Can anyone address this-and still call it a victory?

[CWebster]

The filibuster is dead

Edited on Tue May-24-05 01:37 PM by Internut
The Democratic senators in the group agreed that they would only support filibusters of "extreme" candidates. But, in order for the agreement to hold, the Republican senators in the group have to agree with the Democratic senators that the candidate is, in fact, "extreme". But - if these 7 Republicans agree that the candidate is "extreme", they would not vote for him/her, so the filibuster is not needed anyway. Conclusion: the Democrats hold no cards at all.

On the other hand, if the Republican senators in the group think the candidate is not "extreme", they either veto the filibuster or open up the "nuclear" option again. They hold ALL the cards.

Net effect: same thing as before, except now, instead of Democrats having the right to decide to filibuster, the seven Republican senators have the veto power over it.

[BlueEyedSon]

1. It merely delayed the inevitable showdown....nt

[dajoki]

4. that's all it did

from today's WPhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/23/AR2005052301904.html?referrer=email

[MADem]

16. And now, WE CHOOSE the time and place

...and with the right circumstances, we can make the GOP look like thugs in the process.

The moderate cabal of 14 is just starting to realize their power. They need to conclave a bit, and see what they can accomplish outside the far right - far left spheres of influence.

At this point, half a loaf is better than none.

[CWebster]

23. I see

they confirmed all the nominees--but these few extreme cases and now they won't use the nuclear option and we won't filibuster.

Yahoo! What did that accomplish?

Sounds like we are falling for all this bi-partisan posturing.

[BlueEyedSon]

70. Nonsense, the underdog never choses the time & place for the showdown

[MADem]

77. We have to weigh each nominee

...and decide when the pain is worth it, or if we can accomplish the goal by other means. Remember, part and parcel of this agreement is advice and consent PRIOR to the forwarding of any future nominees to committee. If a sufficient minority of the cabal of 14 raise a big enough stink, those names will never make it to the Hill in a formal action. The executive branch has been, in effect, hobbled, if only slightly.

Gotta crawl before you can walk, gotta walk before you can run.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. Hey, reality check - we NEVER held any cards

The fact that we got them to compromise without any good reason to is a damn big victory. Just look at how apoplectic the right wing is today and tell me we didn't score something.

[CWebster]

3. read it again:

"Net effect: same thing as before, except now, instead of Democrats having the right to decide to filibuster, the seven Republican senators have the veto power over it."

We lost ground.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

5. You say this as if they didn't have that power before.

Reid is still going to call filibusters - he's said that repeatedly. It's up to the 14 that signed the agreement to make their own decisions. And quite frankly, they always had that power anyway - they just made it public which way they were leaning on it.

[gkhouston]

6. now, Vash, stop being rational...

don't you know we're double-dog doooooomed? :-)

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

9. I know, how ridiculous of me!

:sarcasm:

[CWebster]

7. No, there are terms to the "compromise".

All I am asking is--

Is the above the terms?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

8. You're missing my point completely.

Those seven Republicans always had the power to determine whether or not we could use the filibuster.

Say they don't compromise at all and just vote for Frist's nuclear option. Game over. By agreeing to withold that vote, they're HANDING us their power and telling us not to abuse it.

Now do you see why we gained SOMETHING with this? No one ever said it was a lot in and of itself. The Republican infighting and the fact that we scored any compromise at all is the larger part of the victory.

[CWebster]

11. But there is still no compromise

because the definition of "extreme" has to pass their muster. And obviously the small minority the Dems sought to filibuster as extreme--as part of the compromise, don't get filibustered now. The others they compromised on were rumored as unlikely to get the votes anyway.

Now how is that a compromise--since the result is the same as the nuclear option except now the Right doesn't have to operate under the burden of using the nuclear option?

They are telling us not to abuse their power--is that what you said? Man oh man.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

13. No, they still do.

Again, Reid has said he is going to pursue filibusters. It's not a leadership agreement. The 14 who signed the agreement have to decide if they're going to uphold it or not.

[dbonds]

37. How would you define extreme then?

Serious question. Also, everyone forgets there is an admonishment to the president to ask for congressional advise before submitting candidates. If the president fails this they are more likely to be considered extreme.

[CWebster]

44. The ones we were asked to give a pass too?

They get them in by hook or by crook.

Meanwhile we cheer that they will not use the nuclear option if we will not filibuster!

LOL!

[dbonds]

52. The truth is without this deal all of them would have gotten in anyway.

And we would have lost the right to filibuster. We would have retaliated with shutting the senate down and Rove would have a field day with spinning that where no dem would ever be elected again.

So take you pick, go down to our death fighting, or a compromise where both sides get a little and lose a little. And the psychological damage to the other side is a lot more than our damage, they no longer think that all republicans are lock step - some may actually be politicians again.

[CWebster]

65. I bet it turns out like this:

The Repugs agree not to nuke and thereby preserve the filibuster for their future as well, but in the meantime, the Centrists agree not to filibuster except "extreme" cases. The Repugs won't find any picks (as demonstrated by the few out of the 200 already confirmed)meeting that criteria and the Centrists will allow them all to pass without challenge.

[dbonds]

68. So what you are saying is

that centrist in our side broke ranks and made a deal to sell out our beliefs. The freepers are saying the same thing about their side. I think you are failing to step outside the battle and look at the war. What you are missing is what would have happenned without the deal. Explain to me how you think the fight would have went down in a way we could have won anything else. Take it past the point where we shutdown the senate to what the Rove reaction would have been.

[CWebster]

71. But the freepers want absolute power

And since the Center has been compromised and triangulated further Right, all the Democrats want is to hang on to a thread of their relevance--without being totally marginalized.

It isn't the same--comparing those who demand absolute power to those only trying to stand up for their rights.

[dbonds]

80. I do know where your fears are coming from.

I am not a centrist. I am about as left as you can go. I share your fear of what the bushes will do, of what the republican party has become, of the constant lies and tricks. I like you would really love to see a show down and beat them once and for all. But it really was not going to happen with this. We were set up by Bush. He re-nominated these judges just so this would happen and Frist would use the nuclear option. This would have opened the door to him pushing through some very far right wing wing (extreme) supreme court judges.

What happened is a few republicans broke ranks, said they did not like where this plot was going, it was not worth tearing up our senate over. Harry Reid had put forth this deal a few weeks ago, they took some dems into a conference and got the an agreement to avoid doing away with the filibuster. In return they wanted us to not use the filibuster unless we really needed it. And we let 3 of the 5 judges get a vote. When the supreme court is at stake this is not a bad deal. If either side breaks the deal then we are back to where we were Monday. We didn't just freely give them 3 judges, all 5 would have been up for a vote anyway after Frist went nuclear.

And the best part, the republicans are in fighting over this. This was a long term plan of bushco that fell apart. They are not happy.

[bvar22]

12. REID has been undercut by the DLC.

Reid didn't broker this deal, the DLC did.

The ONLY thing REID could do was to call it a Victory and move on.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

14. That's the part everyone misses.

This isn't a leadership agreement. No one is truly happy and the 14 Senators seized all power for themselves in this.

[CWebster]

ahh yes, here we go.

:-)

Who made them boss?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

18. Unfortunately, they did.

Or their constituents did, if you want to get technical about it. Nothing anyone could do to stop that. They could pull this on each and every issue if they so chose.

[dbonds]

56. This is almost exactly the same deal Reid proposed a couple

weeks ago. It is not a loss for his power.

[MADem]

17. That is not true, the "extraordinary circumstances" clause applies

...to the Senators as INDIVIDUALS, not as a group -- there is no 'voting' on it. If they are sensible, they will consult, but there is no requirement for all of them to agree.

[CWebster]

20. Okay..so we are back where we started

except...they said we won't use the nuclear option if you don't filibuster.



But, why is it such a victory?

Oh, because Reid said we will use the filibuster after all?

[MADem]

26. Because it made the GOP look like thuggish assholes

It made the right and the fundies shaking mad, it made the wingers look like petulant, whining children, and the media is covering it OUR WAY. The actual result is not as important as the PERCEPTION that has been created. They are bullies, we are thinkers who have the best interests of the country at heart.

Look, this is not rocket science. We NEED a filibuster if and when a liberal or moderate Supreme Court justice dies. or leaves due to ill health. Not for Rhenquist, one conservative is as bad as another--no sense wasting our shot there. The lower courts matter, but not as much as the Supremes--the Supremes can change our lives for decades upon decades to come.

We need to be able to FORCE Chimp to send a moderate, vetted by both sides as per the agreement, to the table, should the time come.

And if he reneges, he looks like a highhanded shithead to the public.

They've been painted into a corner, with power they cannot use without looking like bullies. It isn't perfect, but it is more important than anyone seems to appreciate.

[CWebster]

28. Right

but didn't they just bypass all that? Didn't the Right still get their way without resorting to the nuclear option that might cost them politically?

I just can't see how this is spun into a win for us since they can deny filibuster rights at any future point.

[MADem]

40. And then those SEVEN GOP Senators have to go back and take

...orders from that pantywaist PissyFrist. When now, they have a good measure of power and control--they have the ability to set a MODERATE agenda. Why would they give up their new found power?

Everyone wants to lead, this is their shot--all they have to do is play ball with seven like-minded Dems, and they OWN the place.

If we start seeing some serious leadership in the Senate, maybe we will start seeing successful Presidential candidates coming from the Senate once again. The last weak governor hasn't done very well by us.

[MADem]

66. Why would Warner, et al, who are sick to death of Freshman

PissyFrist, a newbie who hasn't done the work, yet is LEADER/Chimp lapdog, want to go back to taking orders from that catkilling toad? The GOP 7 have made the decision, along with a group of moderate, like minded Dems, to go for a THIRD WAY. They are going to keep the power, and work amongst themselves.

It's very Clintonian, when you think about it...triangulation of the highest order...

[CWebster]

72. they are still taking marching orders from Frist

but they are shifting the image away from the abuse of power charge.

Now the Democrats triangulating with the antichrist-

What is it to gain the world and lose your soul?

[MADem]

75. It ain't a game for the fainthearted

And if our side can't play hardball,we may as well roll over, play dead, and obey.

And I disagree with your assessment, but we'll see how it plays out.

[Internut]

21. Yes there is.

The only way this agreement works is if they act as a group. If just a couple of Republican senators out of the seven decide that some nominee does not qualify as "extraoridinary circumstance" and the Democrats' filibuster is not justified, out comes the "nuclear option" again.

[CWebster]

25. So now the Dems do not even have the threat

of the filibuster?

Man. The Dems are toasting their own castration? I find this unbelievable.

Internut, I hope you don't mind that I used your post--but it cut through everything and I didn't want it overlooked.

[Internut]

31. Sure - no problem

It is natural that people try to claim this as a victory, no one likes to lose. It is dangerous to delude ourselves, though. We have done this long enough.

[MADem]

46. No, 14 moderates have taken over and will play a huge role

...in setting the agenda. If they work together, refuse to undercut each other, and parlay amongst themselves, they can do whatever they want, so long as they stick together, and give and take.

PissyFrist has been de-balled. This is why the far right is so MAD. 14 Senators ganged up and took his toys away.

Power is fun, the 14 may get used to it. And in that mini-body, it is a fifty-fifty split, which is better than what we have in the Senate as a whole.

[gkhouston]

58. and that mini-body's influence may grow

over time, we may see a lot of former Fristians getting up their nerve and breaking away to rejoin the center and that is why the far right is apoplectic about the compromise -- and why Reid's smile doesn't seem forced.

[MADem]

64. BINGO--that is it exactly. A new power base! n/t

[gkhouston]

67. oh, but not just a NEW power base.

a power base that is bipartisan, and that might actually give a rat's ass about the Constitution. That's gotta be pretty :scared: for blivet**.

[CWebster]

73. No the pugs are still marching in lockstep

They are addressing potential image problems around abuse of power charges.

They are playing you if you think otherwise.

[MADem]

36. Go reread the agreement.

"EACH SIGNATORY MUST USE HIS OR HER OWN JUDGMENT in determining whether such circumstances exist."

There is NO REQUIREMENT or understanding that they act as a group. They would be smart to do that, to retain their power and control, but they do not HAVE to--and when everyone has something to lose, they are going to come to the table and work it out in genuine good faith and collegiality. In fact, the way to totally fuck the PissyFristers is to have someone on the GOP side raise the objection to a nominee--then, the GOP is given the appearance of eating their own if they try to nuke the debate.

What that section means is "don't waste your shot--you may not get many." Consultation will surely occur, because they are developing a new power base, but if they all hang together, they can OWN the place. And power is a cool thing. They know it...and with any luck, they will start to like it.

[Internut]

41. You don't get it, do you -

they ONLY have power as a group. As soon as they splinter, even just a couple of them, the power is gone. So when you say there is no REQUIREMENT that they act as a group - sure there is, if they want to retain the power to block either the filibuster or the "nuclear" option.

[MADem]

49. Why would they splinter? The GOP mavericks would get screwed

...far worse than the Dems. They need to grind Frist into the mud, because they know he is a dangerous asshole...and that is what they are going to do. Why do you think PissyFrist is shaking with anger? He knows he has been screwed. His power rested on whipping the rest of the GOP into shape, and seven of them have said they have had enough of his far right shit.

[Internut]

74. Two of the seven already said they would have voted for

the "nuclear" option. The agreement basically tells Democrats "do not make us vote for the "nuclear" option. Do not filibuster, or else." And the Democrats caved.

[MADem]

76. Once they see the benefits that they, personally, accrue

...by being affiliated with this cabal, they may not be so quick to head that way. And hey, they have constituencies so they need to talk tough...it is real easy to "woulda" when they didn't actually DO it. It's kinda like Rush Limbaugh, who said he "woulda" gone to Nam had it not been for the massive, weeping pimple on his butt!*

*As an aside, and totally unrelated to the issue at hand, the Army during Vietnam had a corrective surgery program that provided medical care for substandard accessions--if you had bad teeth, screwed up sinuses, or piloneadal cysts, like Rush, they would swear you in, send you to hospital, fix you up, and then send your ass (newly healed) to boot camp...but it was a VOLUNTEER program, and Rush didn't volunteer....

[Internut]

78. There is an old Jewish saying about

some people:

"You piss on him, and he will say it's raining".

Think about it.

[MADem]

79. WE are never going to see this the same way

I have some hope, you don't. We will just have to see how it plays out. I see opportunity, you see the shaft. Perspective is everything!

[MADem]

24. No, you have it TOTALLY WRONG

There is no veto anywhere in the accord.

Read the agreement: http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/05/05/TheDeal.pdf

Specifically PART 2, SECTION A, in re: Special Circumstances: ...EACH SIGNATORY MUST USE HIS OR HER OWN JUDGMENT in determining whether such circumstances exist.

That ain't groupthink, that is INDIVIDUAL assessment of the situation. It is a damn good deal for the minority party, especially considering how nutty the right has gotten.

[CWebster]

27. So, the Dems agreed to let their filibuster right to be held hostage

by a group of Republicans?

What about the others who didn't sign on--are they bound by it as well?

[MADem]

53. Nope, but you can bet the seven Dems will act as "delegates"

...to the rest of the minority party, as the GOP 7 will act as delegates to the GOP wing.

This is more about Frist's shitty leadership and thuggish behavior -- and his role as the Chimp's strongarm man in the Senate -- than anything else. Power has been wrested from Frist, and now rests with the 14. If they hold the line, they set the agenda. And there isn't a damn thing PissyFrist can do about it.

[CWebster]

59. That depends on whether

all those extreme picks get a free pass.

We will see.

[GumboYaYa]

10. Frist can only go to the well so many times....

If the Repukes start to threaten the nuclear option every time they don't get their way, they will appear petulant in the eyes of most voters. In politics, you only get a few bites at the apple before an issue become stale.

The dems did just about as well as could be expected given the minority status.

The real answer is to start winning some elections.

[unfrigginreal]

15. Respectfully disagree

I think that you have it exactly backward. The public was with us on this fight. The pukes were being perceived as petulant. Now, the MSM will play it as the Dems breaking the compromise when Dems have to fillibuster a Bush nominee. You know as well as I do that Bush will now use this opportunity to nominate someone to the right of Satan.

[bvar22]

19. Which is EXACTLY where the Republicans were yesterday.

They were losing in the Polls. Frist was looking like a wacko prancing around the floor and threatening Nuclear Options. Dobson was on TV all the fucking time making the republicans look like extremists. The public was beginning to see these guys as petulant bullies that were trying to run over the opposition. The PUBLIC was SEEING this and the POLLS were showing it.

NOW, the Republicans are the Great Moderate Compromisers who didn't have to give up ANY of their extreme agenda. They are still on the way to totalarian Lock Step One Party Rule, only NOW the Media can say they are Moderate Compromisers willing to work with the Democrats (sellouts) for the Good of the Country all in time for campaign 2006.:puke:

The Democrats should have Held the Line. They were winning.
The DLC fucked us again.
Thanks, Lieberman.

[Writer]

22. LOL!

Nothing satisfies the young, angry, and uncompromising. Not even an explanation.

[CWebster]

33. Still waiting

:hi:

[Writer]

35. ...

LOL!

[Generator]

29. IF this is true

If the stupid ass Democrats need permission of ANY Republicans, then I only have one thing to say:

The Democrats are total fools. I have had it. I'd rather clean my fridge than care anymore.

How fucking stupid do you have to be? They are fools and being played as such. I can't believe they need PERMISSION.

[Internut]

34. What do you mean "IF" this is true?

Read the compromise agreement. It is there in black and white.

[demwing]

30. I already did the FIRST time you asked

here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1803985&mesg_id=1806289

But here it is again:

Not all Republicans are alike, obviously. Now Frist takes a back seat. Say what you will about McCain, but I'd rather have him guarding the filibuster than Frist.

The filibuster stands. It still takes a 60 seat majority to lockdown the filibuster. If nothing else, the compromise brings delay, and delay is a sharp tool for the Democrats. It will be much harder for Frist to build the momentum he previously held.

For the Republicans to put together another anti-filibuster majority, they'll have to start up the process all over again. Compromise wins over stubborness.

Now WE strike while the iron is hot. Time and momentum are on our side.

We must take back the Senate. All of our efforts in 2006 must be concentrated on the Senate.

And now we have a great tool. I can see and hear the commmercial now:

"The GOP leadership wanted to turn the Senate into a rubber stamp for the Whitehouse. The Democratic party fought to ensure the separation of powers, provided for in our constitution. In that fight, only 7 brave Republicans joined the Democrats in their battle.

"We must not let any one party consolidate our three branches of government into one. This November, remember the Senators that fought for the rights of the people over the desires of a political party. Vote for balance in the US Senate. Vote for Democracy. Vote Democratic."

[CWebster]

39. If however the Repugs

still get whatever they want-

The point is moot.

[demwing]

45. Look, the Republicans hold a majority!

They will pretty much get whatever they want ANYWAY.

Now, we have public opinion on our side, the filibuster lives, and Frist and Bush get the smackdown.

What did THEY gain, that they did not already have?

[CWebster]

50. ahh, their extreme judges?

Nuclear option or no nuclear option. Because if we agree not to fillibuster, they don't need it.

This is so silly--I can't believe it.

[demwing]

63. We didn't agree to NOT filibuster.

We agreed to be selective about the filibuster. That's not actually a bad thing. The filibuster is not supposed to be used williy-nilly.

We just agreed to follow rules that were already in place. Ouch! LOL!

[cornermouse]

32. The repubs got their extremist judges through, no fuss, no muss.

And we lost.

[dbonds]

38. No they didn't.

You are misunderstanding the comprimise. We agreed to a VOTE on 3 of them. The other 2 are out. And there is absolutley no guarantee that the 3 will go through.

[CWebster]

43. They had the votes already for the three?

That was the point of the filibuster?

The 2 they scammed us for the bargaining chip already were iffy.

[dbonds]

47. According to some Republicans speaking on the floor last night,

at least one of them will not get full republican votes. We have 7 now that may be thinking independently of reichwing group think. We do not loose anything but 3 possible judgeships for striking this deal, what we maintain is infinitely more important, the right to filibuster supreme court judges that fundies may want to have put in.

[CWebster]

54. Except that they can reintroduce the nuclear option

at anytime.

But you say, we win, we win--even if they still get their picks which was the point of filibuster.

and around we go.

[dbonds]

62. I'm not saying we win we win.

I'm saying it is a comprimise. But think for a sec, not about us vs. them - but what about the future of the country. The alternative was to have filibuster removed forever and a major consolidation of power that in the next 2 years would do lasting damage. We made a deal that at worst postpones that, at best preserves the minority voice.

[RaulGroom]

42. The Republicans Wanted

To do something very unpopular to consolidate their power in an off-year. Now they will have to do it in a dangerous election year.

The timing is everything.

[demwing]

48. Exactly!

There is no way that this will fly again next year. They needed it NOW.

The Democrats now look like David forcing Goliath into a compromise. And, I might add, a compromise that benefits the people of this country, not one party over another!

Look at the big picture here gang! We scored!

[Writer]

51. Yippee! The big picture rocks!

Yes it was a compromise, but yet again, WE are the party OUT OF POWER. We forced them to compromise. That deserves a bottle of champagne!

Writer.

[CWebster]

57. What was their loss? nt

[demwing]

60. Wrong Question! Ask "What was their GAIN?"

They hold the majority, they caved to the compromise.

What did they gain?

[Writer]

61. 7 of their party members.

That's huge.

And the ability to push through future appointments without threat of a filibuster.

That's huger.

Internecine warfare between Repub centrists and right-wingers.

That's hugest!

Rove is a chump.

[CWebster]

55. But they don't have to do it now

and they will still get their way.

[Vinca]

69. I agree. The current judicial nominees are about as extreme as it gets.

Are they expecting someone to nominate Charlie Manson?? You wait. The Supremes will have an opening, the Republicans will put up someone who wants to overturn Roe, Democrats will want to filibuster and next thing you know they're talking "nuke-q-ler" option again.