You can filibuster all you want right here
I haven’t blogged about the whole filibuster controversy — constitutional issues aside, to me it was just a giant distraction from things like, oh, I don’t know, getting the federal budget under control. However, now that it’s apparently been settled, I am amused to see the gnashing of teeth on both sides of the aisle. ...
I haven't blogged about the whole filibuster controversy -- constitutional issues aside, to me it was just a giant distraction from things like, oh, I don't know, getting the federal budget under control. However, now that it's apparently been settled, I am amused to see the gnashing of teeth on both sides of the aisle. From the National Review's Quin Hillyer:
I haven’t blogged about the whole filibuster controversy — constitutional issues aside, to me it was just a giant distraction from things like, oh, I don’t know, getting the federal budget under control. However, now that it’s apparently been settled, I am amused to see the gnashing of teeth on both sides of the aisle. From the National Review‘s Quin Hillyer:
Conservatives examining last night’s Senate deal on judicial nominees should see it as not a compromise but, as a capitulation. It does not save the stature of the Senate, but confirms its reputation as a den of mutual back-scratchers willing to throw principle out the window so their own reputations for wisdom and statesmanship can remain intact.
The Center for American Progress’ John Podesta:
This victory comes at a heavy price: the near-certain confirmation of at least three nominees whose contempt for constitutional liberties and disregard of precedent make them manifestly unworthy of judicial office.
Actually, that’s not fair to Podesta, who opens up his statement by praising the 14 senators who crafted the compromise. Go see Jeffrey Dubner at Tapped for a more visceral reaction. In the spirit of making only a few good predictions, here’s the only one I’m willing to make: the big loser was Bill Frist. Conservatives are pissed at him because he didn’t get all the judges past the filibuster. Moderates are pissed at him for pushing the nuclear option in the first place. Comment away on the political and institutional implications.
Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and co-host of the Space the Nation podcast. Twitter: @dandrezner
More from Foreign Policy

Saudi-Iranian Détente Is a Wake-Up Call for America
The peace plan is a big deal—and it’s no accident that China brokered it.

The U.S.-Israel Relationship No Longer Makes Sense
If Israel and its supporters want the country to continue receiving U.S. largesse, they will need to come up with a new narrative.

Putin Is Trapped in the Sunk-Cost Fallacy of War
Moscow is grasping for meaning in a meaningless invasion.

How China’s Saudi-Iran Deal Can Serve U.S. Interests
And why there’s less to Beijing’s diplomatic breakthrough than meets the eye.