Bottle of Wine, Fruit of the Vine - When You Gonna...

Paul Deignan that very brilliant worthy who writes Info Theory and the subject of an earlier "Newly Discovered Blogs" has sent me an e-mail:

GM, I got two spots open for this: Wine For Winners Challenge

Interested?

Paul

Imagine that, a fellow blogger enticing an upstanding member of the community and blogosphere such as myself into gambling and imbibing? Hard to imagine isn't it. Paul believes, as I do not, that the Compromise of the Fourteen is a good deal. He seems to think that it will "prevent" future judicial filibusters (at least during the remainder of G.W.Bush's term.)

Paul has set aside a few rules to stack the bet NOT in his favor such that:

1. So let me offer this, should the Dems filibuster more than one judicial nominee without incurring the nuclear option in this Congress from now forward, I will send a bottle of Merlot or some other type of your choice not to exceed $20 (thanks SCOTUS) to the first five right-leaning site owners who respond to the challenge and who are on record against the deal provided they will respond in kind should I be right.
Wine not whine. Takers? Respond here

2. I'll extend the deal to be for the entire current presidential term for those that are hesitant. (I can wait until 2009 for a $20 bottle of wine).

3. Well, despite my best efforts to prod our excitable friends into taking me up on this offer, it looks like they don't quite have the moxy. So caveat emptor of the latest fad political ideas to all those who would follow the first shrill alarm that would stampede the herd--the head is not fully committed to the trials of the hoof.

4. Alright--I'm dropping the tripwire down to one or more (rather than more than one) unanswered filibusters of judicial nominees in this Congress. I'm not sure that this is theoretically sound, but I would like to have fun with this proposition.

5. Well, I may be irrationally overconfident, but I'll allow that the time period is for the extent of Bush's term or the end of this Congress, whichever occurs later.

6. Now allowing that "Bush's term" is interpreted as this current presidential term, so that the challenge will possibly be determined on the date of the next presidential inauguration for all participants."

Paul has been taken up on his bet by no less worthies than Xrlq (newly added to my blogroll) and the author of Damnum Absque Injuria; The highly talented, pontificating Patterico who writes at Patterico's Pontifications, also on my blogroll and by Flap that industrious dentist [Q: How can you tell a dentist is sad? A: When they look "down in the mouth."] who writes at Fullosseous Flap's Dental Blog [Don't let the name fool you, FFDB is a delightful read - and also on my blogroll]. And now: GM, the wise, the magnificent, the courageous, the charming and oh so good looking accepts the challenge as well.

Hey, why not, I'm risking 20 bucks; if Paul loses, it's gonna cost him a hundred smackers (5 x $20.00 = $100.00 for you graduates of the California School System). $20.00 vs $100.00; whats not to like. Political beliefs like behavior ought to have consequences.

Paul, you understand that the last was tongue in cheek I hope. ;-)

At any rate, given that the Dems have already found the UN Ambassador to be an egregious exception to their "deal" (although they are disguising it as "we need more papers from the whitehouse"). I suspect that Paul will lose - Dems are not noted for keeping their "deals." Come to think of it, most politicians of any stripe aren't noted for keeping their deals.

At any rate, and because I'm getting sleepy again: Paul, I accept!