PRESIDENT COULD END UP THE BIG WINNER (Senate judge deal)

NY POST ^ | May 24, 2005 | DEBORAH ORIN Analysis

[Liz]

The real winner in the Senate judge deal could be President Bush — because it opens the way for Congress to finally start getting things done.

Right after the deal was unveiled, Democrats were visibly relieved while Republican conservatives were livid, fuming about a "cave" by centrists led by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). Talk radio and conservative bloggers went wild.

Why? Because the odds were that if push came to shove, Republicans would have had the votes to kill all filibusters of judicial nominees and humiliate Democratic leaders.

No wonder Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) was cheering, even though the deal guarantees confirmation of jurists Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owens and William Pryor — all of whom he's blasted as unacceptable extremists.

"Armageddon has been averted, and thank God," said Schumer, well aware that Democrats could have come off much worse.

That's why conservative Republican activists in the key states of Iowa and New Hampshire are already vowing revenge against McCain if he runs for president in 2008. But the White House put on a positive spin — after all, Bush will now get three of his top-priority appeals court judges confirmed.

And, if the Senate had come to what Democrats called "the nuclear option" — a vote to strip them of filibuster power over judges — all hope for cooperation in the Senate would be over.

Now the success of the judge deal could encourage centrist Democrats — perhaps Sens. Joe Lieberman (Conn.) and Ben Nelson (Neb.) — to start working toward compromise on other issues, as Bush has been hoping.

A Democratic staffer predicted one result will be the confirmation of Bush's controversial nominee for U.N. ambassador, John Bolton "No one is going to want to filibuster him now," the staffer conceded.

[Bahbah]

Thanks, I will go back and read it.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

We shall see... but, I am not convinced...... Only time will tell.
I always hold the view to never compromise with the Democrats, because they would never give us the same consideration.

[Kuksool]

Hmm. You have a most interesting interpretation of last night's deal. I will refrain from drawing my own conclusions until there is a vacancy on the US Supreme Court. Now is not the time in breakdown into hysteria. Although, we should tell those 7 squishies of what we think of them.

[Cboldt]

When I woke up and heard this I thought OH MY Goodness, they folded! They CAVED..

It is the DEMs who caved. They always could, by voting to vote on the nomination. THey needed this smoke and mirors to distract from the fact that they caved.

All of the nominees are either on the Senate Calendar, or in the Judiciary Committee. They aren't going to "poof" disappear. The people will see how these nominations are handled. So will the WH ;-)

[prairiebreeze]

Pardon if I'm not understanding correctly, but I thought the "deal" was that some of the nominees would be sacrificed. In fact, another article this morning says two more will be passed over.

How does this help our cause?

[Cboldt]

As George Allen just pointed out, Reid got what he wanted.

"Cover for caving."

[Prophet in the wilderness]

I call them the Dirty Dozen + 2

[Timeout]

Here's how I see McCain's motives:

He's running for prez in 08. He's decided to try to win without social conservatives. Splitting the GOP is to his advantage.

His "base" will be GOP "moderates"...and he will do all he can to convince more and more republicans that that's a good thing to be. Add to that mix the independents and a good portion of rat voters---the ones who don't pay much attention to politics until late in the prez election years.

It's a volatile mix and McCain went a long way in appealing to them yesterday. Given the cover he will get from the media, he's a dangerous loose cannon on the GOP deck. I wouldn't even TRY to predict his next move. But I can be certain of one thing. He WILL NOT be taking the normal route of appealing to conservatives in the primary, then moving to the center in the general election. He's trying to build a new coalition that doesn't include social conservatives.

To me, the biggest danger is if he pulls a Perot, running as an independent if he doesn't get the nomination. The only thing is...I can't decide whether he would attract more GOP moderates or Dems who've become disillusioned with their party.

[Mo1]

A Democratic staffer predicted one result will be the confirmation of Bush's controversial nominee for U.N. ambassador, John Bolton "No one is going to want to filibuster him now," the staffer conceded.

I'll believe when I see it

[Cboldt]

We get every judge, regardless of the language.

We get votes on them. Or the Constitutional principle will resurface when the DEMs refuse to vote on one.

Some of the nominees are apt to be rejected, and if the rejection is "to keep the deal we made," instead of on the merits of the nominee, well whoa, Nellie - that is mighty unprincipled. The people will see it.

[PGalt]

Good thread bump!

[Liz]

Time will tell......more important is how the Repubs finesse this, I'd say.

[demlosers]

Red State.org has an excellent post outlining why the Republicans are the winners with this deal.

Check it out. It makes a lot of sense to me.

I've withheld comment to this point on this matter. I agree the Repubs did win the battle, however, they did have a total victory at hand if it were not for the likes of McCain.

[Cboldt]

It took a simple majority to avert the nuclear option, for now - therefore it takes a simple majority to implement it.

[Raycpa]

The rats agreement is simply the terms of a retreat. They only get what they would have gotten had they voted for cloture. They would have retained the right to filibuster another day.

Why did 7 GOP join them in giving them cover? I suppose the answers are many. Some probably want to look moderate, some may have common interests on other issues, some may not have srong conservative bases as voters.

I doubt they entered into a secret handshake because the rats would have sensed that as blood in the water and would not have caved.

[Timeout]

THey [the dems] needed this smoke and mirors to distract from the fact that they caved.

That's exactly right. Reid saw he was going to lose the nuke vote. He knew no amount of media bias would save them once the American people saw the senate taking votes on the nominees. When it became clear Frist was going to call the vote, Reid blinked.

[Gulf War One]

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS

We respect the diligent, conscientious efforts, to date, rendered to the
Senate by Majority Leader Frist and Democratic Leader Reid. This
memorandum confirms an understanding among the signatories, based upon
mutual trust and confidence, related to pending and future judicial
nominations in the 109th Congress.

This memorandum is in two parts. Part I relates to the currently
pending judicial nominees; Part II relates to subsequent individual
nominations to be made by the President and to be acted upon by the
Senate's Judiciary Committee.

We have agreed to the following:

Part I: Commitments on Pending Judicial Nominations

A. Votes for Certain Nominees. We will vote to invoke cloture
on the following judicial nominees: Janice Rogers Brown (D.C. Circuit),
William Pryor (11th Circuit), and Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit).

B. Status of Other Nominees. Signatories make no commitment to
vote for or against cloture on the following judicial nominees: William
Myers (9th Circuit) and Henry Saad (6th Circuit).

Part II: Commitments for Future Nominations

A. Future Nominations. Signatories will exercise their
responsibilities under the Advice and Consent Clause of the United
States Constitution in good faith. Nominees should only be filibustered
under extraordinary circumstances, and each signatory must use his or
her own discretion and judgment in determining whether such
circumstances exist.

B. Rules Changes. In light of the spirit and continuing
commitments made in this agreement, we commit to oppose the rules
changes in the 109th Congress, which we understand to be any amendment
to or interpretation of the Rules of the Senate that would force a vote
on a judicial nomination by means other than unanimous consent or Rule
XXII.

We believe that, under Article II, Section 2, of the United States
Constitution, the word "Advice" speaks to consultation between the
Senate and the President with regard to the use of the President's power
to make nominations. We encourage the Executive branch of government to
consult with members of the Senate, both Democratic and Republican,
prior to submitting a judicial nomination to the Senate for
consideration.

Such a return to the early practices of our government may well serve to
reduce the rancor that unfortunately accompanies the advice and consent
process in the Senate.

We firmly believe this agreement is consistent with the traditions of
the United States Senate that we as Senators seek to uphold.

Signed by:

McCain
Warner
Collins
Snowe
DeWine
Graham
Chafee

Nelson
Byrd
Lieberman
Landrieu
Pryor
Salazaar
Inouye

[Liz]

Thanks PG.......almost all of the FR Brain Trust checked in on this thread. Still waiting on a few.

[Cboldt]

Although, we should tell those 7 squishies of what we think of them.

That's part of the beauty here. The DEMs choose the time to back away from their tantrums, but now we get to see 7 GOP Senators in a more clear light.

The playout was likely the same wheter there was a deal in a press conference, or the same deal in a back room.

The Mexican standoff is taking a siesta. It will resume.

[Mo1]

Time will tell

True .. but I don't have much faith left