Sorry Lefties, Procedural Obstructionism Isn't Constitutional Obstructionism

I know the hot new Media Matters talking point is to shout that Republicans are against the Constitution and guilty of "Constitutional Obstructionism" for blocking proposed Supreme Court appointments.

Constitutional Obstructionism is just another way of saying filibuster. Which is to say, procedural obstructionism. If the Democrats want to argue that procedural obstructionism is Constitutional obstructionism, they can go right ahead and do that. But that would mean they're guilty of Constitutional obstructionism in spades.

As I discussed in my article, the Democrats used procedural obstructionism to block Bush's judicial nominees for anywhere from 4 to 6 years. Not 1 year. Judge Owen, a moderate and qualified nominee, was obstructed for four years. An entire term.

But when she was nominated for the Fifth Circuit in the spring of '01, Senate Democrats denied her a vote for four years until the spring of '05. When the vote finally came up, Obama voted against her.

That's the length of an entire presidential term. This wasn't running out the clock on a lame duck presidency. Senate Democrats refused the "up and down vote" they're demanding to a nominee for 4 years. They filibustered her and threw tantrums that would have embarrassed a six-year-old.

Is this Constitutional obstructionism?

As a practical matter, the branches of government are in a constant tug of war with each other. And the Senate has its own internal conflicts which are fought using procedure. This was always meant to be. Arguing that such obstructionism is somehow a violation of the Constitution is debatable. The Constitution was built to allow power struggles to take place within its general framework.

Obama has actually done unconstitutional things. ObamaCare is one of many examples. Arguably his illegal war in Libya was another. He has usurped the power of the other branches of government on more than one occasion in ways that the Constitution quite clearly disapproves of. And he abused his power over Americans in ways that the Constitution explicitly rules out.

Procedural obstructionism has a long, if not necessarily proud, history in the Senate. Both parties have made use of it. Pretending otherwise is silly propaganda.