1 Annie: I had a simiar discussion with Orren Hatch one day at lunch, as I was compaining that I had helped Barbara Boxer get two tough nominations through the Republican Senate, working with him on both. I asked him why there is no reciprocity, to which he answered "They don't play fairly like we do; winning is more important than integrity or justice." You cannot deal logically with one who is not logical.

2 Yes, Annika. Yes, Shelly. Let us remember this example the next million times we hear the Republicans urged to give up some political something in order to win the good will of the Democrats: 1) Thomas is Borked. 2) Ginsburg is politely confirmed. 3) Confirmation hell breaks out against Bush' appointees. I remember Annika herself creating this negotiation meme: "Never give up a concession to gain goodwill." I completely agree.

3 Which is to say: GO FORWARD WITH THE NUCLEAR/CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION!!!!!

4 K-rist, can't you people get laid on a Saturday? Me either, so when the blood letting comes, if you don't have a target, keep your head down so you don't get hit. Yes I HAVE been drinking.

5 Nuclear Option. Easier said than done. (except by W) Frist was not shy, he just didn't have the 50 to do it, viz. "The gang of 14". That so called "compromise", as distasteful as it was to many of us, may yet turn out to be the key to the rules change. If the Dems who were part of the 14 try to allege that "unusual circumstances" exist in a situation where the 7 R's (or even enough of them) disagree, perhaps some of the squishes will actually grow a spinal cord and join Frist, the rest of thie party and W in getting the rule changed once and for all. I think this was the thinking of at least Lindsay Graham, Mike Dewine and John Warner, who did sign on to the compromise. The others were the usual suspects, John McCain, Susan Collins, Olympia Snow and Lincoln Chaffee. I was personally surpised not to see Chuck Hagel in the deal, as he was always one of those who was iffy on the cloture vote. He may still be. I am bothered by just one thing, and that is the fact that I am a pro-choice Republican; otherwise I am conservative about every other major issue. I am not sure that I want to open the door for Bush or the right wing part of my party to jam in a couple or three of pro-lifers in order to change the 6-3 Roe v. Wade vote to 5-4 the other way. You never get it all, do you?

6 Shelly, Interesting point - I wish I believed the Stupid Party was smart enough to "win by losing" via 7 Repub Senators joining the "gang of 14." Maybe they are smart enough. Maybe the Great Pumpkin.... oh never mind.