NYT: A Modest Victory for Bush, but More Tests Lie Ahead

[DeepModem Mom]

A Modest Victory for Bush, but More Tests Lie Ahead
By RICHARD W. STEVENSON
Published: May 24, 2005


WASHINGTON, May 23 - President Bush won enough from the bipartisan compromise on judicial nominees on Monday night to claim a limited victory, but he now faces a series of additional tests of his political authority, with the stakes extending to the fate of his second-term agenda.

On the plus side for Mr. Bush, the bipartisan agreement among 14 centrist senators expressly called for up-or-down votes on three of his nominees to federal appeals court seats, all but ensuring their confirmations, though it left in limbo the fate of two more.

By explicitly exempting from the agreement two additional judges opposed by Democrats, it did not meet Mr. Bush's oft-stated demand that all his nominees get a vote, and it did not foreclose the possibility that Democrats could block an eventual nominee to the Supreme Court, a matter of intense concern to the White House. The split-the-baby outcome, moreover, did little to resolve a rolling series of challenges to Mr. Bush that in coming days and weeks could do much to set the tone for his second four years in office.

On Tuesday, the House is to vote on a bill that would defy Mr. Bush and lift restrictions on federal financing of stem-cell research, legislation that stands a good chance of passing.

In the days and weeks that follow, Congress will confront a proposed trade agreement with Central America, the confirmation of Mr. Bush's embattled choice as to be ambassador to the United Nations, an effort to rein in government spending and the first legislative steps toward overhauling Social Security - all topics on which Mr. Bush faces excruciatingly close votes in Congress, where Democrats are generally united against him and his own party is splintering around the edges....


(NOTE -- At the end of the article, a "veteran Republican with close ties to the WH" is quoted: "The only reason he's still up there in the 40's is that the Democrats are really brain dead and have nothing positive to put on the table....What you see is that he's increasingly turning overseas to demonstrate leadership because he's having so much trouble in the molasses of the Beltway.")


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/24/politics/24assess.html?oref=login

[YEM]

1. WTF? Victory for Bush? I don't see it that way.

And neither does the hard right. What the hell is happening to the NYT?

[DeepModem Mom]

2. This writer appears to have been spun, although the bulk of the article...

is centered on Bush's troubles.

[DoYouEverWonder]

5. The headlines and the story

are usually written by two different people. The NYTs is shameless in the use of this type of spin. They do it all the time.

[Demeter]

4. Most Likely NYT Is Hedging Their Bets

Nobody dare take a stand anymore, not with Patriot Act and the Wacko boycotters and extraordinary rendition.

[GOTV]

12. They get 3 judges previously blocked...

... and the "extraordinary circumstances" language allows the nuclear option to be held over Dems heads to get the rest of the judges.

[emulatorloo]

3. Note to "Veteran Republican" - it is repugs who are 'brain dead' and 'have

nothing positive.' The only reason Bush is still 'up there' in the 40s is because of his Karen Hughes Crafted Personality ('Sure things are bad, but i JUST LIKE HIM!!!!) and the SORELY MISTAKEN notion that he is Tough-on-terror.

[lancdem]

14. I agree

I do think, though, that if we do develop an agenda of our own, we'll really kick ass. Until then, we can't exploit the Repukes' weaknesses to the fullest.

[DemocracyInaction]

6. About the quote at the end---------

What the ignorant Republican fails to realize is that the Dems cannot put forth their idea on an issue until Bush brings it forth on the table. Like they've said on SS, first Bush has to bring it up and then they can give their plans for "solving" the problem.

[meti57b]

7. of course bush declared victory. That's the way the game is played.

They're not going to call press conference and say "We lost out in this. We no longer have as much power."

[rodeodance]

8. drats--ol' cheney is in the mix also--

..To some degree, the confluence of disparate issues is coincidence. But in another way it is the logical consequence of Mr. Bush's decision to expend his political capital, as he put it immediately after his re-election, to push through initiatives that he suggested voters had endorsed by putting him back in the White House.

From his push to add investment accounts to Social Security to his nomination of John R. Bolton to be the United States envoy to the United Nations to his opposition to pork barrel spending in the Senate's highway construction bill, Mr. Bush has been assertive and even provocative in probing the limits of his own power.

In recognition of the stakes, Mr. Bush has been stepping up his courtship of Congress members, holding nine meetings over the last month in the Cabinet Room and the White House residence, with two more meetings scheduled this week. Vice President Dick Cheney has been taking a more active role in dealing with Congress on domestic issues. The White House message machine has been relentlessly seeking to put the onus on Congress not to block Mr. Bush's initiatives, in effect putting the responsibility on Democrats to move toward Mr. Bush rather than the other way around, and pre-emptively casting them as obstructionist.

"This is a critical period," said Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman. "The American people expect Washington to act and work to find solutions to our most pressing priorities.".

[LightningFlash]

10. So now Republicans are against your priorities Mr. Bush?

"toward Mr. Bush rather than the other way around, and pre-emptively casting them as obstructionist."

So the Republicans themselves are now cast as obstructionist. Mr. Lockstep Dick Cheney views the dissenting republicans as obstructionist.

What's next? Anyone demanding your complete explanation on the illegal war is a liberal, Bush?

The democrats don't have to lockstep to anything anymore, its obvious your power is all smoke and mirrors. Clearly Cheney knows you were elected by fraud and is actively trying to throw water on the situation. There's no reasoning with the Americans anymore, they are tired of your sordid evil cannibalizing on legislation and trying to make your secret cult be the focus of the government.

I see things in plain gray, your policies have grown the majority of the Radical Right to turn against you. In time the consequences will seal their fate, and implode the party.

For now, election fraud is just beginning to hit deafening orchestra.

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1284

[robcon]

9. I think the big victory for Bush is...

that he can nominate Owen, Brown or Power to the Supreme Court, and the "extraordinary circumstances" language will probably prevent a filibuster of any of these, since they've nominated and approved for the appeals courts.

[sendero]

11. There are no end..

.... to the back doors that the Reps can use to get their SC pick nominated.

This "compromise" does absolutely NOTHING to change that.

[Zorra]

13. This is a huge victory for Bush. Priscilla Owen is in.

That is all the PNAC really needed. Everything else is gravy.

Constitutional "interpretation" now translates into Constitutional irrelevance, and we are going to lose all our rights and liberties because the Constitution will now be interpreted however Bush wants it to be interpreted.

[IChing]

15. A Modest Victory for Bush, but Challenging Tests Lie Ahead NYTIMES

By RICHARD W. STEVENSON
Published: May 24, 2005
WASHINGTON, May 23 - President Bush won enough from the bipartisan compromise on judicial nominees on Monday night to claim a limited victory, but he now faces a series of additional tests of his political authority, with the stakes extending to the fate of his second-term agenda.

On the plus side for Mr. Bush, the bipartisan agreement among 14 centrist senators expressly called for up-or-down votes on three of his nominees to federal appeals court seats, all but ensuring their confirmations, though it left in limbo the fate of two more.

By explicitly exempting from the agreement two additional judges opposed by Democrats, it did not meet Mr. Bush's oft-stated demand that all his nominees get a vote, and it did not foreclose the possibility that Democrats could block an eventual nominee to the Supreme Court, a matter of intense concern to the White House. The split-the-baby outcome, moreover, did little to resolve a rolling series of challenges to Mr. Bush that in coming days and weeks could do much to set the tone for his second four years in office.


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/24/politics/24assess.html?ex=1274587200&en=2d5106cdd9452646&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[Beetwasher]

16. What a Profoundly Wretched Headline FUCK THE NYT!!!!!!!

Motherfucking, bootlicking cocksuckers. They smell like cat piss.

[Nancy Waterman]

18. I just heard a few people interviewed on CNN

They seemed ot agree it was far more problematic for the GOP and a moderate victory for the Dems. They also said Frist is a big loser in this.

[DeepModem Mom]

19. Tell us how you really feel, Beet!

:)

[Supersedeas]

17. the Compromise was everything Reid had in the proposal Frist rejected

Yet, it is a Bush victory??????