Democrats are outraged that the Republican-controlled Senate might simply refuse to hold hearings on a qualified Supreme Court nomination made by President Obama, leaving the filling of the seat to the next President.

Marc Thiessen has yet another "where you stand depends on where you sit" story in the WaPo:

On Jan. 27, 1992, President [George H. W.] Bush nominated [John G.] Roberts to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Roberts was immensely qualified for the job. He had served since 1989 as principal deputy solicitor general of the United States, arguing 39 cases before the Supreme Court, making him one of the country's most experienced Supreme Court litigators.

But his nomination to the federal bench was dead on arrival at [Sen. Joseph] Biden's Senate Judiciary Committee. Biden refused to even hold a hearing on Roberts's nomination, much less a vote in committee or on the Senate floor. Roberts's nomination died in committee and was withdrawn on Oct. 8, 1992. It was only about a decade later that he was re-nominated to the federal bench by President George W. Bush -- and we all know the rest of the story.

Democrats have no monopoly on hypocrisy in this area, as I have noted before, but they do seem to be taking it to a new level.  They are calling the stalling unconstitutional.  No, it is not that, and I don't recall any Republicans saying it was when the shoe was on the other foot.  This is bare-knuckle politics, and it seems that with every cycle the Democrats take nastiness to a new level when they are blockers and scream louder when they are the blockees.