Why are the Dems considering a compromise on Bush's judicial appointments?

Bush has 10 appointees that the Dems intend to filibuster to keep them out of the federal courts.

In an effort to avoid the "nuclear option", (the Rethugs changing the rules to forbid filibusters of judicial appointments), the Dems offered a compromise. They agreed to let three go through if the thugs withdrew the other seven.

That's like saying, "Okay, you can have Mussolini, but not Hitler." "You can have Idi Imin, but not Pol Pot." "You can have Attila the Hun, but not Genghis Kahn."

What the hell is the matter with the Dems? Let the thugs go ahead with their "nuclear option." Most of the country is against it and it may just turn over the congress to the Dems in next year's congressional elections. Plus, it will push Bush's ratings down the sewer ever further.

I repeat: What the hell is wrong with the Democratic Party???

n/t

I think it is nuculer :sarcasm:

I agree with you. It is time the Dems called bullshit on this one. Make the Repugs take the step that will make them look like shit in people's eyes.

I don't know why the Dems would blink on this one.

ANSWER: They lost the election. Big time. They know the Rs have the power to shut them up. They'd rather "run away and live to fight another day".

Eventually, the Rs will force the issue and the Dems will lose if they haven't effected some kind of peace treaty.

It's that simple. The Repugs will flex their muscle. They have to or their base will abandon them.

Maybe it's like a guy letting his wife get raped because he's tied up and helpless in the closet. There really isn't a whole lot to be done about it except try to get out of it alive. That's what they're up to. It's too bad, but we should have won the election, or at least not lost more of the Senate.

I hate to be disagreeable, but I believe STOLEN is the word you are looking for. The election was stolen from them.

Until everybody believes we were robbed, we will continue to be robbed. Never as long as I live will I believe otherwise. I am angry about it every morning when I wake up and at night when I go to sleep,
Never give up.

get into an argument with you about whether it was stolen or not. I haven't been able to convince anyone that it wasn't, nor have they shown me any real evidence that it was. It doesn't matter for purposes of this discussion. The point is that the Republicans are in the seats of power. They have an agenda, and they will try to enact it. Why shouldn't they? They won (stole, whatever).

Now the Dems want to block as much of the agenda as possible. This, too, is only natural. Trouble is, they are not moving at all in the Rs direction, and the Rs, seeing this, are asking themselves, "Why the hell should we be the ones to move, WTF! WE WON!!". So their position is solidifying, and our position is solidifying.

Ever wonder about that old paradox, "What happens when an irresistible force meets and immovable object?"? Well, the answer is that either there is an irresistible force and no immovable object, or that their is an immovable object but no irresistible force. There cannot be both.

Somethings gotta give. My bet: the Dems, because they are in the minority and the majority rules. All the Repugs have got to do is stiffen their spines (they're actually as weaselly as our guys, they're all careerists; I spit upon them all). Their base is pressing them hard. And they have the power.

Can you not see the strategy?

If not, step away from CNN and Fox News and start reading up on political strategy.

who suggested that looking toward the future, it might not be a bad move if the Republican promised to take the nuclear option off the table permanently. When a specific Supreme Court justice is nominated, everything becomes more politically volatile and the consequences more serious than for an appellate judge.

It has the benefit of making the Republicans look unreasonable if they don't accept. But if they do accept, the evangelicals may be mad that they didn't go all out for the nuclear option. Could be a win-win if it's handled right. I'm willing to give Reed the benefit of the doubt on this one.

NOT by bargaining chip?
how can anyone say in advance they'll approve 3 but not 7?

Reid needs the support of a couple of the GOP Senate moderates to kill the nuclear option. Reid made an offer that was reasonable on its face but was still one that Frist could not accept and run for President. The Christian conservatives will not be happy with anything but complete victory.

Reid's offer will help the Senate moderates feel good about not supporting the nuclear option. It now appears that Frist does not have the votes. Reid's offer to settle this matter was a brilliant political move that may have enable the GOP moderates in the Senate to stand up to Frist.