The issue with respect to prospective Supreme Court Justices, IMO,

[Mike 03]

and I'm not expert, to say the least...

I do not think this discussion should be only about intelligence.

Robert Bork was intelligent. Alito is intelligent. Plenty of judges are intelligent.

(It is true that some are not, and we can debate about those names, like Clarence Thomas and so fourth.)

If we cling obsessively to "intelligence" alone, in the case of nominating a Supreme Court Judge, we are being responsible in one respect, but blind in another.

It is our right, as the electorate, and as the citizens of the Democracy we have designed, to express our preference for justices who share our beliefs. There is nothing wrong with that. Even Presidents admit that they make their selections based not merely upon intelligence, awards and degrees, but also upon primary philosophy.

Is this not true?

Correct me if I'm wrong.

[pnwmom]

1. Of course not. But Sotomayer's not intelligent -- she's brilliant.

In addition to graduating Phi Beta Kappa and Summa cum laude, she received the top undergraduate award given at Princeton University, and she was editor of the Yale law review. No honest person could seriously question her intellectual capacity.

[Mike 03]

2. Let's hope so! I trust that she is!

I wish I'd been more thorough and articulate in my initial post.

Intellect is very valuable, but it has certain limits, prejudices and biases which need to be assessed, responsibly, by the President who nominates the person.

I'm very excited about having someone as brilliant as Obama selecting our new Justices.

This is why I voted for him.

[pnwmom]

3. I agree. Scalia, for example, has a cold and bloodless intellect. We don't need

another jurist with a high I.Q. and no emotional intelligence.