THE DEAL

Associated Press writer Jim Abramson gives an overview of reaction on the deal cut by seven Republican and seven Democrat Senators:

first laded the 14 senators, seven Republicans and seven Democrats, who on Monday evening reached an agreement that allowed action on Owen and at least two other stalled nominations while preventing a precedent-shaking move by first to eliminate all future uses of the filibuster to thwart judicial nominees.

With the seven Democrats on board, the Senate was ready to vote Tuesday to cut off debate on the Owen nomination, ending the filibuster and moving toward a final vote on confirmation.

first, while stressing that he was not a party to the compromise, said it signified "modest progress" in assuring that President Bush's judicial nominations would get a yes-or-no vote in the Senate.

If the agreement is carried out in good faith, he said, "I believe it will make filibusters in the future, including Supreme Court nominees, almost impossible."

But Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada reminded first that the agreement did not alter the rights of the minority to lengthy debate, and in extraordinary circumstances, filibusters of controversial nominations.

He said that also applied to the Senate vote on the highly contentious nomination of John Bolton to be US ambassador to the United Nations. That nomination could come up this week and "there are a lot of things we have to talk about with Bolton," Reid said.

...The agreement, which also applies to Supreme Court nominees, said future judicial nominations should "only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances," with each Democratic senator holding the discretion to decide when those conditions had been met.

Although the fourteen "moderates" claim to have saved the Senate, the deal is a temporary measure. Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., said, "We tried to avert a crisis in the United States Senate and pull the institution back from a precipice."

Nelson wants to believe that the deal they brokered kept the Senate from going over the edge. Oh really?

Leaders on both the left and the right have made it clear this "restraining order" will do nothing to significantly alter the course of debate over judicial nominees and other issues. Reid even found it necessary to take a hit at John Bolton, threatening him with a filibuster.

The ink isn't dry on the agreement and it's already being dismantled, essentially rendering it impotent to address anything beyond the Dems' obstruction of votes on Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown, and a few other nominees.

Moreover, the deal appears to have served to ratchet up the rhetoric from opposing sides in this battle rather than toning it down.

Steven Ertelt, editor of Life News, provides an account of some of the reaction:

Dr. James Dobson, chairman of Focus on the Family, said the Senate agreement
"represents a complete bailout and betrayal by a cabal of Republicans and a great victory for united Democrats."

"The rules that blocked conservative nominees remain in effect, and nothing of significance has changed," Dobson added. "The unconstitutional filibuster survives in the arsenal of Senate liberals."

Paul Weyrich, chairman of Free Congress Foundation in Washington, agreed and said the plan is an "outrage" that "solves nothing." He said Republicans lost their main objective -- "to get rid of the filibuster for the Supreme Court."

On the other side of the abortion debate, pro-abortion groups were pleased with the deal.

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL, said her group was "heartened that the crisis has been averted and the right to filibuster preserved for upcoming Supreme Court nominations."

"We are confident that a Supreme Court nominee who won't even state a position on Roe v. Wade is the kind of 'extraordinary circumstance' this deal envisions," Keenan added.

"The agreement embodies the very principle of consultation and consensus that the filibuster encourages," said Ralph Neas, head of People for the American Way, in a statement. Still, he said, "We are deeply concerned that it could lead to confirmation of appeals court judges who would undermine Americans' rights and freedoms."

Neas called the deal a "major defeat for the radical right."

I think it's wishful thinking on the part of the fringe secularist left to believe that the issue is settled.

On the other hand, while I understand the outrage and feelings of betrayal by some on the right, I think that anger should be reined in a bit, and directed at the RINOs, but not the Republican party as a whole. This must be remembered:

THE CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION IS NOT OFF THE TABLE.

As I said last night, this deal is only a temporary ceasefire.

Bill Frist said yesterday and said it again today that he is not a party to the agreement. When it comes to the Supreme Court, I trust him to do whatever it takes to uphold the principle that it is the Constitutional responsibility of the Senate to give judicial nominees an up or down vote.

Let the left think they have prevailed for the time being. They haven't. Allow the liberal media outlets their giddiness today. It is unfounded.

We haven't arrived at the endgame.