Please enjoy this Supreme Court-related segment from yesterday's Media Buzz wherein liberal panelist Tamara Holder (a) misunderstands my initial point completely, (b) offers several misstatements about history and the constitution, and (c) interrupts my final answer with a question -- the response to which she was not prepared for, via Right Sightings:
In these circumstances, one must pick one's spots, so I chose not to correct Ms. Holder on her Bork comparisons, which were incorrect both regarding the year in which that confirmation battle took place (she was off by nearly two-and-a-half decades) as well as the tone of Bork's critics. Her constitutional assertion was patently false, as evidenced by the text of the document itself. And her decision to showcase her lack of awareness about the abundant Democratic hypocrisy on judicial appointments -- interrupting my concession that this sort of thing also occurs among Republicans -- seemed...unwise. Had there been more time, I would have expanded upon the sitting Vice President's extensive 'Biden Rule' comments, or the Reid/Schumer standard from the waning years of George W. Bush's presidency, or Barack Obama becoming the first president in history to demand up-or-down votes for his nominees after having attempted to deny one of his predecessors' picks the same opportunity via the filibuster. I'll leave you with the White House chief of staff and Senate Democrats' lame duck minority leader getting grilled over the very double standards Ms. Holder evidently had never heard about -- courtesy of the Free Beacon:
And before you go, consider conservative columnist George Will's against-the-grain analysis of SCOTUS vacancy politics.