Can McConnell perform basic math?

According to Mitch McConnell Sotomayor's 48 days between nomination and confirmation hearings would be the shortest in recent memory. Unfortunately for McConnell it turns out that this accusation is both easily verifiable and not even close to true. As it turns out, if you go back through all nominations where hearings took place (Myers doesn't count) to when Stevens was nominated (and throw in Rehnquist's first nomination since his promotion to chief is in there) there are 13 nominations to consider. 5 of which are shorter than 48 days and one which is 49. If you add in Sotomayor's 48 day gap you get precisely half (7 of 14) of hearings that have a delay of equal length or 1 day longer than Sotomayors. Oh my, the injustice of it all.

McConnell is right that you have to go WAY back, a full 4 (Roberts, Alito, Souter, and then the magic 4th Ginsburg) to find a shorter gap of 36...for Clinton's nominee to a REPUBLICAN Senate. In that time span you pass Roberts, who was only a week longer at 55 days and who had only a SEVEN day gap between when he was reappointed to the chief spot from the associate justice spot he was originally slated for and his hearings. Oh my, what games the Democrats are playing. It gets worse. Of the past 14 nominations 1 was only 10 days and another only 13 (In fairness these are the 2 oldest). This is hardly sounding like some rigged game or the shortest nomination in recent memory, unless recent memory is only supposed to apply to Roberts and Alito, in which case, how dare Leahy not wait that extra "Roberts" week. A delay, by the way, that was a direct result of Roberts' promotion to chief since, if memory serves, he was actually slated for hearings in that week but was pushed back due to the reappointment. I guess that means if Roberts suddenly retires and Sotomayor is promoted on July 13th making Leahy wait a week then McConnell won't be complaining.

I wouldn't make such a big deal of this but for the fact that McConnell grandstanded on the Senate floor as if the Democrats were pulling the wool over the Republicans' eyes. Given that Sotomayor's name had been floated as a potential Obama pick from when he first took office this was no surprise to Republicans. They've had plenty of time, even if you only count the 7 weeks between nomination and hearings. As for her "longest record" thats a GOOD thing. That means they need less time to privately interview her and less time to come up with questions to figure out where she stands because we already know where she stands to a large degree.

Look, I'm not a big fan of Sotomayor, I think I've made that pretty clear in the past. However, I think its absurd to try to act as if the Democrats are hiding the ball here. Its pretty clear who she is and where she stands. The questions that need to be asked are apparent, and 48 days is more than enough time to find any less obvious ones. McConnell has bigger things to worry about than cry wolf on this ridiculous issue, and it pisses me off when politicians try to pull these shenanigans hoping that people will only hear the lie and not the follow-up story with the truth.

Madison