About that thing Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said about not confirming George Bush's Supreme Court nominees, forget it. That was a completely different situation, the New York Democrat insists in a new column defending his remarks from nine years ago. In the aftermath of Justice Scalia's death, some conservatives have defended their decision not to confirm a Supreme Court replacement in the waning months of Obama's presidency by pointing back to Schumer's own statements. Back then, the Democrat left little doubt where he stood: "We should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court, except in extraordinary circumstances." And he said that with 19 months left in Bush's term -- not nine!
Now, almost a decade later, the senator has had a change of heart, arguing that the GOP's position is an "apples to oranges comparison" to his in 2007. But let's face it: the only thing that's different between then and now is who controls the White House! "[Judicial nominees] must prove by actions, not words, that they are in the mainstream rather than we have to prove that they are not," Schumer said nine years ago.
Fast-forward to this week, when Schumer is calling Majority Leader Mitch McConnell "an obstructionist" for holding the same position -- with even less time on the lame duck president's clock! Desperate to change the record, the senator is trying to put some distance between his position and Republicans'. "What I said in the speech given in 2007 is simple: Democrats, after a hearing, should entertain voting no if the nominee is out of the mainstream and tries to cover that fact up. There was no hint anywhere in the speech that there shouldn't be hearings or a vote..."
On the contrary, what Senator Schumer told his colleagues is that they not only have the right, but the responsibility to block a lame-duck president from appointing justices. Apparently, liberals like their history like their Constitution: revised.
