If the women and Hispanics chosen are intelligent, qualified Constitutionalists, than by all means, appoint them!

The racist media believes that the only important characteristic of an individual is their race or sex.

Janice Rogers Brown, for example.

Jack

He has also, more recently, told Democrats that he supported Ginsburg and Breyer also, so they have nothing to worry over.

The 4 justices most likely to be replaced are the Liberal Bloc. So if elected Obama can’t really change the balance of the court. He can just make the Liberal Bloc younger.

but BHO would never appoint Janice rogers Brown or Miguel Estrada, the lib RATS tried to filibuster them to death

Yes

Remember, one Ginsberg can totally nullify the IQ of the remainder of the court.

“`Regardless of who is elected president, there will be strong sentiments in favor of appointing a woman or someone who would reflect other elements of diversity such as an Hispanic or African-American,’’

As long as he or she is another Clarence Thomas.....okay by me.

My favorite is Scalia though. I wish they all could be Anthony Scalias.

Call me old fashioned. But whats wrong with a little meritocracy?

Miguel Estrada!

Not surprising they’d be looking for other demographic groups, but yes, they DO need to be qualified, which I’m sure McCain could find.

I would only feel pressure to get the best possible SCOTUS Judge I could find. Race, gender and all that is irrelevant. I find the very thought process behind this article misguided and odious on its face.

If I was president, I would do anything to get Janice Rogers Brown on the Court.

Affirmative action will help kill this country.

Interesting you should bring him up.

Miguel Estrada, not John Roberts, was Bush’s first choice for Supreme Court. However, Estrada was so disgusted with the confirmation process, he refused to even consider it. I don’t blame him, but it’s the nation’s loss.

I have a dream.

I have a dream that someday we will have a president with enough integrity to select cabinet members and judicial nominees on the basis of their qualifications and ability rather than on the color of their skin, their sexual preferences or crotch configuration.

1925: What are you, some kind of [classical] liberal radical who thinks all people are created equal?

2008: What are you, some kind of racist far-right extremist?

The problem is with this line of thinking is that it assumes the conservatives on the court are immortal, or at least guaranteed to live longer. As we all know, any one of them (or us) can drop dead tomorrow. I certainly don’t want Obama in charge of replacing Scalia or any of the other sane justices.

That is very true. This is why McCain must win, even though he is not the ideal nominee.

Source please...

Above: Judge Janice Rogers Brown

There were dozens of blogs, up to the Politico. It was at the meeting with former Clinton supporters at his house.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2031895/posts?page=61

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0608/McCain_mingles_with_Clinton_supporters.html

You surely did not expect the MSM to promulgate this, did you?

Priority 1: Intelligent, qualified Constitutionalists.
Race, cultural origin (”Hispanic” is not a race, despite what La Raza says) and sex really should not enter into the equation.

Oh please. Enough of this. Just get us the best qualified person.

What difference does it make? I never heard of the "Founding Mothers" or the "Founding Mexicans" or the "Founding African-Americans" having put together this country's principles.

Maybe it's just me, but "diversity" doesn't trump old-fashioned common sense and tradition, in my book....nor should the PLAIN MEANING be contorted to adopt some alternative interpretation that suits the "diverse" perspective.

(Guess I still cling to the old "love it or leave it" principle).

I think this is all BS. I want an American. Someone who believes in the words of our founders.

It seems that even conservatives now are falling into the PC world of BS.

Makes me ill.

They should be included in the pool. Maybe it could be a tie-breaker, but that's all. As soon as it becomes a big positive factor, you are eliminating the best jurists for reasons of race or sex. Politicizing the judiciary is bad on principle, and bad in practice.

In what cases have you thought Scalia was better than Thomas?

I think though as a new POTUS McCain would have the credibility to nominate Estrada. The dems would be fools to block an hispanic for SCOTUS. The stakes are much higher.

There are no asians on the court. How about we get Ito from the OJ trial?

When will we see a native American on the Supreme Court?

And what about a transgendered judge?

Women and black people and even hispanics are passe. They keep all of the other minority groups down while doing nothing for them.

“I think though as a new POTUS McCain would have the credibility to nominate Estrada.”

He would, but that doesn’t mean that Miguel Estrada would accept the offer. As for the DemocRATS, the only way I see them allowing Estrada to be confirmed is if he replaced Antonin Scalia (who is aging and could conceivably retire).

I think with the promise of a hispanic groundswell Estrada could be convinced. I don’t think there is any hispanic equivalent of the black term “uncle Tom.” The democrats then would find it very uncomfortable in to raise such heat in a SCOTUS nomination and face a hispanic backlash.