Stevieslaw: The Senate and the Supreme Court
There seem to be subtle differences between the people currently serving in the Senate and those who are (or were) on the Supreme Court. For example, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who could not be more philosophically opposed to the views of former Justice Antonin Scalia, said today of Scalia, “when I wrote for the Court and received a Scalia dissent, the opinion ultimately released was notably better than my initial circulation. Justice Scalia nailed all the weak points—the apple sauce and ‘argle bargle’—and gave me just what I needed to strengthen the majority opinion.”
Over on the Senate side, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio—who are as philosophically close as the obverse and reverse of a dime, disagreed over who is a true conservative. Cruz accused an eight year old Rubio of playing ping-pong with the son of a prominent Democrat. Rubio vehemently denied the charge and accused Cruz of “lies, lies and more lies.” Attack ads on both sides of this earthshattering issue have already begun to appear in South Carolina. (Others have weighed in—Trump, for example, declared he has never lost at ping-pong.)
The Senate gets to approve or disapprove of the President’s Supreme Court nominee. What could go wrong?