Appoint Pelosi.

It needs gay and lesbian people; it needs its first Asian American; it needs a person who is differently abled; etc, etc, etc. If our goal, as Joan describes it, is to "make the court look more like America," putting another woman on the Court doesn't necessarily advance that goal. How about if we just seek to put the best legal minds on the Court regardless of their race or gender or other "minority" characteristics?

This has nothing to do with "women". The libs want to put on a show. Remember the racial, disgusting lynching of Clarence Thomas because of his race by the liberals. They treated him worse than any other nominee for the court. They played on racial stereotypes, and it was because he was black. Liberals are extreme racists, remember that.

I am hispanic, but I don't think I need a hispanic person on the supreme court to make me feel represented. What I need is someone who will honor the constitution and who will respect the right of individuals.

If thats a man, a woman, a minority, who cares.

I think tokenism is when you have to worry about someone who looks like you representing your interests..

The first critieria should not be whether a judge is a woman, an Hispanic or other races. It should judicial experience, experience writing briefs and a high grade from the ABA. Thomas for instance had very little experience in writing opinions and to this day has written few. On the other hand Judge Marshal Thurgood was a great scholar. I'm interested in a judge who does not use ideology to make decisions. The Supreme Court has been politicized by the right when it is suppose to be the third component of our Democracy and free of politics.

Even though woman are graduating at a higher rate than men. What are the statistics on their staying power. I know many women who who gave up law once they hit the 'mommy track', or it did not fit their ideals. Yet women, like Ginsberg and O'Conner, who faced real discrimination toughed it out.

The other problem is the right wing of the republican party has been able to appoint judges to the lower courts, thus limiting true non-basis candidates.

I kind of think that the comments made last week by a bunch of 70 year old men on how a 13 year old girl shouldn't be embarrased by being strip seached are a good example of how the court could use a little more female perspective.

The Court doesn't need to look like America because it's members are not elected by the American people. The idea that diversity = a more just Supreme Court is absurd. What if you get a justice who comes from a "minority", but turns out not to "really" represent the group (ala Clarence Thomas)? I assume we're all pretty happy with Roe v. Wade: that was decided by an all-male court. And when Joan says she wants another woman on the court, she really means she wants a pro-choice woman. Women justices that are pro-life aren't "really" part of the American female demographic.

Politics already play too much a part in Supreme Court nominations. Let's not further gum up the works with identity politics.

...I think Obama should nominate a man's man...perhaps Jesse Ventura.

Surely its difficult to consider the women so far appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court as "mere tokens". Given the results, its hard to label the method of appointing them as "mere tokenism". Before their appointments, each had proved to be extremely intelligent, hard working and accomplished people, and after being appointed, each one demonstrated that she belonged on that bench. A candidate's gender should now be treated as irrelevant. If we just look at the very best, based on relevant factors, at least half of the candidates will be women. On the other hand, there is a hazard to treating gender as an important factor. When it comes to inappropriate appointments and reactionary conservative jurists blinded by a calcified ideology, or people now at the limits of their competency, men do not have a monopoly.

I guess since Ruth Bader Ginsburg is clearly liberal, what Joan is really saying is we need a conservative women nominated for the court, so it really starts to look like America. Oh snap, conservative women aren't really women (as defined by Joan's feminist echo chamber)...my bad.

Souter has long been rumored to be gay. I truly hope that he takes the opportunity, as a retired justice, to come out and support the cause.

how about we try to find the most qualified, genuinely brilliant legal mind we can and give the seat to him/her regardless of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or anything else? That'd be wacky, wouldn't it?

Golly, Joan, what planet do you live on? THAT notion was dispelled by way back in 2001 when USA TODAY, The Miami Herald and Knight Ridder newspapers hired the national accounting firm BDO Seidman to examine undervote ballots in Florida's 67 counties.

This from USA Today eight years ago:

05/15/2001

Newspapers' recount shows Bush prevailed

By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY

George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes — more than triple his official 537-vote margin — if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 "undervote" ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election.

* * *

You can revise a lot of things, Joan. But you can't revise history.

The court needs people that are well qualified, period, end of story. Not just people who have the right body parts.

"In fact, Obama's list should continue to be topped by women, because there's exactly one woman out of the nine Supreme Court justices."

That is sexist cloptrop. That is quotas, plain and simple.

Obama's list should be topped by the best minds, regardless of gender, race or ethnicity.

What matters? Education, experience, temperment, philosophy. Certainly not ovaries or testicles.

If -- AND ONLY IF -- the best minds are women, they should top his list.

Period.

Ms. Walsh, you should be ashamed for posting this. Ashamed.