Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Harry's lap dog?
Does Frist deserve to be blamed for this? I don't know, it is hard to corral a bunch of independent minded Senotors. I do know that the Democrats will make us regret this. In fact, they know a good deal when they see one. But why deal when you are about to win? That is the problem I have. The Democrats have been unreasonable and malicious. They have sought to tarnish the reputation of good nominees and they are getting the best deal they could hope for which is to keep the filibuster as an option for when the next Supreme Court nomination comes along. I feel for Frist because I think he wanted to change the rules. All this does is make him look weak.
Here's my quick reaction. The big problem I see is basing a compromise agreement the hard fact promise of not nuking the filibuster for a squishy fact of what is the definition of extreme. In that sense, the Dem's come out favorably, particularly since anyone of them or their cattle-herding fringe groups scream "Extremist!" at the drop of a tinfoil hat.
So, much depends on whether the Republicans bother to frame the agreement to offset this imbalance. If Owens, Brown and Pryor are getting a vote and, better, if they all get a thumbs up, then Repubs need to note the confirmation of mainstream nominees -- nominees that did not violate this agreement. This forces the Dem's to let the standard be moved for measuring what the definition of "extreme" is in the future. (Really, were there any on the list more 'extreme' to the Dems than Brown or Pryor?)
Anyway, this might allow for easier sailing for those remaining and, again for any of the current crop which might be on list for potential SC associate justice slots.
You know what? I don't want to chill! Grrrrr