If you're an ordinary person, you might think the Supreme Court fight is a battle between an obstructionist party and a non-obstructionist party. Maybe you think the two parties have swapped roles, although Democrats in living memory have never refused to allow a Supreme Court vacancy to be filled -- even when they voted down Robert Bork three decades ago, they ultimately approved Anthony Kennedy.
But according to Michael Shear of The New York Times, this isn't a battle between obstructionist Republicans and non-obstructionist Democrats -- it's a battle between two camps full of connivers. And, in fact, the Democratic camp's conniving deserves more of the attention:
Supreme Court Vacancy Has Left and Right Ready to Pounce
Could there be a more "both sides do it" headline?
President Obama’s senior adviser and his top lawyer were blunt with liberal activists on a strategy call as they jumped into what political professionals in Washington expect to be one of the hardest-fought Supreme Court battles in a generation.
In what one participant described as part pep rally and part planning session, Valerie Jarrett, a senior adviser to Mr. Obama, and Neil Eggleston, the White House chief counsel, urged dozens of the president’s allies who were on the phone not to hold back in their condemnation of Republicans for refusing to hold hearings to replace Justice Antonin Scalia, who died last week.
