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."

[Coop]

You just love that bold function and allcaps.

[chronic_loser]

Could we get just a LITTLE sanity on this issue?

1) The nuke option is still there, and is even MORE potent now, as the dems have to go on line to defend "extraordinary" circumstances.
2) The judges will all be confirmed. The ones that were really really offensive to the libs were the ones specifically exempted from the filibuster.
3) The senate should have an option of a real filibuster (not these halfa*sed ones, but where the senate stays in session 24/7) to obstruct some leftist when the other guys get in power.
4) The "moderate" crowd of GOP senators have been IDed for some time. Conservatives increasingly mount primary challenges to these unreliables, and they DO get the message. Arlen Specter comes to mind. If we can defeat them in primaries with good people, I am all for it. Howling curses on them with no plan is just silly. Personally, I am more concerned with reducing the power of the fed than punishing Olympia Snowe for heresy.
5) The fed is leviathan. It is big, unweildy, cumbersome, and difficult to change. Just as it is idiotic to expect an aircraft carrier to turn on a dime, it is stupid to expect conservative changes to be anything but incremental. Consistent, forceful pressure (which sometimes includes removing them in primaries) works. Maniacally shrieking that you won't give another damn dime to the f*ing hypocrites till they shape up just shows how naive some freepers are.

The hysterical element of freepers so TIRESOME sometimes. Any deviation in strategy for getting these judges confirmed or in strategy for restoring balance of power, and the hysterical pitchfork brigade gets busy lighting up the torches.

Taking your marbles and going home is a dumb dumb dumb way to play this game. Politics is what it is, and the first rule is not to expect many people to be principled leaders. If you get 'em, thank God for them and support them tooth and nail. Given the moral state of the USA, how do you expect us to elect a senate/congress full of selfless leaders???? Talk about naive, sheesh!

I rather think some freepers are simply dyspeptic and enjoy the electronic soapbox to bellow out their displeasure on whatever is the issue du jour. Mylanta would be cheaper, and might allow them to channel that zeal into something that makes a difference. If you demand all or nothing you will get nothing EVERY time.

PS. If you don't like what I said but are reduced to attacking a moniker ("chronic_loser"), please note that I did consider logging on as "flame_bait_for_the_neurally_impaired" and respond accordingly.

[Coop]

Inquiring minds would like to know...why is this NOT Lucy and the football...????

While PJ's answering that, some of us would like to know why it is. Nothing has changed tactically, except the GOP now has three judges getting confirmed.

Strategically I'm concerned with the GOP angering its base, but that's a larger issue than just this particular deal (which does serve as a powerful catalyst, however).

[Gondring]

No way Bush would ever leave our borders unprotected against illegal aliens...the true Republican base would let the RNC feel their wrath.

oh, wait...

[Big Giant Head]

Here's what I read in the article:

said a Republican Senate leadership aide late

Also as part of the compromise, the Democrat moderates promise

assuming Democrats keep their promise.

"Assuming that our guys hold themselves to that promise," says another Republican staffer working on the Judiciary committee

says a Washington lobbyist

said the Republican Judiciary staffer.

HOW TRUE TO THEIR word Democrats will be may become apparent in about a month

says a former White House staffer

"Everything points to a Gonzales nomination," says a lobbyist

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.

No names, just anonymous sources. Does this give me confidence? Not exactly. If this were an AP report with no known sources, we'd all be picking it apart.

[Samurai_Jack]

no more star wars for you!

[Coop]

The hysterical element of freepers [gets] so TIRESOME sometimes. Any deviation in strategy for getting these judges confirmed or in strategy for restoring balance of power, and the hysterical pitchfork brigade gets busy lighting up the torches.

Well said.

[PJ-Comix]

Compromising when you don't have to is cowardice.

The votes weren't there. Too many RINOs. HOWEVER, IF a vote is needed to end the judicial filibuster in the future, the votes WILL be there. Trouble is most people want VICTORY right away. Better to "look" like you lost a battle when in fact you WON the war. I keep thinking about Merv Griffin declaring he won against Trump when he actually lost.

[leprechaun9]

This article makes the big mistake of believing that the Al-Jazeera 7 RINOs are honest, ethical elected officials. The Leader McLame is one of the Charles Keating backed members of the Bob and Billie Club (formerly U.S. Senate)!

[samtheman]

And the Pubbies still have their nuke option.

Exactly. The filibuster is still on the table, but so is the anti-filibuster.

And not only that, but we get five judges right now, three of whom the RATS swore would never serve.

And furthermore, the DUmmies actually think they won this one. I'm glad there's a lot of dissent in the ranks here and among other conservatives (Townhall, etc), thinking this is a win for the RATS. Let the RATS think they've won. Their misapprehension of reality screws them up every time, and this time their erroneous calculations of victory spell Error with a capital E.

The fact is, there are not just the 7 RINOs to consider. There are 14 faithless party members. All we need is 2 of them. Just 2 out of 14. One or both of them just might be a faithless RAT. And why would a RAT be faithless? For the same reason a RINO might surprise us all and grow a spine: fear of the conservative trend in voting back home.

So is the filibuster still on the table? Of course it is. And I say: bring it on.

Because now, as a result of this deal, there are 14 wavering nitwits who fear for their silly butts so much that at least 2 of them will bolt and vote to go nuclear. Please remember, everybody, these 14 have absolutely no principles at all. They will vote for their own self-interest and nothing else. Can you honestly say that you are sure that of those 14, we won't pick up 2 who fear the filibuster will backfire on them? Can you honestly say you'd rather be in the same mathematical position that the RATS are in right now?

No, my fellow freepers, this is victory. And the greatest thing about this victory just might be that it's spelled with a lower-case v.

[Coop]

No names, just anonymous sources.

I gave a source. Bill Frist himself. And Lindsay Graham is on record saying he'll vote for the nuke option if the Dems break the deal. I can't make you agree with or believe them, but you've got sources.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

But here's the deal. IF the Democrats break their word (a good assumption) then McCain and most of the other RINOs will beel obligated to vote to end judicial filibusters in the future.

The RINOs were never going to vote nuclear. This "agreement" is concocted purely for their cover. Wake up.

[PJ-Comix]

I actually think a lot of Freepers need to watch more holdem poker on the Travel Channel. Winning isn't just a matter of winning a hand with few chips on the table. Winning is when you get up from the table at the end of the session with your pockets full of chips.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

SHEESH! This is started to remind me of the time when Merv Griffin claimed victory in the purchase of some resort hotel from Donald Trump. It wasn't until months later that Griffin found out that he actually got snookered by Trump. Or should I say, "trumped" by Trump.

At least Griffin ended up with a nice hotel. And he got taken by a master.

So the RINOs probably wouldn't have voted to end the fillibuster without the deal? So what? I think that some of them would not have been able to vote against stopping the fillibusters, if it wasn't for this cute little figleaf covenent of their's.

Again, how is it a victory for conservatives? These people they were fillibustering weren't exactly Michael Savage and Jerry Falwell.

With a 55-45 GOP advantage in the Senate, is it too much to ask that when a GOP President sends up nominees that are found qualified by the fricken ABA, that they receive the courtesy of a vote on the Senate floor?

Neville Chamberlain comes back with the names of three nominees, and we should rejoice?

It's a victory because the next time they try to filibuster a nominee....yada yada yada. So, who the heck is going to be willing to accept a nomination?

It's a defeat. Maybe we come out ahead in the long run. Maybe the Donks really will overreach that badly, and the seven will return to the fold. Maybe a couple of those Donks who were with the RINO seven do have honor. We'll see.

I know one thing. All this talk about the big tent the last five years has basically got us three nominees. And that's it. Good to know that RINOS will always be with us...at least every six years when it's time for us to break out the checkbooks for their re-election campaigns.

[Samurai_Jack]

If you demand all or nothing you will get nothing EVERY time.

TRU DAT!

[traderrob6]

I agree with you, and Frist is by no means rolling over on this

http://exposingtheleft.blogspot.com/2005/05/senate-compromise-on-judicial.html

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

And Lindsay Graham is on record saying he'll vote for the nuke option if the Dems break the deal.

Linsay Graham and John McCain may be the first gay marriage in the history of the Senate.

[Apercu]

Chicken Littles...the sky is not falling - the nose of the camel is in the tent. The real battle is ahead for Chief Justice replacement (Scalia best candidate) and 1 or 2 Supreme Court slots & the "nuclear" option remains.

[PJ-Comix]

I'm looking forward with pleasure a few months from now when the DUmmies realize they got SNOOKERED on this deal by Bush who they consider to be stupid.

[southernnorthcarolina]

This was a WIN? I wonder what a LOSS would look like.