Depends, Hope so!
"Bind" HELL..., the stalwart "Gang of 14" will melt their way through previous pronouncements and SHAZAAM, agree that their "Agreement" doesn't apply to whatever nominee named by President Bush...
Define "the extreme of either side". I would guess that registering as a Republican at some point in their life would define any nominee as being extremist. Certainly such extraordinary circumstances could justify a filibuster.
We are talking about DeathoCrats here. Since when do they allow a deal, giving their word, an agreement, get in the way of their political ambitions!
Remember:
Never Underestimate The Depths To Which The Deathocrats Will Sink For Personal And Political Power!
Also remember:
Republicans Have Nothing To Fear Except Themselves!
Deal smeall, the RATS will do as they wish and the pubbies will wilt, as usual. It's happened before. Much, much, before. Surprise me, pubs, get balls.
Some bind! "Extraordinary circumstances" is whatever the hell they want to make it.
I doubt they need to worry. I don't think there is any chance of that.
Maybe, just depends on how it plays out. The real battle will be for "control" of the courts which is ridiculous to be talking about because the courts should not be so important, but none the less they are. If President Bush nominates someone the Dems vote through right away they,IMO, will feel more empowered to oppose the next candidate, surely more Conservative. Thats why I say it is important to make them play their hand now on a real honest to goodness Strict constructionist or originalist. Just my opinion
Anyone who expects the Dems to honor an agreement is crazy.
Expect the Democrats to pull a Bolton on any Conservative Supreme Court Nominee. They'll delay. They'll procrastinate. They'll get out the old playbook and pull a Bork. They'll force the Republicans to change the Senate rules to get a confirmation and kick their feet and throw a tantrum about how the Republicans have destroyed the Constitution.
It's a win-win for the Democrats. If they can delay and block a nomination, they retain marginal control of the SCOTUS. If they force the Republicans to change Senate rules, they win the propaganda war and will use this during the mid-term elections to their advantage.
The Democrats are absolutely ruthless. The Republicans act like they haven't figured out that they are in the majority.
You can't serously exspect the lefties to keep thier word, but then the Republicans can use the constitutional option again and finially get rid of the Fillibuster.
Personally I think being able to prevent a yes no vote is a clear violation of the advise and consent policy in the constitution and I know I am not the only who agrees.
LET THE GAMES BEGIN!
The answer is for the President to nominate someone who is already acknowledged by both parties to be acceptable and in the mainstream. Someone like Janice Rogers Brown.
I believe the attitude will be "we know nothing about any deal".
45 million dead and a slightly lower number injured psychologically and in some cases physically consitutes "extraordinary circumstances."
The Democrats were NEVER in a bind. The oral agreement with the Democrats is not worth the paper it is written upon.
They followed the first rule of french diplomacy, always leave an out clause. EVERYONE here on FR saw this, the democrats would just say a USSC justice is a "extraordinary" circumstance.
The democrats are not and were not ever in a bind. They will do whatever they want. The msm will help them. Both assume the public is stupid enough to let them.
Forget about the Democrats' "pulling a Bolton." Ohio's illustrious Senators can't wait to sabotage another part of the President's agenda to suck up to the liberal press.
That is why any red state dem up for reelection in 2006 should fully understand what this vote will mean to his/her chances for another term. But, don't expect integrity, honor or constitutional responsibility from a dem, they live in the sewer and will act accordingly.
Nudge nudge wink wink Mr Bush...Janice Rogers Brown, say no more.
The Democrats already have the excuses for not honoring their "no filibuster" rule prepared, and anyone who thinks they don't is too naive to live. For example, if the President fails to "consult" with the Dems prior to the nomination, that will trigger "extraordinary circumstances". If the President consults with the Dems, but fails to change his mind when they "reject" his nominee, that will trigger extraordinary circumstances (after all, the Democrats have already twisted the phrase, "advise and consent" into "filibuster and reject").