Watch Carefully

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia passed away over the weekend.  In the wake of his passing, there are two noteworthy things.  First the good, to read about the friendship between Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the two political polar extremes on the current SCOTUS.  Ginsburg is about as liberal as you can get, and Scalia about as conservative, but they actually liked each other.  They voluntarily spent time together, and Ginsburg referred to Scalia as her "best buddy."  According to the narrative being adopted by most of our society, this is not supposed to happen.  We are supposed to divide up into teams of the like minded and hunker down to win the fight.  Ginsburg noted that when she would write a document for the court and Scalia would write a dissent, the dissent and the dialogue would make her better, it would free the writing of "applesauce and arglebargle," because he could be counted on to call her on it.  I can't help but marvel at the fact that such a relationship managed to exist at the center of our most contentious and polarized system.  It calls to mind G.K. Chesterton and George Bernard Shaw, and Lincoln and Douglas.
And it makes me despair all the more about what is revving up in other quarters.  Liberal types are not always doing a great job at containing their glee at the fact that Scalia has passed.  He was, after all, the conservative bell cow of the court.  Agree with him or not, he was a force of nature on the right, I often got the feeling that Justice Thomas was simply going along for a ride on the Scalia train, when it came to dissents and voicing the conservative opinions.  Roberts and Alito, seem to be candles in the wind compared to the stalwart conservatism of Scalia, it will be interesting to see the court dynamic without him.
Which leads to the latest nightmare faced by the Republican side of the aisle: Obama gets to pick Scalia's replacement.  I'm almost beginning to feel sorry for them (not really).  Now, on top of having to deal with a Democrat that produced a recovering economy, a functional Affordable Care Act, and a Democratic party that's got a new pulse, they have to figure out a way of blocking Obama's inevitable nomination without seeming like a bunch of spoiled crybabies throwing a tantrum.  Majority Leader McConnell has already promised just such a petulant and borderline treasonous display.  Some people have mentioned the Thurmond rule that said Presidents in the final year of their term shall not nominate SC justices, but there is next to zero constitutional reason for Obama to abide by such a pronouncement, which was essentially just a statement made by notorious racist Strom Thurmond in order to block the promotion of Justice Abe Fortas to Chief Justice, during the segregation disputations. (Funny how racism seems to keep rearing it's head)
The fact of the matter is that, given the state of political affairs, the Republican establishment ought to sort of thank their lucky stars that this task falls to Obama.  He is probably going to pick a reasonable, moderate candidate, because Obama (all slander to the side) is a reasonable, moderate President. This fact seems to get lost amidst all the hullabaloo.  The Supreme Court, despite all ravings to the contrary, is one of the more stable and least activist institutions of our government.  It behooves our nation to have solid representation from a variety of perspectives and locations on the political spectrum (see above about Scalia and RBG).  It would not serve our nation well to have a Court packed with liberals or conservatives.  Replacing Scalia with a moderate would not destroy the balance.  In fact, it would probably cement the identity of the Roberts court as a decidedly middle of the road bunch. (Need I remind everyone about the checks and balances)
The only way the Republican Congress can effectively block an Obama nomination, is to actively resist doing their constitutional duty to provide a nominee with a fair and timely confirmation process.  You can be pretty sure that Obama is not going to trot out a Democratic/liberal version of Robert Bork or even a Clarence Thomas for this one, because Obama is nothing if not shrewd and diligent when it comes to stuff like this. My guess would be this is the moment where the Republican power structure has to decide whether to actually act as sane governors of our nations or, in perhaps the most undeniable display yet, prove to the American people that they are engaging in Against Obama politics.
That, my fellow voters, is not a good standard by which to run a country, unless you're trying to run it straight into the ground.