Deal reached on the Filibuster/ CNN

[Ksec]

details not provided yet

[bemildred]

1. Geee. Who could have predicted this?

:puke:

[deadparrot]

2. Gawd. We've probably backed down...again.

:(

[Renew Deal]

9. I bet it's a good deal.

The key is to keep Janice Rodgers Brown and Owens off the bench. They are unqualified nuts. The Michigan judges were retribution by Levin for mistreatment of Clinton judges from Michigan.

[deadparrot]

13. I hope you're right.

I'm not near a TV...keep me posted, all. :popcorn:

[LSparkle]

15. But I heard PO and JRB were going to be OK'd per compromise

That's why I was so hoping they wouldn't take the bait -- because the two most objectionables would have to be confirmed in order to get ANY compromise at all.

Deep breathing required until all details come out ...

[Jawja]

3. CNN has been known

to have "jumped the gun" and been wrong. You know, the "Pope has Died?"

Don't see it on MSNBC.com

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

4. Thank God,

Please let it be real.

[Ksec]

5. press conference coming up soon. /CNN

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. Any deal that maintains the capacity to filibuster is a WIN for DEMS

Period.

[Ksec]

10. agreed.

I bet they allow one of the extremists.

[LittleClarkie]

12. And a loss to Frist who kept saying "No deals"

the Religious Right will have him for dinner if it is perceived he backed down, regardless of the political reality that he will have gotten all he could get. I think the RR would rather he went down fighting than to back down and allow any compromise at all.

[vickie]

26. This is a huge defeat for Frist. It is doubly embarrasing because

McCain is announcing it. Limbaugh may have to return to rehab once he gets wind of this! He was really pushing this. The Dems are the big winners here!

[jmcon007]

29. what good is the "capacity" to fillibuster?

As long as we let the traitorous asshole in the Whitehouse pick and choose the judges he wants, what the hell good is maintaining the "capacity" to fillibuster? Are we really this stupid as a party?

[DemocracyInaction]

7. See Breaking News----apparently it's coming across Fox, etc. too

I just saw it on CNN with Joe John's reporting but don't have details...ran here. Lieberman will be talking. Anyway, it's true. Now stay tuned to see what the details are. This means that Frist and scumbag Bush blinked. They want their agenda to get through and were afraid they would be fucked if they fucked the Dems. We won ...we really did.

[Horse with no Name]

16. Why is the DINO Lieberman giving the press conference?

Why not one of the real dems?

[Pithy Cherub]

17. No, please no joementum...

Pleeeeaaaase!:cry:

[TahitiNut]

8. Liberals can drop their pants, bend over, and grab their ankles.

Joe "Love the Man" Lieberman says he's happy. :eyes:

[Renew Deal]

11. lol

Where's Matcom when you need him?

[Jawja]

14. NOW MSNBC.com has it on their site.

The DEMS better NOT have caved!!! :grr:

Betcha Fristie didn't have the votes.

[spooky3]

18. Landrieu reportedly said they were on phone all weekend; Warner shown

no one's speaking yet

[Mr.Green93]

19. We Won

the pugs backed down. We have them by the balls now.

[bettyellen]

20. gang of twelve takes over the senate......

frist has lost all his power.
so says tweety, hmmm.

[Renew Deal]

21. That's the point.

:toast:

[bettyellen]

24. hey, you!

:hi:

[DemocracyInaction]

22. If that's what Tweety says, then it's not good for Frist n/t

[bettyellen]

25. well, i liked hearing it.....

[suffragette]

23. from msnbc.com

WASHINGTON - Centrists from both parties reached a compromise Monday night to avoid a showdown on President Bush’s stalled judicial nominees and the Senate’s own filibuster rules, officials from both parties said.

These officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the agreement would clear the way for yes or no votes on some of Bush’s nominees but make no guarantee.

Under the agreement, Democrats would pledge not to filibuster any of Bush’s future appeals court or Supreme Court nominees except in “extraordinary circumstances.”

For their part, Republicans agreed not to support an attempt to strip Democrats of their right to block votes.


Obviously, not anonymous anymore.

Here's the link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7957374/

edit: added link

[dbonds]

27. Isn't this very similar to the deal Harry Reid put forth a while ago?

[suffragette]

28. it sure is

Everytime, I click it to refresh, I'm getting a new paragraph, so they must be typing and putting it on the site as details are coming in.

[elperromagico]

30. Most likely scenario: Frist didn't have the votes.

That's my take on it, anyway. Why else would he compromise?

[dweller]

31. so why give in?

why didn't the Dems hold the line?

dp

[elperromagico]

32. How in the hell should I know?

I'm not the minority leader.

[dweller]

34. sorry, had you mistaken there...

so you had a take on it, from Frist pov...

ok.

dp

[elperromagico]

35. I see it as an attempt on Frist's part to save face.

Frist saw the nuclear option - and the Democratic-led shutdown of the Senate that would surely follow - as a plus for the Republicans. They (Frist, Rove, and the whole bloody lot) were probably thinking back to how the Republican shutdowns of a decade past helped Clinton.

The Republicans were eager for the Democrats to shut down the government; then they could go into the midterms and say "These Democrats are trying to stop the Senate from doing the work of the American people."

But he didn't have the votes. So, rather than lose on a straight vote, he went to a compromise.

Could there be further tricks up the GOP sleeve? Of course. But I think that Frist is trying to save face.

[Dulcinea]

33. That's what I think too.

Not enough votes & he had to look like he was saving face.