Left Wing Media Desperate

The Left Wing Media is desperate to try to turn the compromise that temporarilly delayed the Constitutional Option into something that would force GWB into proposing only moderates as judges.

LA Times reported
Senate Truce Faces Test of Bush's Next Nominations
A polarizing choice, especially for Supreme Court, could unravel the deal, both sides say. - The fate of Monday's agreement defusing the Capitol Hill confrontation over judicial nominations may now rest as much in the hands of President Bush as in those of the senators who crafted it. The dramatic deal by a bipartisan group of 14 senators produced immediate results Tuesday. The chamber voted to end a Democratic filibuster of Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla R. Owen. Her long-stalled nomination to the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals is expected to be confirmed today.

The agreement showed that Priscilla Owen and the other two were not extreme candidates, like the Dems were saying, so it sounds like they would be ideal candidates should openings appear in the Supreme Court.

Some who forged the deal expressed hope that the agreement would create momentum for compromise on other knotty issues, such as Social Security and immigration. "Watch this group when it comes to major problems that the nation faces, like Social Security," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said. "I think we have created momentum for the idea that if you constructively engage each other, the political reward is high." The group brokered a compromise in which seven Republicans agreed to oppose a Senate rule change to end the judicial filibuster and seven Democrats agreed to use the tactic against future nominees only in "extraordinary circumstances." But the agreement could prove short-lived if future judicial appointments provoke partisan conflicts similar to those that erupted over the current nominees.

TalkLeft blogger Jeralyn Merritt: blogged Republicans Think They Can Now Compromise Social Security. One day after the awful compromise on filibusters, Republicans already think they can use the same strategy to force a compromise on social security. Lindsay Graham says: "Some who forged the deal expressed hope that the agreement would create momentum for compromise on other knotty issues, such as Social Security and immigration. "Watch this group when it comes to major problems that the nation faces, like Social Security," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "I think we have created momentum for the idea that if you constructively engage each other, the political reward is high."

If Lindsey means that the 7 Dems will now support a Social Security compromise that includes personal accounts, then that would be wonderful, but if he thinks he is going to get the President to roll over on people the age of his daughters and give up the idea of personal accounts, which is the only way they will ever see Social Security, then he needs to rethink

WaPo reported An Unwelcome Compromise - Yesterday's last-minute bipartisan compromise averting a historic clash on judicial nominations was just that: A compromise. But this White House isn't keen on compromises. It hasn't had to compromise much so far.

Actually Bush made the mistake of compromising with the Dems on No Child Left Behind and Medicare Drug Benefits. I am not surprised it is leary of compromising.

And it doesn't want to compromise now. Compromise means the Senate is not following the White House script. And where that leads is anyone's guess.

Dan Balz writes in a Washington Post news analysis: "The deal brings mixed results for President Bush. It means that at least three of the nominees who have been blocked for years will make it to the appellate courts, while at least two will not.

It does not say that. It just guarantees votes on three.

Beyond that, without a total ban on judicial filibusters, as the nuclear option would have guaranteed, the president will not have such a free hand in selecting a Supreme Court nominee. He also will be under pressure from the moderates to work more cooperatively with the Senate on judicial nominations or face rebellion from at least some of them."

Janet Hook and Ronald Brownstein write in the Los Angeles Times that the agreement "is an unusual challenge to Bush and GOP leaders who until now have commanded remarkable party discipline on a wide range of issues. It throws a rare obstacle in the Republicans' steady march toward the overarching goal of the Bush presidency: to parlay the party's slim majority in the country into major changes in policy and in government institutions for years to come."

Or at least that is what they hope it means.

Peter S. Canellos writes in the Boston Globe: "Emerging from their weeks of negotiations like a long-sequestered jury, Senate moderates delivered a stunning verdict to the White House and Congress: Politicians have spent too much time rallying their bases of support and not enough time coming together in the national interest."

And by coming together they mean giving into pressure from the minority and letting it have what it wants.

Richard W. Stevenson writes in the New York Times: "President Bush won enough from the bipartisan compromise on judicial nominees on Monday night to claim a limited victory, but he now faces a series of additional tests of his political authority, with the stakes extending to the fate of his second-term agenda

David S. Broder writes in WaPo reported The Senate's Real Leader - The Monday night agreement to avert a showdown vote over judicial filibusters not only spared the Senate from a potentially ruinous clash, but also certified John McCain as the real leader of that body.

That is the biggest joke I ever heard. McCain totally shot his chance of ever becoming President.

In contrast to Majority Leader Bill Frist, who was unable to negotiate a compromise with Minority Leader Harry Reid or hold his Republicans in line to clear the way for all of President Bush's nominees to be confirmed, McCain looks like the man who achieved his objectives. If -- as many expect -- McCain and Frist find themselves rivals for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, the gap in their performance will be remembered.

Frist never had a big chance, but McCain certainly threw any chance he had away.

To be sure, McCain was only one of 14 senators -- seven from each party -- who forged an agreement to clear three of the roadblocked circuit court nominees at once, shelve two others, and reserve the option of future filibusters only for "exceptional circumstances." And the deal forged in McCain's office probably would not have been possible without the support of such Senate elders as Republican John Warner and Democrat Robert Byrd.

Brendan Nyhan blogged More McCain fetish nonsense from David Broder, dean of the "can't we all get along" wing of the press. Also, it's absurd to call McCain the "real leader" of the Senate. He's a backbencher who helped broker a paper agreement that has yet to be tested.

NYT reported Justice Choice Could Rekindle Filibuster Fight in the Senate - For all the euphoria Monday night that the political center had held, the Senate compromise in the judicial filibuster fight did not noticeably de-escalate the ultimate battle now looming: that over a potential vacancy on the Supreme Court. In fact, a new debate erupted almost immediately over the meaning of the agreement reached by seven Democrats and seven Republicans, which sought to preserve the right to judicial filibusters but restrict their use to "extraordinary circumstances." Republicans and their allies said the agreement made it much harder for Democrats to filibuster a Supreme Court nominee - particularly on the basis of the candidate's judicial philosophy. After all, they argued, the accord explicitly cleared three appellate court nominees - all established conservatives - for floor votes. Democrats disagreed. "There's nothing in anything that was done last night that prevents us from filibustering somebody that's extreme, whether it's on the district court, on a circuit court or the Supreme Court," said Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader. Leading Democrats and their allies were highlighting another part of the agreement: what they asserted was a clear signal to President Bush that he needed to engage in "true consultation and cooperation" with both parties before naming future court nominees, particularly to the Supreme Court. "This agreement is a shot across the bow toward the president," said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York. "Don't pick someone too extreme or you'll run into trouble."

Pick Owen or Brown. The agreement just proved they were not extreme.

Administration officials and their allies pushed back, saying the agreement would have no effect on their powers to pick a nominee. Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said the administration would consult as it always had, signaling that it did not intend to change in any substantive way its method of selecting, vetting and nominating candidates for the federal bench, including the Supreme Court.