Posted by Dave on 05/24/05 at 11:12:03 am
Categories: Political Ravings

Wow...this deal is really causing some amusing things around the blogosphere. Some people like it and a lot of people hate it on both sides of the aisle. Though it looks like the consensus on the Right is that it was a bad deal, and on the left the reaction is more mixed. I don't think that anyone is perfectly content with it. This is what I said to say over at Smijer and Buck:

For one, a deal was absolutely needed in order to keep the senate moving.

But two, the deal works. Rumor has it that one of the three judges will not be approved (a gentleman's agreement, maybe?). So two of the big three get approved, and the Dems reserve the right to filibuster any supreme court nominees, which is the most important thing.

While I do not like Rogers Brown or Owen (sounds like a law firm), i would rather have them in their new positions than someone like Alberto Gonzalez as a supreme court judge.

So I think that the deal works. The most important part of this fight was the preservation of the filibuster, and that is what we got.

I do think that this is a good deal. I think that it is essential to preserve the rights of the minority party of the Senate, and thing that this deal does this. But I also think that the deal is not perfect. It leaves a lot of outs for the 14 Senators who made the deal, and allows for little accountability if one fails to follow through. But I do think that this gives hope to the partisan atmosphere in Washington and specifically in the Senate. While I am not a moderate, I feel that it is important that people vote how they believe and not how their party tells them to. It is funny to me that people get upset at the moderates who actually went by their conscience and did what they believed in. They are being called "sellouts" and "traitors" (see below) for their willingness to compromise. Gary Bauer often calls the Republican moderates (Chafee, Hagel, McCain, Voynovich, etc) RINO's - Republicans in Name Only. But let’s be honest. What Mr. Bauer means is that these people do not follow the party line just because they are told to. He means that they are not willing to bow down to the Religious Right even when it goes against their principles. It means that they are unwilling to confirm an appointment to the UN (John Bolton) because they realize that he is not good for this country. So good for the moderates, who actually made something happen in the Senate. And good for this deal.

Here is the text of the deal (its a PDF document).

Here are some of the thoughts from across the spectrum:

On the "Left":

• Smijer: Doesn't like it so much...read why here.
• Ezra is happy, and says that one of the three judges promised an up-or-down vote will go down.
• Dave Pell says:

  The good news is for the Senate and the country. The disappointing news is all related to Frist's 2008 presidential ambitions.

• Bull Moose celebrates the good news.
• Matthew Yglesias is not enthusiastic about the deal.
• Talk Left is upset, calling it the "worst" and "a sellout", and has this to say:

  We don't have a "Republic" tonight. We have a total Republican regime. Welcome to the Theocracy.

• Senator Feingold:

  This is not a good deal for the U.S. Senate or for the American people. Democrats should have stood together firmly against the bullying tactics of the Republican leadership abusing their power as they control both houses of Congress and the White House. Confirming unacceptable judicial nominations is simply a green light for the Bush administration to send more nominees who lack the judicial temperament or record to serve in these lifetime positions. I value the many traditions of the Senate, including the tradition of bipartisanship to forge consensus. I do not, however, value threatening to disregard an important Senate tradition, like occasional unlimited debate, when necessary. I respect all my colleagues very much who thought to end this playground squabble over judges, but I am disappointed in this deal.

• Senator Reid says it is a "victory for democracy":

  There is good news for every American in this agreement. The so-called “nuclear option” is off the table. This is a significant victory for our country, for democracy, and for all Americans. Checks and balances in our government have been preserved.

• Over at Pandagon, Jesse says that "everyone hates it", but the "Democrats win."

On the "Right":

• John Mark Reynolds has a "wounded heart" and feels betrayed.
• Dobson is angry:

  This Senate agreement represents a complete bailout and betrayal by a cabal of Republicans and a great victory for united Democrats. ... We share the disappointment, outrage and sense of abandonment felt by millions of conservative Americans who helped put Republicans in power last November. I am certain that these voters will remember both Democrats and Republicans who betrayed their trust.

• Gary Bauer thinks it is a "travesty":

  This is a sad day for our nation. ... Under this agreement it is now more likely that radical social change will continue to be forced on the American people by liberal courts committed to same sex marriage, abortion on demand and hostility to religious expression. The Republicans who lent their names to this travesty have undercut their President as well as millions of their most loyal voters. Shame on them all.

• At Powerline, Paul thinks it is "very bad", John says it is a "hideous deal", and Scott is singing sad songs.
• Hugh Hewitt is not happy either:

  It is impossible to say whether this is a "terrible" deal, a "bad" deal, or a very, very marginally "ok" deal, but it surely is not a good deal. Not one dime more for the NRSC from me unless and until the Supreme Court nominee gets confirmed, and no other filibusters develop. I won't spend money on a caucus supporting organization when the caucus can't deliver a majority.

8 comments | Permalink