No one questions the qualifications, intellect or integrity of the man President Obama nominated to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia.
Judge Merrick Garland won easy bipartisan Senate confirmation to become the chief judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit a decade ago, with the votes and praise of several Republican senators who today, like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), refuse even to extend the courtesy of a personal meeting with the nominee.
McConnell accused the President of "politicizing" the nomination by sending it up in an election year, but it really is McConnell who has obscenely politicized the constitutional process.
The New York Times describe McConnell's dilemma in blocking this nomination of a centrist who some Democrats feel is too conservative:
If the Republicans refuse to accept him, they will face one of two scenarios: a nominee selected by Hillary Clinton, who may well be more liberal, or one chosen by President Donald Trump — a racist, vulgar demagogue who many Republicans have said is unfit to run the country.
If McConnell really believes a President should not be able to make such decisions in his final year in office and that should be left until after the next election, then fairness would dictate that no senator in the final year of his or her term and who supports McConnell's position on this should be allowed to vote on anything until after the election.
But I don't think that's the real motivation for McConnell, who repeatedly vowed to make Obama a one-termer and assure his presidency is a failure.
Does anyone really believe McConnell would be blocking any Supreme Court nomination if it were sent to the Senate by an outgoing white Republican president?