The agreement allows the Repubs to define extraordinary circumstances for themselves. It doesn't allow RATs to define it for everyone.
The text doesn't define it for anyone, true. Don't be so naive, though. We all know that, to an unfortunately high percentage of Americans, the liberal media will define "extraordinary circumstances."
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.
I do not have a glass-half-empty, glass-half-full, glass submerged in water, glass struck by lightning or glass anything else point of view. I have simply analyzed the situation and given my predictions. Now I will grant that having Brown, Owen, and Prior confirmed (wasn't it too late to say "without any fuss"?) was nice. However, that does not have anything to do with the problems that could arise.
So help me out here - - what did the rats get out of this again?
The Democrats got an "agreement" from the Republicans that they can twist into a promise not to use the "Constitutional Option." Furthermore, they have not restricted themselves with the "extraordiinary circumstances" clause as any filibuster at all implies "extraordinary circumstances."
I guess I fail to see how the "rats were trapped."