Jan 30 2006
On the eve of Alito’s confirmation to the US Supreme Court we wanted to hear from members of the Coalition of the Chillin’ on what the Gang of 14 Agreement meant as we look back to all that has transpired since. I think it is fair to say the filibuster-nuclear option debate has subsided significantly by the fact this will be the shortest Carnival for the Coalition to date. It is hard to find the same intensity as those days when no judges where getting through. Before Rodgers-Brown, Owens, Prior and Roberts.
But we get some excellent perspectives to share. And anyone who wants to have a link added just contact me (here is the original announcement) or link to the post and a trackback will appear in the comments section. In the order I received them, here is the Carnival.
It is fitting our first post is by Professor Bainbridge, one of the first Coalition members and someone who has been following the judicial nomination process in detail. The good professor returns to the debate regarding the nuclear option and whether it should be launched.
The next post is by Dan at Searchlight Crusade who also discusses the use of the nuclear option now that Alito has been through the tough part, and what the political ramifications might be.
Our good friend from West-by-Golly, Don Surber, points out the motivating factor behind the democrats efforts is not so much judicial philosophy, or even abortion, but something more basic – and obvious once you think about it.
Roy Lofquist sent us this note on his thoughts since his American Thinker article from the time of the Gang of 14.
My prediction about the demise of Reid, Pelosi and Dean was actually contrary to my previous instict that what we are witnessing is a battle for control of the Democrat party.
The historical precedent is the 1964 nomination of Barry Goldwater. That effort was doomed from the start. With an assassinated President and the country at war there was no way a Republican stood a chance of winning. The Republican establishment let the right tilt at windmills, thus fending them off for 16 years.
I believe that the DLC has adopted a strategy of letting their own loonies bring on 3 crushing defeats in a row. They then stand to pick up the pieces. The Democrats have evolved into a coalition of special interests who are not ideologically motivated so much as power motivated. It is better to be a big fish in a little pond.
I fervently hope that the Democrats survive the current crisis. Although a life-long Republican I do not wish to see any party triumphant and unchallenged.
The next entry is from Cold Hearted Truth who looks back and questions whether 14 members of the US Senate should be able to hold sway over the entire body. A good question with interesting implications on many issues.
Harold at Called As Seen has posted thoughts on each of the Supreme Court nominations, and what each meant to the overall debate. It is good to see Harold blogging again.
Coalition founder Mark Coffey calls the Gang of 14 agreement the biggest GOP victory in 2005. And given the results it is hard to argue it has been anything but a victory.
Eric at The Viking Pundit is “Chillin’ like Matt Dillon”. Eric discusses how the bar was set for filibusters and its resulting impact.
W.C. Varones notes the irony for McCain – whose Gang of 14 allowed a wrath of pro 1st Amendment jurists to be seated on benches that will.. – Well, I won’t steal his thunder.
And finally, my thoughts on the Democrats – which takes the flip side view from Mark since I think this has been a big loser for the left.
Posted at the Truth Laid Bear Ubercarnival