WP: Breakthrough Pact Unlikely To End Battle

[Pirate Smile]

Breakthrough Pact Unlikely To End Battle

By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 24, 2005; Page A01

In a dramatic break with the ideological warfare that has defined the politics of Washington for much of the past decade, the center held firm in the Senate last night, as a bipartisan group of senators unexpectedly signed a compromise that yanked the institution back from a historic clash over judicial nominations.

The negotiators had spent a week laboring to find the language to define their agreement. But with the Senate just hours away from pulling the trigger on the "nuclear option," the seven Republicans and seven Democrats managed to defy predictions. They found both the language to make a deal possible and the courage to risk the wrath of partisans on both sides who were pushing for an all-or-nothing outcome.

-snip-
The fragile compromise, stitched together in the office of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) just as the Senate began an all-night session, will not necessarily end the battle over President Bush's judicial nominees. At best the group produced a cease-fire in the judicial wars, one that will produce up-or-down votes, and thus likely confirmation, on three of Bush's most controversial appellate court nominees. That means that two others still face filibusters and probably never will be confirmed.

After that, no one can say with certainty whether the deal will stick, particularly if there is a Supreme Court nomination in the near future, as many anticipate. The 14 senators who joined hands last night said theirs is an agreement based on faith and goodwill, but there is no certainty or even commitment that they will continue to operate as a group once past the current nominees in question.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/23/AR2005052301904.html

[proud patriot]

1. I agree with the "kicked the can down the road" analogy

:hi:

[RobertSeattle]

2. And to paraphrase Yoda...

Victory! Victory you say? DUers, not victory. The shroud of the dark side has fallen, begun the judge war has.

:evilgrin:

[DeepModem Mom]

3. kick

[AnnInLa]

4. Just heard Pat Buchanan on Imus saying

if Frist is smart, he will IGNORE the compromise, tell the Senate that the pres deserves an up or down vote on ALL of his nominees....that will force McCain to either vote with the Dems or back-up Frist. If McCain votes with the pukes, he is ceding control of the Senate to Frist (said now McCain is in control of Senate due to the compromise), if McCain upholds the compromise he has shot himself in the foot when the puke nomination for pres comes. Said if Frist does not force the issue today or tomorrow, then Frist is dead in the water for the puke nomination.

I don't think the theo-cons would have supported McCain for pres anyway, so what does McCain have to lose? McCain is much more socially moderate, of course, pissing off the fundies.

Buchanan went on to say that the filibuster controversy was really about the Supreme Court. He analyzed the make-up of the court, and said bush needs to have 3 nominees approved to ensure that the court stops controlling the social agenda of this country. (That's what makes this compromise so impt to us libs, IMHO, the filibuster is preserved for the SCOTUS nominees.)

The implications of this is that rove/cheney may not be able to control the 2008 pres nomination process...if puke mods take over the party, that screws up the long-range plans of rove/cheney to have absolute control of this country.

I am wondering if Frist will take up Buchanan's challenge?

[nolabels]

6. Mongrels dogs fighting over a couple scraps and a bone

These people are really sick :puke:

[lovuian]

5. Oh your right this is war!!! AND TAKE NO pRISONERS!!!

this is one battle not won by the right!!!

But its not over there is three more years too go!!!

[bemildred]

7. This is a "non-deal" deal, like the non-explanation explanations we get.

Nothing is changed except some guys signed a piece of paper
that has no legal force.

Edit: there is nothing in this "agreement" that I can see that
prevents some other senator from filibustering any judge they
don't like, including the three "allowed" ones.