As Obama Moves To Replace Scalia, The Press Enables Radical GOP Obstruction

[Bill USA]

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/02/15/as-obama-moves-to-replace-scalia-the-press-enab/208599

In the wake of Antonin Scalia's sudden death, the Beltway press almost immediately began to seamlessly frame the unfolding debate about the Supreme Court Justice's replacement along the contours of Republican talking points. To do so, the press continued its habit of looking away from the GOP's stunning record of institutional obstructionism since 2009.

Immediately after the news broke of Scalia's passing, Republican Senate leaders, GOP presidential candidates, and conservative commentators declared that the job of picking Scalia's replacement should be performed not by President Obama, but by his successor.

Quickly suggesting that Obama was picking a "fight" with Republicans by signaling he plans to fulfill his constitutional duty by nominating Scalia's successor, the press aided Republicans by presenting this radical plan to obstruct the president as being an unsurprising move that Democrats would likely copy if put in the same position during an election year. (Given the rarity of the situation precedents aren't perfect, but it's worth mentioning that during the election year of 1988, Democrats actually did the opposite, confirming Justice Anthony Kennedy unanimously.)

The framework for much of the coverage regarding the GOP's radical demand that Scalia's seat sit empty for a year is this: It's Obama's behavior that's setting off a showdown, and of course Republicans would categorically oppose anyone Obama nominates. But journalists often don't explain why: Why is it obvious Obama would have zero chance of getting a Supreme Court nominee confirmed when every president in the past has been able to fill vacancies?

It is unusual for a president to face a Supreme Court vacancy his final year in office? It is. But there's nothing in the Constitution to suggest the rules change under the current circumstances. (Obama still has 50 weeks left in office.) It's Republicans who have declared that all new rules must apply. And it's the press that has rather meekly accepted the extreme premise.
(more)

What are we to do with those who are opposed to Government getting anything done - or at least opposed to the Government doing anything that isn't consistent with their religion of Plutocracy? This Republican problem needs a solution.

[santafe52]

1. Thank you!!!

Incredible how the GOP talking points always BECOME the news story. Responsible journalists should be laughing at the Republicans' suggestions of waiting until the next administration, and returning to the real topic before us….Who will Obama place as our next Justice?

Amazing how compliant the media is with the constant stream of GOP dirty tricks.

[Bill USA]

6. the M$M - in particular network news/magazine shows are like trained dogs. A little hand gesture

from the GOP and the GOP toadies of M$M eagerly jump, roll-over or parrot the latest GOP Party line to remain in the good graces of the Rabid Right.


.. This is one of the major political stories of the last few decades. I think it started in the 1980's - the GOP applying pressure and criticism of M$M in a more determined and relentless manner. Ownership of M$M by corporate RWers is of course a very important part of this too.

This, or course, is not something that we'll EVER hear discussed on M$M television (GOP-tv). Anytime Democrats criticize M$M toadies for biased treatment of news events the Tv-journalists smirk and dismiss such criticism as Democrats asking for favorable covereage: "Gosh we can't please everybody"... AS if the Democrats are asking for biased presentation of events - when Democrats are criticizing the GOP Toadies of patently biased coverage (and it has to be REALLY bad before Democrats will voice any criticism of the media) slanted to GOP talking points (i.e. Propaganda).

[elleng]

2. Supreme Court vacancies in presidential election years

'The historical record does not reveal any instances since at least 1900 of the president failing to nominate and/or the Senate failing to confirm a nominee in a presidential election year because of the impending election. In that period, there were several nominations and confirmations of Justices during presidential election years.'>>>

http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/supreme-court-vacancies-in-presidential-election-years/

[mpcamb]

3. "... the Beltway press "

They really are a worthless lot, aren't they?

[Midnight Writer]

4. Once again, the GOP benefits from "Political Correctness" (though they claim they hate it)

When they play their BS games, the press strives for equivalency. Their nonsense is thus legitimized.

The mainstream media position here is that Obama's insistence on nominating a Justice is just as divisive and politically driven as the GOP's pledge to block any appointment, regardless of the merits.

We see this legitimization by the press everyday. Have you seen one negative assessment of Scalia? Even a mild criticism?

The same with Saturday's Republican debate. The coverage is focused on "who won points", not the fact that every one of their candidates seem emotionally unhinged and unable to comprehend reality.

[shadowmayor]

5. GD TV machine

The puss-filled readers who come at us through our TV machines don't even know the difference between a fight and an obligation. The propaganda we are fed would make an old KGB editor at Pravda jealous. What passes for news is pathetic. When was the last time we heard a word about Fukushima???