Elizabeth Warren Humiliates Mitch McConnell For Threat To Block Obama SCOTUS Nominee

[spooky3]

69. Thanks for the clarification. But if I am understanding your last pgh,

those who want to refuse "to even vote" may have an opportunity to do that if the Republican committee chair refuses to bring the nominee to the floor.

I agree with you if the earlier poster was meaning "act to resist" as objecting to Kennedy on the basis of his record or carefully scrutinizing his background. Is there any evidence that they, as a concerted group, objected IN ADVANCE of the nomination, simply on the basis of timing?

There is a big difference between Dems' (or Repubs') objection to the record OF A SPECIFIC NOMINEE (such as Kennedy) versus stating before anyone has even been nominated either that the President should not put forward a nominee simply because of timing, OR that they will filibuster or vote against someone who has not even been nominated. That is not "advise and consent."

Per Wikipedia:

"When his nomination was voted upon, Kennedy received bipartisan support. Maureen Hoch of PBS has written that he "virtually sailed through the confirmation process and was widely viewed by conservatives and liberals alike as balanced and fair".[18] The United States Senate confirmed him on February 3, 1988, by a vote of 97 to 0.[17] Kennedy received his commission on February 11, 1988."