Again, we see the dynamics of the judicial compromise at play: (1) the wisdom of the deal, from a Republican standpoint, and (2) the insufferable arrogance of the Gang of 14. How so? Consider:
"This is a credible nominee, and not one that - as far as we know now - has a record that in any sense could be described as extremist," said Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut, after a breakfast session with the Gang of 14, a bipartisan group that helped broker a deal in May to avert a Senate showdown over judicial nominees.
While Mr. Lieberman and his Democratic colleagues were careful not to rule out a filibuster - "There's a lot I don't know about John Roberts," the Connecticut senator said - their remarks after the meeting suggested that, barring any surprise developments, they expected Judge Roberts to be eventually confirmed.
"At the end of the hearings we do not anticipate anything that would be a stickler, that would rise to the level of extraordinary circumstances," said another Democrat, Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, invoking the criteria that the group had agreed would warrant a filibuster. "But you can't come to that conclusion until the end of the entire process."
If there is a dispute, several members of the Gang of 14 said they hoped the group would intervene. "The group stands ready," said Senator Mike DeWine, Republican of Ohio, "if there's any rough sledding."DeWine is insufferable. Enough, already...you did a good thing, but here's a tip: praise sounds best when uttered by another...