"McConnell’s blunt refusal to consider Garland fits with the image of the broken, dysfunctional Republican Party ..."

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS: 
*  “The current obstruction led by Senate Democratic leaders threatens that balance. Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown deserve an up or down vote. It’s high time to make sure all judges receive a fair up or down vote on the Senate floor.”  Chuck Grassley - Senate Floor Speech, 4/23/05]  “Under the Constitution, the President has the primary appointment authority. 
We check that authority, but we may not hijack it. We may not use our role of advise and consent to undermine the President’s authority to appoint judges. That is why, as I have argued on this floor many times, it is wrong to use the filibuster to defeat judicial nominees who have majority support, who would be confirmed if only we could vote up or down. That is why I have never voted against cloture on a judicial nomination.”  Orrin Hatch- Floor Statement, Oct. 24, 2007, Cong. Rec. S13289
*  Antonin Sclalia was appointed in Ronald Reagan's last year in office and nobody screamed about letting the next president appoint the successor.
*  This is what the Senate did with Bork. Nominated 7/1/87. Voted on 10/23/87. They had hearings in between those dates. The vote was 58-42 against, but the thing is they had hearing and a vote and it took less than 4 months. That's what the Democrats did.
*  Just follow the Constitution. Do your job. You can vote him down. (Did you ever take Civics in school?)
*  The Tea Party members and too many other Republicans as well appear to have difficulty drawing conclusions from experience.  When they lost big in 2008 and 2012, they doubled down on obstructionism and immigrant bashing.  The Republicans are now on track to lose big in November and Hillary will get to nominate 3-4 Supreme Court Justices.  Question for the Republicans: Was it worth it?
*  Let 'em dig their heels in or even reject Garland. Let Hillary appoint the next justice and have Senate Majority leader Schumer use the nuclear option (simple majority to approve the SCOTUS justice). The Dems can say "Obama gave you a moderate and you told him where to shove it", now were going to get things done. So sad Republicans don't know how to say yes to the deal that harms them least, but that's what they've come to.
...................................................................................................................................................................
Juan Williams: GOP's Supreme Court block will backfire
By Juan Williams, April 25, 2016

As the GOP’s Senate majority hangs in the balance, here is the inspiring message from Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R- Ky.) as he asks voters to keep Republicans in charge: Senate Republicans will stop President Obama from putting anyone on the Supreme Court.

“The American people should have a voice in the selection of the next Supreme Court Justice,” McConnell said in February after the death of Associate Justice Antonin Scalia. “Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.”

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll last week found that 52 percent of registered voters want the Senate to vote this year on Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to replace Scalia. Just 30 percent say there should not be a vote, while 18 percent are undecided. 

Despite that strong message, McConnell refuses to hold confirmation hearings or a vote on Garland’s nomination. The Republican leader has even refused Garland the courtesy of an introductory meeting.

Yes, blocking a nominee from Obama will appeal to the hard-right base of the GOP. But McConnell’s most vulnerable Senate incumbents come from states that Obama won in 2012. 

Senate Republicans will need the votes of independents and conservative Democrats to hold on to their majority. How does blocking a centrist Democrat nominee to the high court help?

Three Republican senators have defied McConnell and agreed to meet with Garland. They are Illinois’ Mark Kirk, Pennsylvania’s Pat Toomey and New Hampshire’s Kelly Ayotte.

All three are in close reelection races in states that were carried by Democrats in the last three presidential elections.

Kirk won his Senate seat by less than 2 points in the Tea Party wave year of 2010. His likely Democratic opponent is popular Rep. Tammy Duckworth, an Iraq war veteran and double amputee.

Kirk is one of only two GOP senators, the other being Maine’s Susan Collins, who support a vote on Garland’s nomination. In a radio interview, Kirk told his colleagues to “man up” and have an up-or-down vote.

Toomey and Ayotte did not go so far as to call for a vote or a hearing after their meetings.

Toomey only won his seat by two percentage points in the GOP-friendly 2010 election.

After Ayotte met with Garland, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) pounced, saying it was shallow political theatre.

“Don’t be fooled by the dog and pony show Senator Kelly Ayotte is holding today – she is still choosing unprecedented constitutional obstruction over doing her job,” said Lauren Passalacqua, DSCC national press secretary.

This is all the consequence of McConnell’s decision to make blocking Garland the signature issue for Senate Republicans.

The White House and Senate Democrats have a clear message for McConnell: “It’s time for the Senate to do its job,” as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) put it in a March statement.

There is a hashtag movement, too, with the same loud drumbeat calling for the Senate to “#doyourjob.” President Obama joined in with a tweet in February that said the “Senate has no excuse to delay. #doyour job.”

McConnell’s blunt refusal to consider Garland fits with the image of the broken, dysfunctional Republican Party that is forcing Senate candidates to run away from its nominating convention.

Last week, four GOP senators said they would not attend the convention, set for Cleveland in July. Their message is that the selection of Donald Trump or Ted Cruz as the party’s presidential nominee — or a fight to push another name into the winner’s circle — is not going to help any Republican Senate candidate.

According to the most recent Cook Political Report, five out of six of the closest Senate races in the country are for seats currently held by Republicans. Moreover, the GOP is defending 24 Senate seats while the Democrats are only defending 10.

According to the most recent FEC filings, the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) has raised $49.5 million this election cycle while the DSCC has raised $74.3 million.

This means that the national Republican Party has fewer resources to spend on saving their most vulnerable incumbents and national Democrats have more resources to devote to taking them out.
If Senate Republicans lose their majority this November they will have no shortage of factors and people to blame. There can point to the down-ticket drag of a toxic presidential nominee like Trump or Cruz. Or they can look at the party’s broader failure to appeal to an electorate that is becoming more diverse all the time.

But they can also point to McConnell for forcing them to carry the albatross of Garland obstructionism around their necks. 

Chances are they will be able to find him in the Senate Minority Leader’s office in the Capitol next year. 
...................................................................................................................................................................