Get over it, we won

Already just 30 minutes after the announcement of the  "compromise" over the nuclear option I've seen bitching and moaning of how Democrats have "abandoned us" are "spineless", etc. etc. etc. What were these people expecting? A complete victory over the Rethugs even though they hold a 10 seat majority?  The mere fact that the GOP couldn't launch the nuclear option is a huge loss for them. How can I tell? Look at the reaction of their base (from the FreeRepublic.com):

I just left the GoP.

I'm done with them.

Cowards.

We've been snookered again. Picture Lucy whipping the football out from under Charlie Brown for about the millionth time.

Who would have ever thought that the GOP Senators would have folded to Democratic Demands?

I am Shocked!

The last time I was this surprised was this morning when the sun came up.

The GOP is now dead to me. Bill Frist....ah why even bother..

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bill Frist cannot control the RINO's in the Senate. The Democrats win again.

What the HELL is this???????? We don't need a deal!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am furious. I will NOT SEND ANY MORE MONEY TO THE REPUBS. We didn't NEED a deal and we don't WANT a deal!!!

I mailed my change of registration in this morning. Welcome to the growing ranks of the unaffiliated.

This is a sad day for the Republican party, and the conservative movement in this country! The Dems will likely gain in Congress in 2006 because of this kind of cowardice. What's the matter with you folks in Arizona????? Is McCain the best you can do??

It seems like Frist wouldn't have to votes to stop a potential filibuster on a SCOTUS nominee.

Underneath the chestnut tree; The Republicans sold you, and the GOP sold me.

Not another frigging dime or a minute of my time, I stay home in 06' or vote libertarian. Unfreakin believable

If this is true it is truly an outrage. The only deal is the one the crats got. Everything they wanted. We got nothing. Only thing to do now is support a third party that can hopefully pick up 10-15% of the vote and use it as leverage to bargain.

If this is true it is truly an outrage. The only deal is the one the crats got. Everything they wanted. We got nothing. Only thing to do now is support a third party that can hopefully pick up 10-15% of the vote and use it as leverage to bargain.

Republican moderate - horse sugar! What a bunch of stupid little pricks.

Go to the National Republican Senatorial Committee to voice your outrage. Below is my letter: The “Republican” senators I helped get into the majority have compromised on President Bush’s judicial nominations. I will tell every Republican I know not to contribute one thin dime to the NRSC ever again. We in the grassroots worked our tails off for this majority and McCain et al., have betrayed us, our president and his future Supreme Court nominees. I hope you realize that the NRSC will starve for funds for the foreseeable future. The 55-Senator GOP majority wasn’t worth our effort. The RINOs made a disgusting mistake taking us for granted.

Savor the moment- these seem to be few and far between. UPDATE: Remember introductory psychology- this is a simple case of the foot-in-the-door technqiue. I think we can expect even bigger favors from these 6 Republicans in the future.

•  The Nuclear Option

  wasn't ever about the nominees, it was about exciting the GOP base. The opposite effect has taken place.

  by ARingMD2B on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:09:09 PM PDT

  •  I wasn't too thrilled at first

    but seeing how strongly it's splitting the Republicans, I couldn't be happier.

    Hopefully, this along with Schiavo and the lack of a gay marriage ban will split the GOP in '06 and '08 enough to get us some hard earned gains.

    by hotshotxi on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:39:36 PM PDT

  •  I see this diary made the rec. list

    I'm about to go to a concert, so I won't be able to update the diary for several hours. Happy posting.

    by ARingMD2B on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:40:44 PM PDT

    •  What concert?

      by modchick65 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:18:45 PM PDT

      •  The Eagles

        by Earl on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:26 PM PDT

        •  I had no idea

          They were still together...

          by Goldfish on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:16:49 PM PDT

          •  Damn

            This thread's probably dead and nobody got my incredibly clever joke. Sigh.

            Get Over It...the Eagles...oh well

            by Earl on Tue May 24, 2005 at 02:15:32 AM PDT

            •  By the way,

              Loudon= Greatest Songwriter Ever

              by progressive pete on Tue May 24, 2005 at 05:39:41 AM PDT

              •  Gold star for you

                Wise and perceptive commenter

                by Earl on Tue May 24, 2005 at 10:29:33 AM PDT

      •  I'm home from college for a few days

        and I was just going to check out my old group that I was a cellist in, the Spokane Youth Symphony Orchestra. Nothing particularly exciting...

        by ARingMD2B on Tue May 24, 2005 at 10:59:55 AM PDT

  •  thanks for picking these quotes up

    Cheered me up a lot. I wasn't feeling totally sold out, but was hoping for a more favorable outcome. If the Freeps are hating it this much, it was probably just about a wash.
    

    by Kaleja on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:46:43 PM PDT

    •  Ditto

      Lord knows I don't want to go peruse their sites.  I've had enough BS at work for one day.  Any more would be toxic.

      by Semental on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:06:09 PM PDT

    •  tis not a wash

      it's a win for democracy. a loss for Frist. We don't know yet wat the total picture is. All I know is that I broke our a bottle of champaine (I hate my spelling cluelesness!!) tonight.

      by oysterface on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:09:48 PM PDT

      •  champagne n/t

        by GinnyfromWI on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:55:11 PM PDT

  •  thanks for this diary

    it's a good foil to mine, and it's quite interesting to flip between the two and read different perspectives.

    by georgia10 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:06:10 PM PDT

    •  I read this one first

      and now going to rec yours.  I like many was ambivalent to slightly disappointed in the outcome, seemed like just a delay of the inevitable.  But the spin they aren't calling spin on MSNBC coupled with these quotes in this diary, well, alright then.  I'm back to glass is half full.

      Now, for some reality from georgia10..:-)

      by Revel on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:25:11 PM PDT

      •  hehe, my new dkos nickname

        "Buzzkill"

        by georgia10 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:27:42 PM PDT

        •  The glass is half full

          and the glass is half empty both are very vocal tonight, I have raised the ire of a couple of them in another diary, by my modest, cautiously optimistic comments...lol

          by Revel on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:19:36 PM PDT

        •  I didn't like the deal

          When I heard about it. But the fact is, if they try to go nuclear after this we'll own them from here to 2008 and beyond. This is an ugly win, but it's win.

          by Goldfish on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:18:56 PM PDT

      •  It's half full when being poured into and

        it's half empty when being drunk from.
        Right now our glass just got some in it while theirs just had some spilled out.

        Ours half full, theirs half empty.

        by wegerje on Mon May 23, 2005 at 09:11:40 PM PDT

  •  And?

    How does this outcome leave the GOP base unrallied? They've been told they can't get everything they want, and when they're told that, they get mighty angry.

    My guess is that this will simply motivate them to redouble their efforts and that next time they'll be even more organized.

    Heck, the mere fact that there will be a "next time" shows how fleeting this "victory" you claim we have actually is.

    And mark my words: the Republicans to suffer won't be Frist and Dobson. It'll be the moderates. The wingnuts are gunning for them now. And if they succeed, we're fucked.

    by eugene on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:17:19 PM PDT

    •  They *are* rallied

      ...but against each other.  The extremists now go on the warpath against the moderates.  The moderates defend themselves by attacking back.  Goodbye, lockstep GOP, hello democracy!

      by RequestedUsername on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:20:31 PM PDT

      •  Primary fights

        I'm hoping the New England Repubs field some knuckle-draggers in the Primaries against Chafee and  Snowe, wreck their party and get us a shot at those two seats. I think Santorum will get beat in '06 so maybe we just increased out take on Senate seats.

        I think this helped Nelson in Nebraska, which I like -- not Nelson, but that the seat has a fighting chance to stay Dem.

        Boulanger

        by Boulanger on Tue May 24, 2005 at 07:11:58 AM PDT

    •  Extremists

      If the Republicans lose their moderates, they will never control any branch ever again. So I say let them cannibalize their moderates.

      by Bald Peanut on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:28:19 PM PDT

      •  Of course that's what

        a lot of conservatives say about the Dems, too, which is why they say Dean is bad for the party. I still like Dean as DNC chair and like how he is trying to get the DLCers to be not so GOP-lite. It remains to be seen, though, which party will lose (or gain) more by leaning on its moderates.

        by Erik the Red on Tue May 24, 2005 at 05:58:49 AM PDT

        •  True - Dean is a moderate, tho

          in terms of policy. So he's likely to foster moderates who can win as candidates.

          The only thing that makes Dean seem extremist to Repubs is that he has a spine, uses it and doesn't back down...

          I really, really like what's going on with the Dems. I would have liked for not one single prejected nominee be nominated - but the GOP took a beating in the polls for weeks, Frist is foiled, this smokescreen for now is done, and on to - Social Security! Where the more the public hears about the plan, the less they like it.

          God bless Dean, Reid, Boxer, et al.

          by jbeach on Tue May 24, 2005 at 09:35:02 AM PDT

          •  Agreed

            We can't succumb to using the right's definition of what a "left-wing extremist" is --- I mean, what they don't get is that 'liberal' and 'extremist' are not the same thing.  I mean, really.  We need to be putting some concerted effort into informing people how mainstream the Democratic party is and how far to the right the Republican theo/neocon leadership has taken theirs.

            Dean is not extreme.  He's just very committed to his principles.

            by demandcaring on Tue May 24, 2005 at 10:44:46 AM PDT

    •  Think about this

      It was the Dems all along who said they were defending the Senate. The moderate Repubs crossed over to help them. That means the Dems were right from the beginning and the Repubs who kept calling it a "constitutional option" were dead wrong.

      by Juno on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:28:41 PM PDT

      •  Remember this...

        ...the Democrats did NOT promise NEVER to filibuster Bush's appeals or SCOTUS nominees.

        They simply promised not to filbuster the nominations EXCEPT in cases of "extraordinary" circumstances.  So they left themselves an out, AND avoided the nuclear option.

        Sounds good to me!

        by Phoenix Woman on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:45:10 PM PDT

        •  Do you really think...

          ... that the Republicans will ever agree that something is "extraodinary"? This pisses off the freepers and someone like Dobson, but what did we really get? The three worst nominees that were held up will get put through. In the future, these three will become the "baseline." Tough to think of nominees that would be further right, although I suppose it could happen. IE, pretty much any right wing judge is game. And we have a filibuster right that we can't ever use, because the other side would never recognize "extraordinary" and would instantly launch the nuclear option if we tried to use it.

          And we caved in on principle when we were on the side of right (and the country agreed). Doesn't sound quite so good to me, but we'll see how it plays out. IMHO, we missed a real opportunity here.

          by cafeoz on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:24:29 PM PDT

          •  without this compromise

            Janice Rogers Brown would be headed for the Supreme Court. That isn't going to happen now and that is a big deal.

            Moreover, pay attention to the language in the deal that emphasizes the advise in advise and consent. This is a strong signal from these repubs that bush should consult prior to a nomination. In their press conference, the compromisers said that they would be talking with each other, especially if the Dems thought there were "extraordinary" circumstances.

            As a result of that, if bush were to nominate a Brown or Owen or Pryor, without consulting, I think you can expect several of these repubs to be mighty irritated.

            They've all worked their ass off for this compromise. They didn't do it for it to mean nothing. And bush can violate it by not consulting with both repubs and Dems.

            This administration will give you plenty of reason to be dispirited and angry. Let yourself enjoy a moment when we stopped their radical agenda. Because, no matter what you think, that is what has happened.  

            by kainah on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:46:07 PM PDT

          •  Extraordinary

            Here's the thing. Wargame it out. Wingnut X is nominated for the Supreme Court. All we need is 41 Senators to fillibuster him/her. So the Rethugs cry "this isn't an "extraordinary" case!" But if they make that claim, we have them right where we want them.

            "Oh yeah?" We respond: "what about [insert stubstantive causes for outrage]!" The MSM, in reporting the question of whether or not the case is "extraordinary," pretty much HAS to focus on Dem complaints, whether than on process (as in the current media coverage of the nuke option).

            Put differently: if the Rethugs try to go nuclear, they won't be able to do so on the rationale of "every nominee deserves an up or down vote"--they've just conceded that principle. It will have to be on the rationale that Wingnut X is not out of the mainstream. And that is a debate we'd love to have. Bring it on.

            It must be said though that because of this compromise Scalia is the next chief justice. No way that elevating a major sitting justice can be considered "extraordinary." Then again, since it actually would be extraordinary, the argument may be made ...

            by Ottoe on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:01:33 PM PDT

            •  Aren't SCOTUS nominations always "extra-

              ordinary circumstances" by definition?  You know, not things that happen at all, ordinarily.  Add 'extremist' if Bush doesn't line up his votes before hand -read 'advise'- and puree the Rethugs in the media spin.

              Maybe....

              by chrismorgan on Mon May 23, 2005 at 11:32:38 PM PDT

        •  These nominations weren't extraordinary? n/t

          by fritzrth on Tue May 24, 2005 at 05:22:23 AM PDT

      •  Heh

        Real fun was at the press conference when the deal was formally announced - one of the moderate Repubs, forget which one, called the destruction of filibusters the "Constitutional option", then said he opposed it because the option was bad for the Senate.

        So, the "Constitutional option" was bad for...the main creation of the Constitution.

        Then he handed over the mike to someone else real quick.

        by jbeach on Tue May 24, 2005 at 09:38:38 AM PDT

    •  I doubt it

      And mark my words: the Republicans to suffer won't be Frist and Dobson. It'll be the moderates. The wingnuts are gunning for them now. And if they succeed, we're fucked.

      The GOP won so much by appealing to mostly centrist sympathies.  Less government intrusion.  Less taxes.  Stuff that most people could nod vaguely and agree with.

      After hiding their true agenda under a bushel until they gained an "unstoppable" majority, they then whipped the sheet off their Frankenplatform and revealed an ugly, bolted-together wish list of 1920's-era thinking that completely turned off an overwhelming majority of the electorate.  Starting with Schiavo and Social Security, everything they have done since the '04 election has either directly offended the sensibilities of the middle, or will impact their bottom line in fairly short order (think about the horrible bankruptcy bill -- what a dead, stinking albatross to hang around their necks!).  Without their centrist appeals, all they've got are a bunch of raving crazies whose true aims for the rest of us are apallingly backwards.  Frist and Dobson are fucked, and all they've got to cling to now are each other.

      I keep having to remind people -- these guys are not geniuses.  Right now the GOP is acting like a bunch of fucking babies who want to take their ball and go home.  But there's nowhere to go.  This is our nation, and they have to keep playing this game, and by our rules.  It's time to remind these biatches what democracy means.

      by slippytoad on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:03:02 PM PDT

      •  Yeah, but...

        Aren't they now appearing like they are not owned by the radical UberReicht Wing?  I dunno...I think most Americans don't care enough to watch except if they see something completely out of bounds...The Rethugs were on the verge of doing just that...I think win lose or Cheney, Dems were going to win this one.  Yes, they would enable a majority vote for SCOTUS nominees...but Bush doesn't have that many left in him...only likely replacing Rehnquist and putting Scalia as Chief.  It would be nice if Scalia had to take over the administration functions, frankly.  Might have to spend less time ranting and more time socializing with the other more moderate judges....

        I think it was a draw, and when you're out numbered 55-45, that is an accomplishment, but I don't think it was a win by any stretch.

        by TexasDemocrat on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:24:10 PM PDT

        •  It's the Republican Sister Souljah moment

          and as such, a huge, huge win for them with self-described moderate voters.

          "See? We gave the finger to all those crazies that worried you at the start of '05. We're the regular folks, so thanks for voting us back in in '06."

          by Smallbottle on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:04:20 PM PDT

        •  Predicting the next SCOTUS vacancy is tricky

          Stevens (God bless him) is old enough that his every day on the court is a gift, Rehnquist is sure to be quitting at the end of this term, and O'Connor would like to retire.  Several others have had various other health problems.  As unpopular as he is, Bush has nearly four years left to his term.  My guess is that this gives him a fair chance at two or three appointments, before he is a true lame duck.

          Even if O'Connor is no liberal, she is part of the majority keeping abortion rights constitutionally protected.  So a scenario on which Buch has a chance to shift the balance is not all that unlikely.  Keeping the ability to fillibuster when it really matters seems worth a few bad appeals court justices, especially when one of them goes onto the Fifth (I think it is the fifth? The one that includes TX.) Circuit which already thinks it can overrule the Supreme Court.

          When the focus is the Supreme Court and the Right Wing tries to change the rules again, it will be more difficult than now.  So this is a win.

          by mvr on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:52:00 PM PDT

          •  I hope Ginsburg holds up too

            she, Breyer and Stevens rock!!

            by BlueEngineerInOhio on Mon May 23, 2005 at 11:05:14 PM PDT

    •  A recent convert's perspective

      ...I'm a former GOP moderate who "Migrated" during the Schiavo outrage. Allow me to offer my perspective.

      I always considered myself a "Libertarian" Republican/ Constitutional Fundamentalist, rather than a theocrat. I don't think that my viewpoint was unique, particularly among the more educated/secular Republicans (the poor, South is NOT the "traditional" Republican base (as you well know- I'm not trying to talk down to you)).  Schiavo terrified me because it demonstrated how seperate the "Libertarian-Friendly" Republican rhetoric is from the reality of their practical politics. The "Nuclear Option" is another example of the lengths that the party will go to in order to promote its own adgenda over the traditional rule of law and the protections instilled for minorities (a concern to those of us in the "My Rights Stop at the End of My Fist Camp).

      I think that the "deal" upsets the Theocrats too because, rather than viewing themselves as "Republicans" I think Dobson et. als. smugly believe that they have "bought" the Republican party, and that the Republican Party ought to be able to get them everything they want and deliver it with a smile. Like pouting toddlers, they are going to be FURIOUS that they didn't get this lollipop and looking for someone to blame.

      As others have pointed out, this leave NO ONE in the GOP happy.

      The Republicans who "crossed party lines" will upset their Theocrat base (if they have one- I've only skimmed the list, but it looked more likely to break "Libertarian" than "Theocrat" to me) but they've also taken a lot of ammo away from potential Dem challengers in the future. It's the Republicans who weren't part of the deal who are going to bleed.

      by lexlawgirl on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:03:34 PM PDT

      •  welcome over

        from one ex-moderate/libertarian republican to another. the republican party has betrayed the ideal of civil and individual liberties, and i hope my party, the democratic party, will continue to stand firm for these fundamental constitutional principles. i would be very happy to see the libertarian wing of the repiublican party win this civil war; i am not confident that they will, but i hope they do. it would be great to get back to having honest political debates again without the threat of theocracy or unrestrained autocracy.

        by wu ming on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:17:44 PM PDT

      •  Welcome

        and thanks for your perspective. This really is a win for the United States of America. I hope you see it that way, too.

        by Alna Dem on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:18:07 PM PDT

        •  Guess I ought change my sig

          for a day or two, until the next outrage!

          by Alna Dem on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:18:50 PM PDT

      •  ANOTHER moderate convert? Awww, man.

        Oh, okayyy.

        You can play.

        But you have to bring the pie for a week.

        

        by Maryscott OConnor on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:31:18 PM PDT

      •  Glad to have you

        by missmann on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:34:03 PM PDT

      •  Welcome

        and make yourself comfortable. We believe in individual rights here.

        by sidnora on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:44:46 PM PDT

      •  Hididy Ho Convertireno

        Glad to see the libertrain Republicans are waking up to what's going on. Hope to see you around :-)

        by Goldfish on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:23:57 PM PDT

      •  Good Observation

        The Republicans who "crossed party lines" will upset their Theocrat base (if they have one- I've only skimmed the list, but it looked more likely to break "Libertarian" than "Theocrat" to me) but they've also taken a lot of ammo away from potential Dem challengers in the future. It's the Republicans who weren't part of the deal who are going to bleed.

        Upon hearing the news of the agreement, my first thought was, now I have to pay attention to Mike DeWine and his challenger(s) in the future. If the Ohio Dems can't muster a decent candidate, I'll have to seriously consider whether DeWine deserves support - if a Republican has to hold the seat, I'd rather it be him than any of these other raving theocrats that are taking over Ohio.

        Very astute observation, lexlawgirl. Welcome to the neighborhood.

        by GuyFromOhio on Tue May 24, 2005 at 05:41:10 AM PDT

        •  A Dem in Texas

          I face the same problem in Texas, where the Rethugs are going to win every race for the foreseeable future.  I'm thinking of changing registration simply so I can vote for the lesser of two evils.  

          A good case in point is the coming Governor's race here.  Many establishment Rethugs are putting enormous pressure on Kay Bailey Hutchinson not to challenge Rick Perry for the spot.  Perry's approval ratings are in the 40's and Hutchinson's are high.  Perry has done an abysmal job but that doesn't matter to the establishment.  Just give Perry a pass, screw the people of Texas -- who will elect a dead armadillo if it has (R) by its name.  

          I don't like Hutchinson, but I'm hopeful that she at least would be competent.

          Boulanger

          by Boulanger on Tue May 24, 2005 at 07:29:18 AM PDT

      •  Welcome aboard

        We hope to get some sanity back in the branches soon, and then to have some sane, balanced discussions between mutually respecting outlooks, on how to make things work for all our citizens.

        by jbeach on Tue May 24, 2005 at 09:42:29 AM PDT

  •  Agree

    Also, anyone who thinks we got screwed, look at it this way: We were 10 Senators behind but came out, at worst, even.  Harry Reid is the man!

    by RequestedUsername on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:18:05 PM PDT

    •  Like Barbara,

      perhaps we ought to send Reid some token of appreiciation? Or perhaps to the entire Democratic side of the Senate?

      by Stand Strong on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:03:46 PM PDT

    •  Please, please, please

      Stop with the Harry Reid worship. I can't take it. He's doing alright. He is way far away from being "the man." We are 10 senators down in a 50-50 world. But rule changes require 67. Reid was the response to the Bush victory and was designed to be palatable to Bush voters. Well, he may be, but I don't get how it serves the rest of us.

      Now we had to cross our hears and hope-to-die never to fillibuster unless...what? The numbers should have been in our favor. This has been in the offing for months and yet the best we could do was fiddle around in the conference rooms?

      Can you fill in the rest? I'll give you a hundred bucks if you can convince me that this won't turn around and happen all over again with the coming SCOTUS nominees. Rehnquist checked into the hospital today btw. Ironic no? See you at the next nuclear launch in a month or so.

      by mrblifil on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:38:01 PM PDT

      •  Harry hung tough until seven

        Repub Senators broke ranks with the Radical Right to give us our first victory since about 1998.  Harry is the man!

        by Sam I Am on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:17:20 PM PDT

        •  He better be

          because we're all going to be going through this again sooner than later, I think.

          by mrblifil on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:39:00 PM PDT

      •  We were down ten votes

        And at worst broke even. More over, we now have a really big club to whack any Republican backstabbers if they try to renege on this deal. You seem to miss just how bad a position Frist and his brinksmen are now in. I don't think this is over, but we won round one, and are in the position of strength going into round two.

        At every turn in this debate Reid out maneuvered Frist, Hell, he ran circles around him. It got so bad that the right-wing blogs started openly complaining about it. And this isn't the only thing he's done. Making sure Bush's social scrutiny scheme was DOA was also something he played no small part in. And let's not forget that bit of political juitsu he played on the Senate Republicans during the Shrivo mess.

        Don't tell me isn't doing a good job, and don't tell me this isn't a victory when it most clearly is. Frankly, I'm not sure would you would consider a victory at this point.

        by Goldfish on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:32:07 PM PDT

        •  Ack!

          The title of my comment should read "We were six votes down"

          I saw that thing at the top of your post about being ten senators down (I'm not sure what you mean by that, we have 44+ Jeffords), and it got subliminally put into my subject line.

          by Goldfish on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:34:09 PM PDT

  •  Agree - we need to win the spin now

    I think that if we can spin it that we won, then it will look like we won.  Right now it's hard to tell.  But the best thing for us is if the Republican party craters by splintering.  I had hoped that the moderates would split off but the far right could do the same thing.  My wife the (once) government major said that this is what has happened in American history, parties have split (see Teddy Roosevelt) when something like this has happened.

    We'll see.

    -Fred

    by FredFred on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:52:37 PM PDT

    •  Fox is starting the spin from the other side

      I'm watching my local Fox affiliate; they're spinning this as something "liberals are not happy about".  No mention of the Freeper/Theocrat meltdown.

      I'm NOT happy about Owens, Brown and Pryor getting through.  But realistically, the worst damage in this whole affair has been inflicted on the GOP.  They put everything on the line, both for their hardline base and for their image in general.  The Democrats always looked like they were representing the moderate position on this issue.  When you take an absolute position, drawing a line in the sand, you'd better make sure you hold it.

      From all appearances, the GOP just blinked.  They represent extremists, and the extremists lost.  No wonder Fox is working so hard to spin it as a loss for "liberals".

      by Jonathan on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:12:38 PM PDT

      •  I caught some of that quick spin last night

        Not sure what the right tack to take with it is. It's a huge defeat for the GOP, and a maintaining of power for the Dems. Fox et al will probably now spin, spin, spin this as a sign of the weakening of the Democratic party, because the Dems didn't get everything they said they wanted - 3 judges are now getting voted on and probably confirmed.

        Is this worth worrying about, in terms of image for the Dems, do you think? Or will voters see through it? Or will voters simply not care, and think of something else as soon as we get to it, like Social Security?

        by jbeach on Tue May 24, 2005 at 09:47:11 AM PDT

    •  One can only hope, Fred.......

      Teddy Roosevelt's "Bull Moose" split from the mainline Republicans in 1912 was actually as much of a personality-cult thing as an ideological schism - although technically TR did run on the "Progressive Party" platform - and the current sorry lot of GOP hopefuls come (thank God) WAY short of anything like Teddy R. It's hard to see any politician far enough to the Right to attract support from the clownshow Freeper types quoted above being more than, at best a fringe-vote spoiler in a few dark corners of the reddest States.
      Fine, let 'em go start their own party: it will leave the field open to real humans for a change.

      by Jay C on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:19:46 PM PDT

  •  I don't agree

    I think that the FREEPERS are not happy unless they totally win, which they have been doing a lot of for quite a while now.  They got their president, their war, their media, and they got away with a lot of shit, despite our doing the best we could to make the shit stick to them.  

    They are only upset because they didn't totally get their way.  That doesn't make us winners.  I consider all of these nominees to be the few that the Democrats wouldn't accept.  By giving up on most of them, and letting them be appointed, Priscilla Owen for instance, we have NOT won.  

    I don't consider it winning just because the most extreme right side isn't happy.  

    by Tom P on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:59:14 PM PDT

    •  on the other hand

      it's gotta start somewhere, right? The return of the Democratic party to dominance?

      by GinnyfromWI on Mon May 23, 2005 at 09:03:13 PM PDT

  •  Kinda caught me by surprise...

    Underneath the chestnut tree; The Republicans sold you, and the GOP sold me

    that they know Orwell's work well enough to reference it, but not well enough to recognize when they're living in and supporting it.

    by Muboshgu on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:41:44 PM PDT

  •  If there ever was a time for McCain to take over..

    Now, it is.  <yoda>

    :)

    by aitoaster on Mon May 23, 2005 at 09:56:39 PM PDT

•  asdf

  a perfect mirror to dems reaction... even though they got the better deal

  by FLS on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:12:03 PM PDT

•  Even Kossaks are complaining?

  I was a bit surprised myself.  This was without a doubt the fight over the supreme court and we got what we wanted.  Not only that, the 2008 campaign has launched that threatens to split the republicans into two minority parties.  McCain vs. Frist.

  I don't see any shame at all in the compromise for Dems.  Frist on the other hand will face holy hell for this.  I say it was a big win just to not lose.  And long term, we win even more by preserving the integrity of the senate and avoiding backlash over a stalled senate.

  by Closet VB Coder on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:14:47 PM PDT

  •  Frist didn't compromise

    He was thrown over a barrel and shown a broom

    by NeuroticBlonde on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:34:28 PM PDT

  •  I'm not unhappy they're pissed, but

    please explain to me how we got what we wanted??

    Owen, Pryor, and Brown go for floor votes, and the Dems won't filibuster except in extreme cases. Let me know, please, if there's more I'm not sure of.

    But also, please, let me know what it means to be MORE EXTREME than these three?

    Well, if the mark of a good compromise is that no one is happy, looks like this one is spot on.

    by stitchmd on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:12:10 PM PDT

    •  Rule changes are off the table

      and only individual senators can decide for themselves what is an extreme case.    

      by perpetualstudent on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:20:43 PM PDT

    •  Stage 2

      is now to bring to light all of the crazy crazy things these three have said or ruled.

      Even if they pass, the American people will know how badly they (and Bush) suck.

      by JLFinch on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:25:30 PM PDT

      •  To put it another way

        With these three, we can really put their extremism on display.

        Would have been harder with the others.

        by JLFinch on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:27:44 PM PDT

    •  I have to agree with stitchmd.

      Maybe I just don't understand... but how is this compromise good for us? I want to be happy about this, but I just can't see it.

      Basically, even though we have the constitution on our side, we have just agreed to only use filibusters "in extreme circumstances." This "extreme circumstances" language reminds me of language stating approvals are "not to be unreasonably withheld" in my company's contracts... which means, if we ask, there better be a damn good & completely over-the-top extreme reason why it's not approved, or it's getting approved. So, now we've just said that we'll only use our constitutional filibuster in said circumstances. Furthermore, we've lost the opportunity to use it for Bush's three judges, one of which was just voted the most unacceptable judge on the Texas Supreme Court by the Houston bar association. And... I guarantee that if we ever DO try to use it in the future, the Repugs will immediately start whining and going all shrill.

      The reports I kept hearing were that they didn't have the votes. Why, then, did we cave?

      by modchick65 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:30:19 PM PDT

      •  We won

        because the "nuclear" option is off the table for the 109th congress and individual senators get to define for themselves what are extreme circumstances.

        by gillmp on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:40:48 PM PDT

      •  i think it depends on what happens next

        there's no guarantee they'll all pass and up and down vote. . . and if they do, the GOP is responsible for every take-the-injured-off-life-support-so-the-corporation-can-keep-its -profits decision they make

        by agoldnyc on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:05:09 PM PDT

    •  Agreed, those three are extreme,

      so does this mean is one of them gets an SC nomination, he/she is in like Flynn?

      Owen, in particular, grates -- an obscure oil lawyer and Rove pawn who essentially killed a terribly injured black kid to save a corporation some money (among other judicial atrocities).

      Lindsey Graham just told Chris Matthews that one of the nominees cleared for a floor vote may not get a majority. I hope it's that smug bitch killer Owen.

      But if the corporate media play this as a big defeat for Bush, Frist and Dobson, I suppose it's not all bad.

      by devtob on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:31:15 PM PDT

      •  I hope it's Brown

        Josh Marshall posted this message from a Texas lawyer a few days ago. The gist of it is that the 5th circuit court, to which Owen has been nominated, is so bad already that she wouldn't swing the balance. On the other hand, the DC circuit is more evenly divided, so putting Brown on there would be quite dangerous.

        I don't think the Repugs would want to be seen voting down a black woman, but I also can't see them voting down Owen. Maybe Pryor's the unlucky one?

        by desmoinesdem on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:02:28 PM PDT

        •  Brown is right off the map

          I thought it was significant that in Boxer's speech, she chose to focus on Brown rather than Owen; obviously in part because she's from California, but also, I think, because Brown's looney tune record has not been publicized as widely as Owen's, and on the surface of it, she sounds even nuttier.

          I particularly loved the decision in which she found in favor of a business' right to sell cigarettes to children. What's next on her list, the right to sell poisoned apple pie and stick a hatchet in one's mother's back?

          Owen comes across much more as a corporate tool, IMO - something that's not particularly unattractive to a wide swath of Repugs (all right, all right, so she let that kid on a respirator die.....).

          But you may be right about Pryor, since he appears to be the most ideologically expendable.

          by sidnora on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:04:23 PM PDT

    •  "Look at the board"

      said the chessmaster to the student in Searching for Bobby Fischer.

      It's a big big game where strategy is incredibly important.

      The rule change is gone. These folk may not get voted through. The Dems played this move well. Political capital got spent.

      Frist just had his legs knocked out from under him by his own party. That's gotta hurt.

      by kredwyn on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:42:49 PM PDT

      •  I honestly don't

        think they will all survive the up or down vote.  I think that will add ultimate insult to injury.

        by Closet VB Coder on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:01:39 PM PDT

  •  I'm with you

    The Dems. got the compromise they offered up in the first place and got an even better compromise than the one they were willing to go with as late as last week.  When I was watching C-SPAN, I thought, "This is good for them!".  That thought was immediately followed by, "Great, now there'll be a lot of whining and name-calling on dKos."  

    And just watching Frist sit there in a pile of his own shit trying to mask the smell with a plug-in was beautiful.  Even with McConnell trying to spray the air, nothing helped.  Asswipes.  Reid & Durbin rocked and Boxers speech (which just ended) was fucking brilliant.  

    by fabooj on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:13:51 PM PDT

  •  We did not get what we wanted.

    They got what they wanted.  We "won" in sense that they agreed not to dismantle our government as long as long as we agree to give them whatever they want. To channel a famous Republican, it's like Adolf Hitler bargaining to keep Paris as long as he made no more demands.  Just give me free reign with the Judicial branch, and I won't cripple the Legislative.  For now.

      It's not as bad as it could've been, but it's a Pyrrhic victory at best.  It's been a long, painful 5 years and the end is not in sight; you'll have to forgive those of us aren't dancing in the streets just yet.

    by contraption on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:52:17 PM PDT

  •  My sentiments exactly.

    ...a big win just to not lose.

    by attydave on Mon May 23, 2005 at 09:59:40 PM PDT

    •  I agree! This deal is not good for America!

      Where is the outrage that 7 Dems and 7 Reps could negotiate away, behind closed doors, an important check and balance on the tyranny of the majority. If our Founding Fathers had followed this path and compromised with the British to give away the rights of the colonies to self-determination of local issues, then there would have been no "United States of America."

      This issue was not solely about which judges would get a vote on the Senate floor, but more importantly, whether the executive branch, through its majority status in the Senate, could effectively neuter or eliminate the last arrow in the quiver of the minority to temper the power of the majority. This was a power struggle between the executive branch and the Senate. To call this power grab a Constitutional Crisis is not an overstatement of the importance or the gravity of the situation.

      As a centrist, I feel that I have been ill-served by both parties.  And that little cabal that brokered the compromise .. I say to them .. "how dare you ... who made you the arbiter of which rights the minority shall have and under which circumstances they may exercise them"? Is this not arrogance of power? This deal is an affront to democracy. It is an abomination of the institution of the Senate.

      If some of these Republicans were so loathe to have to vote against their party on this issue and in favor of protecting the institution in which they serve and the democratic checks and balances on which this country depends, then they should not be Senators.

      This deal is un-American and it is antidemocratic. And yes, I am OUTRAGED at this compromise.

      by Jon B Good on Tue May 24, 2005 at 12:46:00 AM PDT

•  Big slap to the power brokers

    The Senate moved to act for itself as an institution.

    This was a big slap to the White House and to the alleged power brokers like Dobson.

    The wingnuts are gonna go ballistic for a while but they will show their asses all the way down the line: they don't give a damn about the country, the Constitution or the basic institutions of this government. And when they show it, slap that too.

  by walkshills on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:14:56 PM PDT

•  Thanks

  For sorting thru the garbage for the rest of us.  Good point.

  by Alan S on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:16:14 PM PDT

  •  Indeed.

    I had just showered an hour ago.  ;-)

    by Omar on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:32:04 PM PDT

•  That's cool, I guess.

  Just knowing there are some miserable Republicans out there makes me feel a LITTLE bit better.  Maybe if we all jump up and down and claim victory, the media will think we actually won...

  by skotrussell on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:32:25 PM PDT

  •  media knows we won...

    cnn and fox are running shit programs

    by NeuroticBlonde on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:36:27 PM PDT

•  We?

  I tihnk a hand full of centrist Dems and moderately conservative GOPers won a little power game and embarrassed their leaders. Unless 'we' means centrists who cave to the Bush agenda, I can't agree that 'we' won.

  by pHunbalanced on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:33:22 PM PDT

  •  America Won

    in the end..that's what this fight had escalated into...whether Congress would survive intact.  We had to compromise on the Judges a little, we retained the right to filibuster...oooohhh yeah, We won.

    by NeuroticBlonde on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:43:51 PM PDT

    •  so

      you're saying, give in to blackmail if they don't take all your money the first time?  

      by markymarx on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:27:34 PM PDT

  •  Status quo for Dems, GOP looks *punked*

    Dems in the Senate retained their rights. Yes, 3 nominees who stink will now be voted on. And, incidentally, their stinky records will now be aired, so GOP will be on record as approving them.

    All the while, GOP polls in general and in Congress in particular are going through the floor; the Fristian Soldiers and McCainites are split asunder; Dobson is weakened; and this opening gambit to send a loony to the SCOTUS has been shut down.

    It's not death of the vampire, but we have a fix on where he lives, he is scuttling to his lair and might not make it before dawn.

    by jbeach on Tue May 24, 2005 at 09:52:40 AM PDT

•  Gonna Have to Trust Reid

  I have mixed feelings -- I wanted the nuclear option to be voted on, and to lose -- but on this I have to say Harry Reid leads the Dems in the Senate, he's shrewd and (unlike Daschle!) touch, and he made the call.

  I admit to some disappointment, and I gravely mistrust the Repugs but I have to trust Harry Reid this time around.  I think he's earned the benefit of the doubt.

  I would say that being on the shit end of a 45-55 split, the Dems came out of this one pretty good.

  Frist is such a piece of shit -- he went to the Senate, really, to aggrandize his family's HMO wealth -- and now everybody can see what a spineless, unprincipled, bought and paid for piece of shit he really is.  He ain't conservative, he's just a ho.

  Yo, Dr. Frist, I think your fundie friends are gonna do with you what you used to do to the little kittens.  What goes around, comes around, motherfucker.

  by proudtinfoilhat on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:35:51 PM PDT

  •  I am very disappointed

    but maybe I just lack faith in Harry.  So far he has done very, very well, so I think I will stay quiet (after my intial outburst on another thread) and see what comes of this.

    Harry Reid has been excellent thus far.  He made this call for a reason.  I'm going to trust him.

    by AndyT on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:06:57 PM PDT

    •  I sorta am too....

      I kinda wanted to push 'em to the mat because I didn't think the moderates could really stomach Dobson and the rest of the Rethuglican 5th column.

      But can you imagine Daschle pulling something like this off? I really respect Reid.

      by rgrace on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:20:59 PM PDT

  •  I was watching...

    Chris Matthews, and he painted the whole thing as "the Senate members are going to trust each other to do what's right." Part of the reason I have such a hard time seeing how this is good is the fact that I can't believe the Dems would be so gullible as to agree to anything that is founded on them trusting Frist.

    by modchick65 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:34:08 PM PDT

    •  "extraordinary circumstances"

      ...the Democratic Senators reserved the right to filibuster Bush's judicial nominees in "extraordinary circumstances" -- and each individual Senator is allowed to decide what those circumstances are.

      by Phoenix Woman on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:54:32 PM PDT

      •  I'm worried

        that we will not get 41 Dems to filibuster the next Clarence Thomas clone whom Bush will appoint to the Supreme Court.

        But on balance I'm glad we made this deal, because sadly the so-called GOP moderates didn't have the guts to just do the right thing, and I'd rather have this deal than lose a nuclear option vote 51-49.

        by desmoinesdem on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:04:36 PM PDT

        •  That's the thing

          Besides, now, instead of trying to imitate the winners of the Colicky Baby Contest, we need to put pressure on the GOP Senators to vote down the three bad 'uns when they hit the Senate floor.

          Don't forget, Trent Lott's amenable to persuasion.  He's wanted to blacken Frist's and Rove's eyes ever Rove moved to zap Lott as Majority Leader and replace him with Catkiller.

          by Phoenix Woman on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:34:38 PM PDT

    •  they're not trusting Frist

      Frist would never have agreed to this deal. They are trusting the moderates who signed the deal.

      by kainah on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:52:28 PM PDT

      •  Precisely

        Frist appears to be entirely irrelevant as far as the deal was concerned.

        Hmmm...and he's supposed to be the Rethug leader.

        by James Benjamin on Tue May 24, 2005 at 12:18:01 AM PDT

    •  Trust dosen't factor into it

      I don't trust Frist, I don't think any of the Dem senators who crafted this deal trust Frist. But this deal makes it very hard for him to pull the trigger, and even harder for the moderates to go along with him if he does. That's the real victory here.

      This deal isn't based on trust, it's based on the fact we can destory any Republican who breaks it

      by Goldfish on Mon May 23, 2005 at 11:04:35 PM PDT

    •  At least they just hafta trust mod GOP, not Frist

      The mod GOP will screw themselves with the voters if they now vote yes for loonies.

      They still could, mind you, but it's less likely. Their best interests are in doing what they just did - compromise - and they'll look especially stupid if they undermine their own compromise.

      I'm wondering if we might be seeing the birth of a new cross-party caucus here. They'll have a lot of power to swing, if so.

      by jbeach on Tue May 24, 2005 at 09:56:08 AM PDT

•  WHAT A BUNCH OF WHINERS!

  The only deal is the one the crats got. Everything they wanted. We got nothing.

  Nothing, except for 95 percent of Bush's judicial nominees. And an up/down vote on most of the others.

  Are all the Freepers such a bunch of whiny cry-babies?

  Boo-hoo-hoo! Mean Democwats!

  by Tony Seybert on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:39:37 PM PDT

  •  So does that mean that Owen is confirmed?

    Or is she to be up-or-down voted on tomorrow? There's a chance she could still lose the confirmation, or am I not understanding this deal?

    by retired on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:21:10 PM PDT

    •  The vote will be up or down.

      But I can't imagine that the R's can't pull 50 votes.  She will be confirmed.

      by John Carter on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:36:42 PM PDT

•  Another freeper comment I enjoyed:

  
  "To: All

  "My deer Freepers, I am so angry right now, I can hardly see straight, so I will do the smart thing and wait a couple of days until the dust settles a bit. I can't help to think that you, me, all of us deserve what we get... yes, we must not be so great after all if we get these spineless, gutless, people.

  "Right now this looks like a total loss for me, because we lost the PRINCIPLE... and also found out we have Reps, w/o principles. I also don't think Frits is completely innocent, along with many other of the Rep side.... they knew what was going on, and they simply wanted to save face. But just for starters, I will not give one more penny to the GOP, or any Republican for that matter. I will give that money to organizations that go after those 7 SOBs.

  "So let's not dispair, this should give us the motivation to keep fighting. We are the religious right and we must keep fighting for this country, because we don't, it will go to hell itself. We have the power and the duty to keep fighting and we will win."

  Sounds good to me.

  by jem6x on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:47:13 PM PDT

  •  To quote Lord Bush:

    "BRING 'EM ON!"

    by Stradavus on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:59:28 PM PDT

  •  Jeepers Creepers, wheredja get those...

    I keep reading that the freepers are pissed and they're gonna find themselves a new party. So who gets 'em now, the LaRouchies?

    by The Gryffin on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:04:46 PM PDT

  •  "We are the religious right"???

    My goodness...someone actually uses that label on themselves?  They probably say stupid crap like, "I'm a NASCAR dad".  

    Idiot.

    by fabooj on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:16:26 PM PDT

  •  Did you ask him how old he is?

    He might be young enough to enlist, since he seems to have big balls--online, anyway ;)

    by bewert on Mon May 23, 2005 at 09:56:44 PM PDT

  •  He can hardly see straight

    Because he is blinded by the right. Such anger for a religious person he displays, sounda like a faux christian in need of anger management.

    I think someone should reply to this guy that we have more class so we will not recommend what they all told us in November..to stop whining, quit being sore losers and get over it. ...LOL..I would love to say that to these wingnuts.

    by wishingwell on Tue May 24, 2005 at 12:19:00 AM PDT

  •  Cool - maybe we can get 'em to vote Democrat!!

    Hee hee hahhhh!!! Oh, I'm laughing at the thought of that. Come, come to the light side!!

    by jbeach on Tue May 24, 2005 at 09:57:56 AM PDT

•  Think a few chess moves ahead . . .

  We gave them a handful of judges and they gave the Dems . . . what?  They promised not to bulldoze the place . . .  unless they get it in their little pinheads that they (or their Christian Pit Bosses) think they really, really want something badly enough to bulldoze the dems again.

  Then what?  We threaten to shut down the place again?

  They claim that they are men of conviction, men who put Christian values ahead of petty party agreements.  Doing the business of every patriotic , God-fearing American.

  How do they lose?  Do you really think that the reactionaries at FreeRepublic are going to turn away from the republican party?  Turn to what?  A bunch of libruls?

  by Pandemoniac on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:49:00 PM PDT

  •  Seriously...

    Look at the board. This was a hit to the mandate of spending political capital.

    The move is much further down the road.

    by kredwyn on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:29:11 PM PDT

  •  Several of them said it straight out

    They're just gonna stop voting.  That in itself is positive for us.

    Every time I visit FReeperville, I find myself laughing - "I am so happy you guys are this STUPID!"

    by ChiGirl88 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:31:02 PM PDT

    •  they'll forget about this in 18 months

      I remember the spring of 2003, when many of my fellow Iowa Democrats said they could never, never support any presidential candidate who voted for the Iraq War resolution. On caucus night in January 2004, guess what? A lot of them went for Kerry or Edwards.

      The freepers are mad now, but wait till the right-wing hate machine reminds them of how evil Dems are for all of 2006. They will get in line to vote GOP again, you can count on that.

      by desmoinesdem on Mon May 23, 2005 at 07:08:49 PM PDT

      •  Well ...

        
        That's the wrong point of comparison. Better would be, all of the liberals who were irked by Clinton bombing Serbia or reforming welfare and voted for Nader in 2000.
        

        by Ottoe on Mon May 23, 2005 at 08:03:51 PM PDT

  •  they will simply

    not vote.

    by JLFinch on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:36:10 PM PDT

    •  Which is cool, too

      A higher percentage of non-ideologically-blinded Gooper voters.

      by jbeach on Tue May 24, 2005 at 09:59:14 AM PDT

  •  If I were a Wingnut ...

    I'd think the Constitution Party looked pretty good about now.

    by John Carter on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:39:06 PM PDT

    •  I've thought the same thing

      Everything these batshit insane wingnuts want is found in the Constitution Party-

      School Prayer
      All abortion illegal
      "Fortress America" border security
      Elimination of numerous Federal departments (education, HUD, Vet Affairs, Interior, EPA, etc.)
      10 commandments in every courtroom

      the list goes on and on.  Maybe like how the Greens have sucked off alot of the leftmost fringe (and some not so fringy) of the Democratic Party, we can hope the same will be true with the GOP and their wingiest wingnuts going to the Constitution party.

      Roy Moore in '08!

      by Ugluks Flea on Mon May 23, 2005 at 06:58:16 PM PDT

      •  EXCEPT

        Their anti-war isolationist stance, of course. Which goes hand-in-hand with their immigrant-hating. Apparently the freepers aren't familiar with prinicpled bigotry, and certainly can't get enough dead brown folk (in the Mideast and not here, of course).

        by Assamite on Mon May 23, 2005 at 09:13:38 PM PDT

  •  but surely

    you haven't failed to notice the huge CHASM opening up within the GOP? It's gonna be the far-right against the moderates now. Get your popcorn and pull up a chair. We'll be in to sweep up when it's over.

    by GinnyfromWI on Mon May 23, 2005 at 09:15:21 PM PDT

    •  Exactly.

      Terri Schiavo, bless her (Terri, whereever you are, know that your husband's fifteen years of suffering at the hands of wingnuts was not in vain), ripped off the thin veneer that covered that chasm.  

      One of our newer Kossacks is a former GOPer who quit the party over the Theocrats and their takeover of the GOP, a takeover which led to Tom DeLay's disgracefully using a dead woman's body as a shield.

      The wingnuts don't know when to quit.  They've totally lost it.

      by Phoenix Woman on Mon May 23, 2005 at 10:40:51 PM PDT

  •  It's funny you would say Chess

    I like Chess, I play a lot of Chess thanks to Yahoo, and I can tell you this: there are times
    in Chess when it can all come down to a supposedly even trade.

    Yes, it seems like it wasn't the best move to make, agreeing to have votes on a couple of the bad judges in exchange for taking the nuclear option of the table. But that means that we'll still have fewer of these creeps around then if we'd lost the nuclear showdown. And more importantly, we'll still have the filibuster later on, when we really need it.

    And most importantly, we've strengthen our position relative to our opponent. A lot of people don't realize how effective trading for tactical position can be.  It is going to be very hard for Frist to bring up the nuclear option again, and it's going to be almost impossible for the Senators who made this deal to support him unscathed.

    That right there is the kind of move that wins Chess games.

    by Goldfish on Mon May 23, 2005 at 11:14:47 PM PDT

    •  Chess

      "Chess" is a cheesy Broadway musical from the 80's.  "chess" is a board game.  Unless maybe it's like a religion for you, like it is for my brother ;-)

      by atomic on Tue May 24, 2005 at 07:33:59 AM PDT

•  Nobody is ever going to

  get 100% of what they want when you compromise.  

  Bottom line:

  The filibuster remains an option and Frist/Dobson have been cut off at the knees.
   

  by cici414 on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:49:26 PM PDT

  •  Huh?

    You say:

    "and Frist/Dobson have been cut off at the knees."

    How, exactly?

    by eugene on Mon May 23, 2005 at 05:51:11 PM PDT

    •  In an obvious manner.