Morning Must-Reads

The Washington Post is short on bombshell political stories this morning, going more heavily with international news. They do link to a couple AP stories posted earlier this morning though which may be of interest. Pam Easton reports that Tom DeLay largely avoided the question of his ethical lapses in a speech at the NRA's annual convention in Houston last night, only saying "When a man is in trouble or in a good fight, you want to have your friends around, preferably armed. So I feel really good." Faaaaantastic.

AP's Tom Raum analyzes the nuclear option, calling it a "high-risk strategy" and guessing that it "could change the balance of power in the Senate, erode the rights of the minority party and backfire against Republicans in the long term." Not just could, Tom - will. Tom includes the quotes from Bob Dole and John McCain ("Someday there will be a liberal Democrat president and a liberal Democrat Congress ... Do we want a bunch of liberal judges approved by the Senate of the United States with 51 votes if Democrats are in the majority?"), and also notes the pressure on Frist to force a showdown in order to burnish his conservative credentials for 2008.

What the Post lacks in news, they compensate for over on the op-ed page:

- In an editorial titled "Beyond the Pale," the Post says Frist's participation in "Justice Sunday" next weekend will "be a distressing new low in the debased debate over judges if the Senate leader appears at an event predicated on slander, unless he makes clear that he does not condone such slander," going on to note that the Democratic filibusters are "simply ... not motivated by anti-religious sentiment." The editorial cites recent examples of conservative judge-bashing, and asks "reasonable politicians" to "stand against" the trend of making comments or taking steps that would erode judicial independence. In my opinion, Senator Frist's attendance at "Justice Sunday" constitutes implicit acceptance of the organizers' views, even if he goes there and says absoluely nothing to condone the heated rhetoric of other partcipants. I see no reason to believe he will use the event as a Sister Souljah moment, very unfortunately for us all.

- Liberal Wade Henderson of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights and arch-conservative Stephen Moore of the Free Enterprise Fund (former head of the Club for Growth, and a person with whom the RINO disagrees on just about everything) team up this morning with "Don't Alter the Filibuster," making the basic arguments that the nuclear option would diminish minority rights in an institution where those have been cherished and protected since the Founding, and that this creates a slippery slope for future abuses and further erosion of the filibuster.

- And finally, the icing on the cake. Rick Santorum himself, the nuclear option's own Major Kong, offers up the insanely headlined "Majority Vote Should Trump Minority Rule." Santorum profiles several of Bush's stalled judge nominees, including such relevant phrases as "daughter of a sharecropper" and "through hard work and determination". Santorum calls the Democratic filibuster attempts "extreme and an arrogation of power", charging the minority with applying "extreme, ideological litmus tests." Still apparently forgetting not only the Abe Fortas filibuster by Republicans, but also the blocks and holds put on Clinton's judicial nominees by Republicans in the Judiciary Committee, Santorum continues to spout the untruth that judicial nominees have never been blocked in any way until this very moment. At least get your facts straight when you're trying to undo more than 200 years of precedent, Senator.

[Update: Steven Weisman at the New York Times has more on Bolton's attempted sacking of Fulton T. Armstrong, and at end the includes a couple paragraphs on additional allegations, including some by a woman who claims Bolton engaged her in a "prolonged confrontation" in 1994. The LA Times has much more on this latter incident. A Chafee spokesman is quoted as saying that the senator would be reviewing the entire record before making a decision on how to vote. "It's one of those tough situations. He's keeping his ear to the ground," the spokesman said.

Ralph Blumenthal suggests that Tom DeLay might find himself in a bit of trouble at home.

Peter Applebome profiles Chris Shays, calling him "perhaps the most conspicuous specimen of what even he labels a 'dying breed' - not just a Republican 'moderate,' a term that when merely denoting a contrast with the party's Southern base means just about nothing, but one of the few willing to be a conspicuous irritant as well." [I love that term, conspicuous irritant]. Shays, echoing some earlier comments and those of John Danforth a few weeks ago, told Applebome:

"Our party is in danger of becoming a theocracy, and the Democrats are already a collection of special interests. You have a fairly extreme left-wing party and a fairly extreme right-wing party, blue and red, but the 42 percent that's purple is largely unrepresented. I feel a moral obligation to make sure I do everything I can to make sure moderates have a place in this party."

Shays went on to note that there's no question of him switching parties: "I'm a Republican," he said. "I'm proud to be a Republican, and I will never be anything but a Republican."

In a move that would certainly shake up New York City, the Times reports that former U.S. Senator Bob Kerrey, currently president of The New School, is weighing a run for mayor of the Big Apple.

The Times picks Tom DeLay to editorialize against this morning, saying that his "hunger for power has grown so insatiable that it has detached him from the nation's business, the principles of electoral democracy and even the mainstream of his own party." This is a strong indictment of DeLay's power-hungry actions, and a call for Republicans of all stripes to step forward and realize that DeLay is proving an ineffective and distracting leader, and that it's time for him to go. Frank Rich also columnizes about DeLay this morning, while Nicholas Kristof writes about Darfur and gives much credit to MTV for its coverage of the genoicide there.

Echoing the CSM, the LA Times this morning analyzes the number of federal judges appointed by Republicans. Of 162 Court of Appeal judges currently serving, 94 of them were appointed by Republican presidents, thanks to Republicans presidents for 24 of the last 36 years. This article is an excellent backgrounder on the nuclear option, and I highly recommend it. -- 9:21 a.m.]