CNN: That Whole 'Next Prez Should Pick The Judges' Thing? Um.
Sooooo, ya'll, remember that whole Next Guy Should Pick Judges Because Teh Willz of Teh Peoplez idea? It didn't pan out, and if you bought that bill of goods, you're going to feel sad in your insides, because turns out that Republicans weren't being... um. Well anyhow they changed their minds:
"I promise you that we will be united against any Supreme Court nominee that Hillary Clinton, if she were president, would put up," McCain said. "I promise you. - John McCain, (R-Naturally)
The Deal: Since "Justice" Scalia died in his bed instead of the fiery blaze he deserved, Republicans have been all about blocking supreme court nominations. To wit: they've turned their collective nose up at the objectively-not-particularly-liberal and universally admired intellectual fella Judge Merrick Garland, because the next president, not the Kenyan Manchurian, should be the one to fill vacancies. And it's only a year, after all. No big whoop to LEAVE A SEAT OPEN ON THE SUPREME FUCKING COURT BECAUSE SPITE. Because The People, y'know, only elected Barack Obama; they didn't intend that he do his job in the final year. And now, because the RNC fielded a very unfunny joke and Hillary Clinton is handing them back their shredded asses, they're extending this fever dream into the next administration.
So I guess the deal is, unless democrats get -- in addition to the White House -- a majority in both the Senate and the House, we're all looking down the barrel of years more of this childish, dangerous, unpatriotic bullshit in which the red side of the aisle subverts the work of governing, because they don't like how the election came out.
Pious types out there who say it's terrible, very bad, no good, not ok, for one party to have all three branches, feel free to tell us all how that axiom holds true in this particular, shining moment in the history of the American Experiment. We'll need visual aids, probably; maybe a flow chart.