What Ed Said
by Todd Beeton, Sun May 03, 2009 at 11:34:43 PM EDT
This New York Times cites several people who have known Barack Obama throughout his career who predict that his choice to replace David Souter on the Supreme Court will likely be "moderate" and "pragmatic" one.
This bit is particularly telling:
Now Mr. Obama is preparing to select his first Supreme Court nominee to replace retiring Justice David H. Souter. In interviews, former colleagues and students say they have a fairly strong sense of the kind of justice he will favor: not a larger-than-life liberal to counter the conservative pyrotechnics of Justice Antonin Scalia, but a careful pragmatist with a limited view of the role of courts.
"His nominee will not create the proverbial shock and awe," said Charles J. Ogletree, a Harvard professor who has known the president since his days as a student.
Mr. Obama believes the court must never get too far ahead of or behind public sentiment, they say. He may have a mandate for change, and Senate confirmation odds in his favor. But he has almost always disappointed those who expected someone in his position -- he was Harvard's first black law review president and one of the few minority members of the University of Chicago's law faculty -- to side consistently with liberals.
I have to say I find it hard to believe that Obama's pick won't be reliably in the liberal camp, I have to say I agree with Ed Schultz who said it very well the other day:
"I think it's time to say it. This is no time for bi-partisanship, we need a liberal on the Supreme Court." [...]
"Will President Obama put a liberal lion on the Supreme Court, and I mean no shame, no apologies. Or will he cave in when the Party of No starts crying about a consensus choice? May I remind Americans tonight, we had a consensus back in November, it was called an election. They lost. Elections have consequences. This is our time to shape the future of this country."
Watch it (h/t Crooks & Liars):