Ah, the opportunities that the Obama win bring to many areas of life in these diverse and problematic states.  We are really not united very strongly, you know.  We are divided roughly in half between 'praise Obama' and 'revile Obama'.  Mr. Bush's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are supported by enough to keep them going while there are many who seem to have no opinion and no spark of "patriotism" or opposition.  Our national economy is in free fall and yet there is more panic about "Swine Flu" than being out of work and having the threat of foreclosure looming overhead for far too many of those once confident that there was no limit to be made by investing in real estate.

Do you have your favorite Justice of the Supreme Court who needs to be replaced by someone more "Justice-like"?  I have three prime suspects: Justices Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito.  These, of course were choices of the managers of the Republican agenda which once seemed sure of taking control of the Courts making the government wholly Conservative if not Reactionary. I had no idea that David Souter (characterized as "stealth", meaning not much is known about him except for a certain reclusivity) wanted out.  When they get older, those who have been APPOINTED for life, begin to think the honor binds them to work (although it seems to be a dream job) with short hours, many perks and immunity from attack despite accusations that you are one thing or another or not one thing or another.

One might hope that the Justices appointed and sealed on to the Court by Senatorial concurrence would be free of political interference.  I don't see how they can elevate themselves over the morass of political plots and plans by either of the two major parties or the plethora of small seething anti this or anti that (or pro this or pro that) groups claiming to be legitimate third parties or replacements for either of the two major parties.  The Supreme Court Justices are people just like you and me.  They bring to the Court a wildly wide variety of experiences no one can reconcile into one solid Court.  Cutting out Thomas, Scalia and Alito might help but replacing them would test the patience of Solon or a Solomon. I am not sure but a wholly "Liberal" Court might be regressive.

Mr. Souter wants out and, it seems to many, earlier than necessary.  Unlike other Courts in the past where some older members are remembered for sleeping while adjudicating important cases, he is young and reclusive. Ruth B. Ginsburg has been ill and may want to step down but she seems to be happy and there are those that are older and still active.  She is NOT reclusive but now the hunt for a replacement for Souter (appointed by Republican Bush I) who is open, moderate, and approved by justices and lawyers who recommend new Justices for their fairness and immunity to political causes.  "Reclusive" is not really so bad.  I wonder what an all female Supreme Court would render as justice under the Constitution of the U.S.

The most important requirement, according to my often wrong wisdom is to not select the replacement for Mr. Souter (who was mentioned as Chief Justice in the Miami Herald - that would make Mr. Roberts sit up and take notice) by the political route.  The new Justice, whether originally in politics on either side and whether female to keep company with Ruth B. Ginsburg, should be recommended by members of the legal profession - a process of winnowing down to an individual perceived as most fair and not bound by political debts.  A short list should then be presented to the President who would make a selection and pass it on to the Senate - I hope without the need for acrimonious debate and filibustering.

Ah, the opportunities that the Obama win bring to many areas of life in these diverse and problematic states.  We are really not united very strongly, you know.  We are divided roughly in half between 'praise Obama' and 'revile Obama'.  Mr. Bush's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are supported by enough to keep them going while there are many who seem to have no opinion and no spark of "patriotism" or opposition.  Our national economy is in free fall and yet there is more panic about "Swine Flu" than being out of work and having the threat of foreclosure looming overhead for far too many of those once confident that there was no limit to be made by investing in real estate.

Do you have your favorite Justice of the Supreme Court who needs to be replaced by someone more "Justice-like"?  I have three prime suspects: Justices Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito.  These, of course were choices of the managers of the Republican agenda which once seemed sure of taking control of the Courts making the government wholly Conservative if not Reactionary. I had no idea that David Souter (characterized as "stealth", meaning not much is known about him except for a certain reclusivity) wanted out.  When they get older, those who have been APPOINTED for life, begin to think the honor binds them to work (although it seems to be a dream job) with short hours, many perks and immunity from attack despite accusations that you are one thing or another or not one thing or another.

One might hope that the Justices appointed and sealed on to the Court by Senatorial concurrence would be free of political interference.  I don't see how they can elevate themselves over the morass of political plots and plans by either of the two major parties or the plethora of small seething anti this or anti that (or pro this or pro that) groups claiming to be legitimate third parties or replacements for either of the two major parties.  The Supreme Court Justices are people just like you and me.  They bring to the Court a wildly wide variety of experiences no one can reconcile into one solid Court.  Cutting out Thomas, Scalia and Alito might help but replacing them would test the patience of Solon or a Solomon. I am not sure but a wholly "Liberal" Court might be regressive.

Mr. Souter wants out and, it seems to many, earlier than necessary.  Unlike other Courts in the past where some older members are remembered for sleeping while adjudicating important cases, he is young and reclusive. Ruth B. Ginsburg has been ill and may want to step down but she seems to be happy and there are those that are older and still active.  She is NOT reclusive but now the hunt for a replacement for Souter (appointed by Republican Bush I) who is open, moderate, and approved by justices and lawyers who recommend new Justices for their fairness and immunity to political causes.  "Reclusive" is not really so bad.  I wonder what an all female Supreme Court would render as justice under the Constitution of the U.S.

The most important requirement, according to my often wrong wisdom is to not select the replacement for Mr. Souter (who was mentioned as Chief Justice in the Miami Herald - that would make Mr. Roberts sit up and take notice) by the political route.  The new Justice, whether originally in politics on either side and whether female to keep company with Ruth B. Ginsburg, should be recommended by members of the legal profession - a process of winnowing down to an individual perceived as most fair and not bound by political debts.  A short list should then be presented to the President who would make a selection and pass it on to the Senate - I hope without the need for acrimonious debate and filibustering.