Rules Changes. In light of the spirit and continuing commitments made in this agreement, we commit to oppose the rules changes in the 109th Congress, which we understand to be any amendment to or interpretation of the Rules of the Senate that would force a vote on a judicial nomination by means other than unanimous consent or Rule XXII.
The introduction makes it explicit that the commitment following it is conditional upon both the "spirit" and the "continuing commitments". These provide both a subjective condition and an objective condition.
As to your second question, why did Graham stumble when trying to explain what he wrote? First, I heard the "interview" and it was more of an intergation and a venting by Hannity so the atmosphere was not conducive for good dialog. Second, Hannity as you are doing are starting your questions on a wrong premise. When that happens its hard for the 'expert" to find common ground in which to explain things.
I've already said what I think about "spirit". What are these Continuing Commitments, other than the no filibuster except in extraordinary circumstances contained in II-A?