it appears that a number of promises were being tossed around the negotiation room on Monday afternoon.

Several Republican senators involved in negotiations swore that not only will the six Bush nominees be given an up or down vote, but that Democrats in the room were aware that Republicans involved in the negotiations had agreed to vote cloture on Myers as well, and that Democratic negotiators had agreed that such a move could take place, thus also allowing Myers an up or down vote in the Senate. "Assuming that our guys hold themselves to that promise," says another Republican staffer working on the Judiciary committee, "then we're looking at a clean sweep for confirmations."

That said, Republican Judiciary Committee staffers said it would have been difficult to clear Saad for confirmation, regardless of the Democrats' unethical behavior in his case. Democratic Judiciary Committee staff and Senate Democratic leadership coordinated an attack against Saad by providing and then sending Sen. Harry Reid a memo detailing uncorroborated raw interview notes from Saad's confidential FBI background check.

"Saad has served on the bench in Michigan, he has been a public figure for years, he has had close associations with several Senate and House members from the state of Michigan," says a Washington lobbyist who has met with Saad on occasion. "This is an honorable man whose nomination was badly damaged by Democrats. Any future nominee should be aware of what the Democrats will do to destroy a good conservative."

If there are any potential losers in this deal, it is the moderate Republicans who have put their reputations on the line with not only their Republican colleagues, but also conservative voters. "If Myers doesn't get a vote, if a reasonable Supreme Court nominee does not receive a vote, or has his or her nomination blocked, then those moderate Republicans should be held accountable by not only the caucus but their constituents," said the Republican Judiciary staffer.


HOW TRUE TO THEIR word Democrats will be may become apparent in about a month, when Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist is expected to announce his retirement. Already in Washington rumors are swirling that current Attorney General Alberto Gonzales may be under serious consideration for the empty slot left vacant after one of the sitting justices is elevated to fill Rehnquist's role.. "You look at what he hasn't done in his few months at Justice," says a former White House staffer, "and it makes you think he's really been looking ahead and trying to keep as clear from controversy as he can."

Gonzales has managed to sidestep taking a position on the Terri Schiavo legal battle, and beyond stating his basic support for the eight judicial nominees in limbo, he has avoided being embroiled in this current debate. As well, he has made very few public appearances where anything remotely controversial could have been uttered.

"Everything points to a Gonzales nomination," says a lobbyist aware of the White House thinking on prospective judicial nominees.

One school of thought related to the threat of a constitutional "nuclear" option was that it would ensure the Bush White House an easier time in putting forward a solid conservative as the president's first nomination to the Supreme Court. But Gonzales would be unacceptable to just about every conservative group in Washington and beyond.

"I don't know of any conservative who worked to reelect this president who would be satisfied with a Gonzales nomination," says a Senate Judiciary staffer. "This president was reelected because conservatives want to see a conservative on the Court. If the president has a second opportunity, then perhaps there is room for Gonzales. But only after the president fulfills his promise to voters."

[sirchtruth]

Bush puts up in the future who is just as conservative as these three must also be considered acceptable and can't be filibustered under this agreement.

PJC, you of all people should know with the dems "Extreme Circumstances" means whatever they're ridiculous minds can come up with!

If you think that Bush and Frist are going to get all these nominees through now without dems being able to make bigger hay of it, when we had them on the ropes and could have delivered the knock out punch you've been reading way too many Dummie Funnies! ;-)

[Edit35]

When (not if) the Democrats break the deal, all seven GOP Senators who signed it should resign immediately.

In fact, that should be the criteria for the rest of the Republican Senators to even accept the deal in the first place.

[Coop]

but the SC fight is on its way, and the Dems still have their filibuster.

And the Pubbies still have their nuke option.

[Soul Seeker]

Right.

We could have had up and down votes on all with the filibuster removed, and you think this is a good deal?

1) It requires us to trust the Democrats LOL!!

2) It requires us to trust the Seven Dwarfs. ROFL

3) Every story I read about this, and every Dwarf I listen to, they all think this damn deal means something different! they signed it but they've already broken it!

4) It requires us to damn the Constitution top hell and elevate 14 to rule the Government.

This is NOT a good deal and I would suggest to that staffer WE AREN'T GOING TO WAIT TO PUNISH THEM!

[Modok]

The Republicans still have their nuke option but their d@cks been broken by the moderates. So what do they plan to do with it?

[PJ-Comix]

Not BS. Without the agreement, the RINOs would have probably voted AGAINST ending the filibuster. WITH the agreement, if the Democrats break their word, most of them will SUPPORT ending the filibuster. This deal was set up to LOOK like a victory for the Democrats but in REALITY it was a victory for the Republicans/conservatives.

[muskah]

This is a "memorandum of understanding", whatever that means. I don't think it has the weight of law or even a Senate rule. It can be renounced by any of the parties if they perceive that the spirit of the agreement has been violated.

Am I wrong??

[liberty2004]

then McCain and most of the other RINOs will beel obligated to vote to end judicial filibusters in the future.

This would happen in a world with reasonable men and those that feel shame. Unfortunately, the real world we face are fill with people who seek one and only one thing -- power over our lives. This so called compromise in NO way gives the Reps any advantage. The Demos single goal is to destroy this Republic and morph it into a Social Democracy. Reasoning and agreements mean nothing to the demos. The only way to restore this Republics greatness is if the Demos are destroyed politically and the big spending Reps reigned in.

[Psalm 73]

"And, mark my words, more judges like her will follow in the days ahead."
Bill Frist

He knows on which side of his bread is buttered.
The Rinos will pay next election - (I'm willing to use vacation time from work and travel to campaign against them, and I'm not alone).

[Guenevere]

bttt

[liberty2004]

any compromise with the Dems is a victory for them

Those few words say it exactly as it is. The Dems are laughing behind closed doors. I bet they didn't' think it would be this easy. The Constitution is essentially meaningless.

[PJ-Comix]

Here's the deal. If the "nuclear option" was put to a vote now, most of the RINO's would have voted AGAINST ending the judicial filibuster. WITH the deal, if the Democrats break their word (and this could be likely) then most of the RINOs (including McCain) will vote FOR ending the judicial filibuster.

[traderrob6]

Now that is a bogus statement if there ever was one.

[BibChr]

HE: No no no, you weren't actually raped.

SHE: But... I feel raped!

Dan

[Noachian]

And the Pubbies still have their nuke option.

Frist needs their votes to make that option work. That was "given away" when the Unholy 7 signed their deal.

[tkathy]

He may be telling a bit of the truth. Success in politics seems to entail picturing the other side as villains and your side as victims.

[Coop]

We could have had up and down votes on all with the filibuster removed, and you think this is a good deal?

And if the nuke option failed?

[Common Tator]

What a crock of SH*T. Do you believe the following?

John McCain in an effort to improve the ratings of George Bush and improve the chances of Bill Frist getting the Republican nomination, orchestrated a deal in which some of Bush's nominees would be confirmed, in exchange for some being filibustered and defeated

The deal was considered a victory for Republicans because the alternative was getting all Bush nominees confirmed.

If you want to read something by someone who thinks with his brain and not his butt, try this Column.

Thomas Sowell tells it like it is.

Lying to themselves... It's what Republicans do best.

[Coop]

So what do they plan to do with it?

Read (or re-read) Sen. Frist's statement up above.

[saveliberty]

Beldar Blog has posted a legal analysis that shows that regardless of the language that the Republicans think is in the agreement, in fact Republicans have committed to not breaking the agreement unless they believe that the Democrats have broken it. Furthermore, the language is so loose that no matter what the Dems do, they haven't broken the agreement.

He says Senator Ted will have these guys for lunch if they break it, waving around the document that they signed.

Read here for the details, but it's a compelling piece.

http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2005/05/liveblogging_th.html

I think that all seven of these Republicans failed strategy, negotiating and management 101. How can these people even imagine any career advancement if they have demonstrated so overwhelmingly the fundamental inability to find good counsel and to drive a hard bargain? Why not just bend over and stop the pretence?