"Trap"? I fail to see how this was a "trap" for the Democrats. The agreement says that the Democrats will not fillibuster unless under "extraordinary" circumstances--which they are free to define. On the other hand, the Republicans in the Gang of 14 have agreed not to accede to the rule change. If the Democrats do filibuster and the Republicans change the rules, the Democrats will start the mantra that the Republicans had been unfaithful to the agreement (please remember, truth is irrelevant to these people). In short, the Democrats have made no promise, but they have gotten something they can twist into a promise from the Republicans promising not to break the filibuster with a rule change. So I completely disagree with you when you say that Now, thanks to the "extraordinary circumstances" language of "the deal", the rats are completely boxed in,. Rather, I see it the opposite way. The "extraordinary circumstances" language of "the deal" gives the Democrats all to much latitude. There is absolutley nothing in the deal which comes anywhere close to defining "extraordinary circumstances". At the end of the day, I wonder how Republicans could have been so stupid as to agree to this travesty.
For the reasons above, I do not believe that Frist will attempt the "Constitutional Option" even in the case of a filibuster. On the other hand, I am not sure that the Democrats will try a filibuster. The Democrats may find that, even if they are not barred from filibustering, that the Republicans will be able to raise enough pressure on them from their constituencies (by making the argument that Alito's nomination is not "extraordinary") that they will not be able to mantain the filibuster and their seats.
Another remark to those who have been pushing the "Constitutional/Nuclear Option": be careful what you wish for. Yes, this rule may help in the here and now, but remember a couple of things: the rules are anything but permanent and the Democrats could readily double-cross you with another rule change, and secondly that there may very well come the day when someone like Clinton comes along and hands us a nominee we truly need to filibuster, but no longer have the tools to do it (nor any way of attaining them before another midterm election).
Executive Summary: The "compromise" is lowsy for Republicans without significant harm done to the Democrats. Yet, despite this, it remains up in the air as to whether or not the Democrats will filibuster and what will happen if they do.
The agreement allows the Repubs to define extraordinary circumstances for themselves. It doesn't allow RATs to define it for everyone.
Thanks for your kind reply, but it appears that you have a "glass half empty" attitude about the deal whereas I have a "glass half full" attitude. What I do know for sure is that Brown, Owen, and Prior were confirmed without a fuss, and Frist can still go nuclear anytime he wants, only now with a more reliable vote-count thanks to the deal. So help me out here - - what did the rats get out of this again?