Nathan Newman wrote:
>This deal was the triumph of the more moderate Republicans who end up in
the
>drivers seat. Eliminating the filibuster would have made them irrelevent,
>so this deal basically lets them control which nominees get a vote and
which
>ones don't.
-But it means that the three horrors are going to get confirmed, and -almost certainly that Bush will get his way on SC nominations. How's -this good for moderate Republicans?
Actually, preserving the filibuster for Bush Supreme Court nominees is what the moderate Dems probably feel THEY got out of the deal. The whole point of invoking the "nuclear option" now was to separate the procedural issue from the specific merits of whatever rightwing wacko Bush proposes for the Supreme Court.
With this deal, the abolition of the nuclear option AND the merits of the specific candidate will be discussed at the same time. And the moderate Republicans will have the excuse to kill Bush's nominee by refusing to eliminate the filibuster. They can vote YES on the candidate and keep their own rightwing voters at bay in their primaries, while voting NO on eliminating the filibuster and thus kill any really extreme Bush nominee.
Nathan Newman