John Kerry says he has signed Form 180. It’s been 114 days since he promised to do so.

Kevin thinks it may not be so cut and dried.

LindaSog is skeptical.

Lorie Byrd thinks there is still a candor gap.

Mark at Decision ‘08 urges caution. And he wants an update to the Kerry Clock.

And Michelle Malkin discusses an interesting point of disagreement between John O’Neill and Captain Ed. She quotes O’Neill:

Last summer, “Unfit for Command” author John O’Neill said if Kerry signed SF-180, reporters or anyone else could obtain all of Kerry’s military records from DoD. “If he executes Standard Form 180, he would no longer be the gatekeeper, the gatekeeper would be the U.S. military,” he told the Washington Times.

But Ed Morissey contends:

All kidding aside, Kerry only agreed to sign off on the SF-180. He didn’t agree to release every document that results from that request. The SF-180 will only release the information to Kerry, who can then cull the material for anything embarrassing before making it public.

I will be reviewing the book “Levi’s Will” shortly. Watch this space for details!

UPDATE: Review has been posted here.

Last night, “maverick” John McCain and 13 other Senators announced a compromise on the judicial nominees, which will prevent a show down on the “nuclear option” - at least for now. The reactions from both leading and long tail bloggers is primarily dissatisfaction with the deal. But there are some exceptions. Here is the actual deal itself.

Michelle Malkin:

The GOP parade of pusillanimity marches on. With this pathetic cave-in, the Republicans have sealed their fate as a Majority in Name Only.

Powerline’s Hinderaker thinks he’s going to be sick:

What a hideous deal! The Democrats have agreed to cloture on only three nominees, and they have made no commitment not to filibuster in the future, if there are “extraordinary circumstances.” Of course, the Dems think any nominee who is a Republican is “extraordinary.” The Dems have just wriggled off the hook on some of the nominees that, politically, some of them did not want to be seen voting against.

Hugh Hewitt:

John McCain –a great American, a lousy senator, and a terrible Republican– took himself out of serious contention in the GOP primaries of 2008. The McCain Caucus showed itself last night, and is united not by “moderation” but by enormous, towering ego.

The Political Teen has the video of the presser.

Scared Monkeys has a round up. So does PME.

The Anchoress isn’t pleased.

As usual, the GOP gave up, and the Democrats give up NOTHING. Here’s the agreement. It will make you sick.

But Mark, at Decision ‘08, thinks it’s a good thing for Republicans:

Why is this a big win? Take the half-full view. These three judges are like poison to the Left; they will be confirmed, and a precedent will be set for what is or isn’t acceptable for the Supreme Court fight down the line, a much more conservative precedent than existed before this deal…

Polipundit’s McClure also puts a positive spin on it. Rather than steal his entire post here (though it’s so good I was tempted…) click through and read his five arguments.

Unfortunately, some of my conservative brethren are screaming that Republicans caved in, that it is time to stay home on election day, or perhaps join a new party.

If these Republicans would look at settlement rationally, they would recognize that it is a complete victory.

First …

Slublog:

Congratulations. With the deal agreed to in the Senate, the Republican party just lost any money I was going to give next election season, and Senator Snowe has lost my vote.

DadaHead calls Slublog a wingnut for the picture he posted. The Therapist says the Republicans have been date raped.

Ankle Biting Pundit:

These RINO’s will undoubtedly be hailed by their real constituency, the MSM, as brave. But we know them for what they are - spineless cowards. Think about it - who is happier with this deal - Bill Frist or Harry Reid. There was only one way to judge the winners and losers here and that’s by asking this question: Will every judicial nominee get an up or down vote? Since the answer is “No”, we lose.

Even Judas got 30 pieces of silver. The RINO’s didn’t even get that.

Jayson at Polipundit though, is optimistic:

Ergo, if Mark Dayton is replaced with Mark Kennedy, and Kent Conrad is replaced with Gov. Hoeven (or Stabenow is replaced with Jane Abraham), and Santorum is kept in the Senate, this deal will become moot as of Jan. 2007.
And that says nothing about potential GOP pickups in places like Fla., NE, MD, WA, and N.J.

With two more net conservative *votes* – which can be achieved even with a draw, from the standpoint of net *seats* – one of two scenarios automatically will be achieved:

1) The Democrats won’t be able to filibuster Jack Squat.
2) The GOP will have the votes to make the rule change.

Elections do matter.

Molten Thought comes through with another analogy:

Once again, the GOP is playing solitaire while the Democrats play chess.

Harkonnendog also thinks it’s a good move.

At first I thought “All this deal does is give the democrats more moral authority!” But maybe it really just gives them rope to hang themselves with. I suppose… maybe it will turn out to be just that. Given this deal, the only reason to filibuster judicial nominees is avowedly “extraordinary circumstances.” I suppose this does move the burden of proof over to the democrats, and I suppose “extraordinary circumstances” is quite a high burden to meet. If the democrats cynically abuse the phrase it should be obvious and move moderates to the right…

The Buzz Blog calls it a sellout.

This so called “deal” was a retreat from earlier claims that Democrats were willing to approve five of the seven filibustered nominees. Talk about bad negotiating tactics - McCain and company actually lost ground when the GOP held all the cards.

Patterico makes a pledge:

The next time John McCain runs for any elective office, I pledge to support his opponent. I will use my blog to encourage others to vote for his opponent.

I am singling him out because of his fascist campaign finance law, which will not stop me in any way from using this blog to oppose John McCain for the rest of his days.

Captain Ed deconstructs the deal:

it appears that we have returned to status quo ante with an implicit admission from the GOP that filibusters are legitimate, and a matching one from the Democrats that they abused it.

Mitch Berg, former GOP Contributor has an open letter to Bill Frist.

Infinite Monkeys is not surpised by the compromise.

I have two words for those who are surprised at the Republicans’ ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory: Well, duh.

ConfirmThem.com, not surprisingly, is irate.

It is not compromise, but capitulation. And I say that as somebody who did agree that a certain form of compromise was acceptable. But this comrpomise treats a couple of nominees, Saad and Myers, as pawns. It makes them not people, but expendable objects. And that is unconscionable.

Beth from MVRWC is dumbfounded by the blog reactions.

Will someone please explain to me why it’s a BAD thing, when the three nominees the Democrats were shrieking about so much will get a vote now?

I know, they said they’ll only filibuster under “extraordinary circumstances.” I know, the Democrats are “The Party of No.” But to me, if they do pull this filibuster nonsense with the remaining judicial nominees, they’ll pay a heavy price politically, and lose the argument anyway. Do you really think the American people will look favorably upon bald-faced partisan shenanigans that break a commitment?

Stephen at the Politburo agrees with Beth.

I don’t mean to get all Rodney King-ish, but why must ALL commentary, from both politcal parties consist of “We won and they lost. Yay!” or “We lost and they won. Boo!” ??? Is that it? Has there been a new civil war? Do we now have the Red States of America locked in a twisted, hateful, unfortunate geographically-required embrace with the rival Blue States of America? Is that how it works? Is there no possibility that (whatever your views, or whoever might have gotten a 51% advantage), perhaps a compromise is a good idea, you know, strictly from a ‘civil war avoidance’ perspective?

All the ranting and raving bloggers can go impale themselves on the anticipated spikes in their Sitemeters they hope to get from all their over-the-top rhetoric. Take a pill, guys.

The good Professor Bainbridge also thinks many of these bloggers need to think again.

Will somebody please get these folks some cheese to go with their whine? I find these reactions not only short-sighted but also surprisingly unconservative. They reflect a willingness to put possible short-term partisan gain (and I emphasize the word possible) over both principle and long-term advantage.

Begging to Differ offers some rampant, baseless speculation.

WunderKraut:

What is wrong with you guys? This is not a compromise. This is a surrender! The Democrats must have gone to bed last night with a smile on their faces.

The Nose on Your Face has the results of the most recent Zogby Poll (Hah!). The top answer? “Frist.”

School children across the United States were asked: If you had to put someone down on the playground today, which insult would you be most likely to use?

Time will tell, which of these schools of thought are correct. Was this a brilliant move by the Democrats? A brilliant strategic move by the Republicans? Or was it legitimately a compromise that will server our country well?

The Funky Presbyterian is actually making an attempt to answer this question, and his answer may surprise you. Check it out.

Why do I say this? Because ultimately, for the Christian, the question “will there be baseball in Heaven” is not a question about baseball, or even heaven. It is a question about the nature and scope of the victory of Christ.

This may be difficult reading. Please please please post comments, ask questions etc etc. as you need clarification. I am a pastor and teacher at heart and nothing brings me more joy than questions. And beer. So if you don’t bring me joy, then bring me beer and we’ll call it even.

Part 1. Part 2.

Oh, and while you’re on the site, check out the new service he is offering: book cover reviews.

Instead, I’ve decided to write reviews of book covers. That’s right! Why put in several hours of labor to decipher all those tiny little letters when you can pretty much just look at a book’s cover and judge wether or not its any good? So my friends, the funky presbyterian now will provide you with the great community service of reviewing book covers of the books I would like to read if I had the time and energy.