Half a loaf? Or lipstick on a pig?

Boy, see what happens when you take a break to watch 24? I’m getting caught up on Fox News and Bench Memos but at first glance, the grand Senate compromise to avoid the rules change only kicks the can down the road. (Let’s see how many metaphors I can squeeze into this post!) After months and years of left-wing vituperation, Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown, and William Pryor will get their up-or-down votes. After that, who knows, but it looks like the Democrats have retained their invented “right” to filibuster judicial nominees.

But can they use it again? By signing on to use the filibuster only in “extreme” circumstances, the Democrats need to tread carefully. For example, if Dubya decides to elevate Antonin Scalia to the Chief Justice position, how could they block a Supreme Court Justice approved by a 98-0 vote? If the Democrats continue to use the filibuster indiscriminately, it will make them look (more) petty and obstinate.

As I’d noted several times before, I never believed the Democrats would allow the rules change to come to a vote. They would always seek to retain the filibuster. The question is whether the Republicans gave up too much in Constitutional principle for a temporary vote.