Just for the record, I think that the Senate Judiciary Committee should conduct hearings on the appointment of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court with all deliberate speed and, if the appointment is approved by the committee, the appointment should be brought for a vote to the whole Senate.
For the record, I know that if the dems were in the republican’s positions of calling for vote, on a nominee from a republican president, with an election some 8 mos away, they would be making the same callous, immovable calls to respectfully put the nominee on ice.
Perhaps, if the vacancy to be filled wasn’t an iconic conservative like Scalia, there would be more give and flexibility to the republican stance. However, in a heated political election year, where the republican elite have been roundly chastised for being an ineffective opposition party to the Obama administration, I think they will have to stand their ground. It has been opined that if a dem wins, the Senate might try to do a 180 on Garland. But, I guess Obama could withdraw Garland’s nomination, knowing that HRC could then place a far left candidate into that position.
It’s all politics, which has grown dangerously into a game of chess for party satisfaction not for the country or it’s people.
And I’d still be calling for the Senate Judiciary Committee to conduct hearings and, if approved by the committee, the appointment to be brought to the Senate floor.
“I know that if the dems were in the republican’s positions of calling for vote, on a nominee from a republican president, with an election some 8 mos away, they would be making the same callous, immovable calls to respectfully put the nominee on ice.”
Actually, when it has happened, Democrats have confirmed the Republican nominee.
Steve
I’m fairly ambivalent. I think Obama played this well. I think the Republican politics are complicated; I would have to put on a party organizing hat to have an opinion.
I agree Dave.