Filibuster compromise

Just got home from work and haven't read all the stories yet, but here's my first reaction--I don't like it. Kos is spinning it as the best we could do considering we only had 49 sure votes backing us and we needed two more to be assured of victory. Here's What's Left isn't happy, but hopes that the conventional wisdom will evenutally be that the Dems won this one and Frist looks weak as a result. Avedon, subbing for Atrios, doesn't like it. And DHinMI over at the Next Hurrah is saying that victory is ours if we can claim it.

Here's why I don't like it. I looked at it as a win-win propostion, as long as we took it to the hoop. If the Republican "moderates" didn't cave to their leadership, then we defeated the nuclear option, and those odious nominees never make it to the bench. If they caved, and the filibuster is gone, then we suffer a bit for the moment, but we do better in the long term, because no matter how the Republican leadership would try to limit this only to judicial nominations, in the end, it would involve other legislation--the filibuster would be gone for good--and the Republicans won't always be in power. We'd have a shot at really pushing through some progressive legislation, and the second they started to bitch, we'd be able to say "what's your problem? You're the fuckers who changed the rules to get rid of the filibuster, so shut it and cast your up or down vote on Chief Justice Dennis Kucinich, bitches."

Of course, I'm living in my own reality, I realize, as the Democratic party I'm a member of would never have the stones to keep the filibuster off the books once they returned to power, but I can dream, can't I?

Newer Post Older Post Home