Ed Schultz is calling on Obama to be bold and nominate a dyed-in-the-wool liberal for SCOTUS.

[onehandle]

He did the same on "The Ed Show" last Friday.

[Aloha Spirit]

1. I'm pretty positive that's exactly what Obama will do

From reading Audacity of Hope, Obama's floor speech on Alito, his comments during the campaign, I don't believe he views the conservative wing of the SC as healthy diversity, but as an affront to the traditional role of the court. He doesn't believe in original intent since the founders didn't agree when the Constitution was written. Lacking empathy, or defending the powerful, isn't representative of one end of a healthy political spectrum on the court, it is wrong.
While Obama may back a senate candidate who is slightly conservative, he won't choose a nominee who is "slightly wrong".

[NYC Liberal]

2. Exactly. Can we not have an extremely qualified candidate who is also a liberal?

Why not?

We have 59 votes in the Senate ... assuming the deal with Specter was that he would vote for cloture in exchange for supporting him in the election next year. We can get one more Republican who believes in the "upperdownvote." That should take care of any filibuster and then it's smooth sailing.

[polmaven]

4. Perhaps by the time this vote is taken

there will be 60 Democrats in the Senate. It will loikely be the end of June or later before it is before the Senate, and by that time, the MI debacle should be over....Unless, of course, the case ends up AT the SCOTUS level.

[CatWoman]

3. and I'm with Ed

both on this subject, and on Arlen Specter.