HotAir: Filibuster in haste, repent at leisure. Senate Democrats blocked an amendment from a floor vote that would have required Iran to release all Americans detained in their country and a formal recognition of Israel’s right to exist before Barack Obama’s nuclear deal could go into effect. Republicans only got 53 votes to move forward to a floor vote, setting up a potential fight over the future of the filibuster itself.McConnell finally doing what we've suggested since the GOP regained Senate leadership? Don't count on it. That would require a smidge of courage. Something Flake has evidently found, albeit on the wrong side of the aisle once again.
Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) stuck with the GOP on the procedural vote, but announced that he would oppose the amendment if it came to a floor vote. Flake argued that the conditions are not serious enough to make a prerequisite for entering into a deal.
Both parties in this case made errors. Mitch McConnell would have done better to restrict the amendment to the fate of US hostages, whose disregard in these talks is indefensible. Recognition of Israel by the mullahs not only is a poison pill, but who’d believe them if they actually complied? Its inclusion allowed Democrats a political out for blocking it.
Strategically, though, the filibuster of this bill will be a disaster for Democrats. Why not have a floor vote? Obama would veto the bill, and Democrats have more than enough votes in both chambers to sustain it. Instead, they made themselves look weak and craven for no difference in outcome in protection of a President whose name is already all over this deal. It’s an incredibly dumb move, one that some Democrats will regret when they stand for re-election.
So, this leaves us with the big question: Does McConnell go nuclear on the filibuster in order to hold a floor vote that won’t prevent Iran from going nuclear in the end?
Related link: GOP senator breaks with McConnell strategy
