Done with that

Caught a little bit of Senator John Cornyn (R. Texas) before getting bored watching the debate. He clearly would rather have used the Nuclear option. He also reiterated the pleasant deception that for 200 years Judges got up or down votes (a phrase that needs a ton of qualifiers to be true). At any rate, in his mind the Nuclear option is still on the table.

Joshua Zeitz, writing over at the Huffington Post, evidently feels the same way.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist agrees to preserve the filibuster, though he reserves the right to re-ignite the nuclear option if Democrats exhibit "bad faith and bad behavior." That is, if the Democrats dare ever to use the filibuster again.

Gosh, what a great deal!

I guess your opinion on the Nuclear option depends on whether you think you could have won that fight or not. Reading this, I am forced to conclude that Zeitz thinks that a more forceful strategy could have won the day. How else does one explain this statement? "If Senate Democrats can't stand up for themselves, how can they be trusted to stand up for the most vulnerable members of society who desperately need their help?"

I disagree with his assessment. I think refusing this compromise would have been a tactical mistake for the Democrats. I don't think we could have won this battle, and without even the threat of a filibuster, Senate Democrats and the independent judiciary would be in a much worse position than they are now.