He’s right, for once. I think the GOP realizes there is little to gain by confirming an Obama nominee. SCOTUS is fine with 8 justices, and the next president will nominate right away.

But Obama’s show this morning was terrible. He knows the Senate will not confirm, and he doesn’t want Judge Garland confirmed; he is using him as a political prop in an effort to make himself look like something he’s not– a statesman. It’s a shame he’s doing this to the judge and it seemed to me this morning that Judge Garland doesn’t realize how he’s being used.

Via NPR.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell vowed again to block President Obama’s Supreme Court nomination Wednesday, saying the American people should have a “voice” in the process.

“It is a president’s constitutional right to nominate a Supreme Court justice, and it is the Senate’s constitutional right to act as a check on a president and withhold its consent,” McConnell said on the Senate floor following the president’s nomination of Court of Appeals Judge Merrick Garland.

In his remarks earlier in the day, President Obama had called for the Senate to put politics aside and confirm Garland. Obama praised Garland’s collegiality and ability to build consensus, saying “he’s shown a rare ability to bring together odd couples.”

A Supreme Court nomination, Obama said is “supposed to be above politics, it has to be, and should stay that way.”

McConnell’s comments came after a pledge he made last month that that the Senate would take no action on the nomination, setting the stage for a political fight. McConnell said Wednesday that the “the decision the Senate made weeks ago remains about a principle, not a person.”

That’s rich– As Obama’s setting up a purely political fight, he announces the nomination “should be” above politics. He never fails to be the jerkiest person in the room.


This section is for comments from's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
3 Comments | Leave a comment
  1. Shifra says:

    Excellent points, Tammy.

    And I would like to add that for seven years, we have been hearing how racist we all are, every time we criticize Obama. Today, Van Jones called Judge Garland “milquetoast.” So, I think we should all consider Jones’ comment to be anti-Semitic *and* racist. Hey, as they say, “Two can play the same game.”

  2. Alain41 says:

    Question for McConnell; To be consistent with this principle, will you promise to not pass significant legislation during the lame duck session? Because that would be worse, having Senators who are leaving Congress voting on major laws. If no promise, then seems as Obama is correct, you are just playing politics.

  3. Alain41 says:

    Good column by Seth Lipsky on history of Advise and Consent as explained in Federalist Paper 69, which was written/published to convince New York State to ratify the Constitution, which it subsequently did. Summary; the Senate is under no obligation to hold hearings or vote on a President’s nomination.

You must be logged in to post a comment.