Progressive pundits just couldn’t wait to start naming liberals they would nominate to the US Supreme Court to replace Justice Scalia. One particular suggestion for SCOTUS is solely designed to try to disgrace Justice Clarence Thomas.
Finally, Charles Pierce of Esquire argued semi-seriously that when Obama picks a nominee, he should go for maximum provocation (bolding added):
If the Republicans are going to invent a new constitutional tradition on the fly, I say the Republic is best served by making them choke on it. Already, Steve M. is pointing out the shitstorm that would break if the president were to nominate Attorney General Loretta Lynch…Let me suggest a name as well.
Professor Hill is a widely respected scholar of the law. She would be a fine addition to any court in the land. Also, she would make the Republicans eat their own faces, one at a time. Imagine the hearings. The Republicans would have no choice but to bring up the whole Clarence Thomas matter again. Although perhaps, this time, the other women who allegedly were harassed by Mr. Justice Thomas would not be intimidated out of testifying, and the Democratic senators would not be intimidated out of calling them…
Look. We’re all kidding ourselves anyway.
The Republicans likely aren’t even going to give the president’s nominee a committee hearing, let alone a confirmation vote…We might as well have some fun with this disgracefully futile exercise in allegedly constitutional government.
Anything to disgrace a conservative, right liberals?