Q&A - How SCOTUS obstruction is different this year vs. last:
Today's entry: So I'm really curious to hear why it's ok for Republicans to obstruct Obama's SCOTUS pick but it's not ok for Democrats to do the same to Trump's. Not even you can spin this one.
Bottom Line: I love this question/challenge for two reasons. First there's a very straight-forward explanation. Second, it once again provides me an opportunity to point out that assuming makes something out of you and me (probably just you in this case but you know...). I'll start with the assumption...
I have a couple of real pet peeves. If you're a long time listener you might be able to pick up on them even though I very infrequently speak directly to them. The first is a lack intellectual honesty. I have more respect for self aware ideologues than I do close-minded people who pretend to be open to information that challenges their ideological worldview. The second is when I'm accused of a position, view, line of thinking, statement that I never made - my frustration is magnified when I've actually stated the opposite of the accusation as is the case here.
My espoused position last year at the time of the nomination was that Merrick Garland, President Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court, deserved a full hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee and provided that no red herrings would emerge during those hearings - a full vote in the US Senate. Republicans still would have had the opportunity to prevent the confirmation by majority vote if they felt it appropriate but instead opted for the politically expedite thing to do by just not even calling a committee hearing. Secondly, despite my view that the Senate Republicans didn't handle the Garland nomination as they probably should have, they were well within their rights to do so.
The US Constitution provides the US Senate that prerogative. So to address the aspect of the question as to why it's "not ok" for Senate Democrats to attempt to do the same. Most literally it's the Democrats prerogative to attempt to do so. It's extremely hypocritical to have called out Republicans for obstruction to a vote on Garland last year and then do the same this year but it's their prerogative to be hypocrites. It's extremely closed minded to say we'll "use every lever" to oppose whomever the nominee is without even having someone named but it's their prerogative to be close mined. They'll lose btw, because the American people also have a prerogative and voted that Republicans retain a majority in the US Senate in addition to switching directions with their Presidential choice.
If you have a topic or question you'd like me to address - bring your "A" game - and email me: email@example.com