Poll: Americans want moderate judge as next justice

Make no mistake about it - We have gone through a terrible 8 years under Bush. The near collapse of our economy from a wild west 'winner take all" capitalism., While not a word came from often outspoken religious institutions who should have been reminding us of how Jesus told a rich man to give his money to the poor, for it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle then a wealthy man to enter the kingdom of heaven.

Then there was Iraq, torture, and the Iraq preparations / focus that resulted in Bush's failure to eliminate1l Bin Laden, when we had him trapped in the Tora Bora mountains in late 3003..

And of course the usse of religious hatred aginst gay people to get Bush re-elected in 2004..

We need to move the court decisively to a middle ground, where the worst possible result cannot happen - turning America into a theocracy. The same type of theocracy where church colluded with state through much of European history, resulting in endless wars, the 1000 year Dark Ages, and the hatred of the Jews that hitler leveraged into gaining control of Germany.

I disagree. I think the next justice, rather then having "legal experience," although that would be a plus, should be a man or woman of the people, not some cloistered "genius" who doesn't know what a scanner is, how to work an Iphone or what g3 means. We need another Earl Warren: a pragmatic "conservative" that maintains intelligent, well thought out legislation and nixes anything that smacks of violence, racism, or corporate bias. In fact, I think optimally we should not have a former judge, but rather a well educated lawyer who has worked within the Civil Rights or Economic rights sphere as an organizer and agitator.

Sounds like this sample of the American people is pretty sharp! Hopefully Obama sees this and appoints a sound judge that grounds their opinions in the law, not their passions or prejudices, and has few political biases either way.

LOL at Steve Kay's comments.

Buddy, you're getting a theocracy right now.

You think the federal government knows how to run an economy better than the private sector? Russia anyone? How about that Post Office? I'd like to have some of what you're smoking bud. It must be some potent stuff. I personally find it fascinating that people think our current economic condition is a product of free market capitalism.

Most of the public has little or no idea of what a Supreme Court Justice does, so the results of an "opinion poll" are meaningless.

A Supreme Court Justice must know how to think, must know how to evaluate complex competing arguments, must know how to ask probing questions of the advocates and unearth the weaknesses of the argument, or reveal hidden strengths, and must know how to write an opinion that explains as clearly as possible what the court has decided and why. It is hard work. Prior experience on an appellate court is good, but not necessary. Experience as a trial lawyer, or trial court judge, does not help that much and should not be given much weight.

President Obama is probably the most qualified President in a century or more for evaluating a candidate for the Supreme Court bench. He was, after all, a professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School. He will not need to be briefed on what a Justice does, or what kind of judicial approach will be best for the Court.

I look forward to seeing who he nominates and why.

"I personally find it fascinating that people think our current economic condition is a product of free market capitalism."

Me too. I think our massive debt is because of a useless war based on lies. It's a product of neoconservatism.

LOL at Michael N's opinions on everything. Your so-called free-market capitalism has reached its zenith. I am enjoying your time in the political wilderness.

The law and politics are inseparable. Laws are made through the political process, the constitution was written by politicians. I hope Obama appoints someone as Left as Scalia/Roberts/Alito/Thomas are right (and that is very far-right by the way).

America is a Republic. We are governed by the law. It's unfortunate that the lawmakers anymore vote however they feel and vote on what benefits them the most. I say term limits for any political figure to weed out the corruption that is so deeply rooted in all facets of our government. I say we mandate that any person running for President show proof of their residency prior to entering the race for the Presidency. I also think that any bailout should be voted on by the people since it is their money that is being spent. Let free enterprise become apart of our society again and make corporations understand that none of them are too big to let fail.

There is no LOL at steve kay's comments.

The private sector failed us when they allowed those who made long term money losing decisions to collect short term profits(loan officers, hedge fund mgrs, ceos, etc). When given the choice to make a ton of money now or less money so that the economy doesn't bubble, the free choice leads to taking a ton of money. I don't think Steve Kay is advocating the government run the economy, but for the government to steer the market away from these perverse incentives.

Michael N,
I don't think you know what a theocracy is. The term has little to do with a government's economic policies or social programs. Theocracy is simply a government based on and integrally tied to religion where religious figures are typically the rulers. The expansive bureaucracies you are alluding to typically have been secular. You could argue that some of their leaders (e.g. Stalin) were demagogues and were worshiped in some ways, but phenomenon such as the cult-of-personality are a far cry from theocracies.

And I think it's embarrassing when people think that our current economic condition is not a product of free market capitalism.

The next justice needs to be "conservative" that is not and activist. I think Bush appointed 2 good justices. We need the clowns we elect to make the laws and run the country, then we can hold their feet to the fire. Or set them on fire when needed.

Maybe I am missing something with Michael N's comments, but I am unsure how his comments relate to a theocracy. I am under the impression that the following description of a theocracy is far from what we have in federal government today.
Theocracy is a form of government in which a god or deity is recognized as the state's supreme civil ruler, or in a broader sense, a form of government in which a state is governed by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided. For believers, theocracy is a form of government in which divine power governs an earthly human state, either in a personal incarnation or, more often, via religious institutional representatives (i.e., a church), replacing or dominating civil government. Theocratic governments enact theonomic laws. Theocracy should be distinguished from other secular forms of government that have a state religion, or are merely influenced by theological or moral concepts, and monarchies held "By the Grace of God".

No Steve you are quite mistaken! The "near collapse" of our economy started with the fall of the housing market i.e. fannie mae, and freddie mac. Does the democratically controlled congress mean anything to you. Does the fact that the fannie mae and freddie mac issue was directly the result of democratic incompetence. Iraq. yes it is horrible that all those people are free from Saddam isn't it. And if you are going to blame bush for bin laden then you'll have to first blame Clinton who was warned by the Saudi's about him, Offered to deliver him to the US but Clinton declined. I have no idea what the religious "hatred" against gay people even means. Just because someone is opposed to gay marriage does not mean they hate gay people or that they are homophobic. You sir are the hater. and I doubt you even know what the eye of the needle is. Why don't you stay out of intelligent honest discourse and keep stirring your kool aid

I think the next justice should condemn Steve Kay's mother for not having aborted this ignorant mouth with a IQ lower than a box of rocks. Steve Kay probably wants to legalize bestiality and make it ok to bathe with little boys.

You wacky liberals!

Keep blaming Bush, If it weren't for people like Bush and presidents before him
liberals would not have a chance to whine and cry in public. because freedom is worth fighting and dying for.

What's wrong with the Post Office? It works reliably year after year, stays within budget, pays for itself, and is much cheaper than FedEx.

Michael, if you're going to trash the public sector, you need to find a better example. Perhaps the military?

Seriously, Owl, a person of the people as opposed to someone with judicial experience. I can only state that it demonstrates how little you understand the judicial system and the rule of law. It is not about desired outcomes - it is about applying the statutes, Constitution, and existing precedents to varying situations to arrive at a logical outcome. Whether we like the outcome or not.

So, yes, we want a brilliant jurist. Conservative or liberal - I want a justice who can reason and fairly apply the law.

Steve Kay wants a court that would move us decisively to the middle ground, but he's spouting standard far left talking points. Your location is not remotely near the middle ground, Steve. And by the way, even though your man in the White House believes that it is the role of government to redistribute wealth, on no occasion did Jesus ever teach that the government should take money from the rich and give to the poor. Jesus was teaching about a heart attitude, not economics.

i agree with michael n. capitalism didn't get us into this mess and socialism won't get us out of it. capitalism stands on several legs , a couple of which are integrity and compassion. take these out of the equation and whala there is your mess.maybe its time that we the people took responsabilty and hold our elected officials, our corporate officers and ourselves responsable for their and our ,respectively, actions. how about we start treating our neighbor like we would like to be treated.

Michael N's comments reek of ignorance and lack of self confidence. Why don't you try presenting a real argument, instead of useless unsubstantiated FUD. Here, I'll give an example of how weak you're stance is: You sound like a high school girl. There, isn't that kind of example pathetic?

It would be refreshing if someone from the private sector, who did not have an
Ivy League education, would be chosen for Supreme Court. Obama's administration is mostly made up of ideological academics who have no private sector business experience, so balance is needed.

I agree with all the comments so far, except the anti-Bush rhetoric, which is old news. We have had some surprises in the past with candidates who turned around. Bush's guy in the SC seems to be doing OK so far. If Obama takes his time, maybe we will get lucky.

We also wanted moderates from GWB, but that doesn't mean we'll get them. I'd like to see him nominate another O'Conner or Kennedy, but I have a feeling his first pick will be further to the left.

The public is right, we do need a moderate on the court with substantial judicial experience. In fact, this appointment amounts to a test of the Obama administration to see whether it really is more centrist or a far left extremist seeking to further politicize the court. We'll see.

Where do you people get these polls? I don't know of a majority of people that want a Moderal judge. I do know people who want a constitutional judge. We need a judge to rule based on universal truths and God given rights. We need a judge who doesn't listen to pressure groups or 501c companies.

If people truly want a Marxist, excuse me, a liberal judge, then so be it. However, it is not America anymore as the Supreme Court (by the founding fathers) is non-party affiliated and only answers to the constitution.

Americans want a socially moderate, fiscally conservative Judge, Let appoint a libertarian

So 67 percent don't want a "conservative"...that leaves 33, not 35 percent who are knuckle-draggingly stupid enough to want another "conservative", and goes to show that not only is the media decidedly not liberal, but that the corporate republican weasels who own it can't do math.

We have a Supreme Court dynamic wherein the Republican presidents try to choose the most conservative judge they think will be confirmed (and they have stocked the Federal Appeals Courts with Federalist Society, ultra-rightists), and the Democrats put in a few moderately liberal judges when they get the chance. The result is a Court where seven of the nine judges are Republican appointees, and where cases are consistently decided on a partisan basis. We would all much prefer some version of justice that looks to facts and the law first, but Obama does not start with a clean slate and he faces a minority determined to push that conservative dynamic even further. Therefore, any effort to achieve balance on the court must push this selection to the more liberal side of our political spectrum.

NO! We want a gay female racial minority appointment. Or if that doesn't work how about an illegal immigrant. Someone has to advocate (legislate) for them.

"We need another Earl Warren: a pragmatic "conservative" that maintains intelligent, well thought out legislation and nixes anything that smacks of violence, racism, or corporate bias."
Beside the laughable notion that Warren was a conservative jurist, displayed here is complete (and dangerous) ignorance of the proper role of the Court. We are not (or at least not supposed to be) an oligarchy and the SC is not a super-legislator that decides if "legislation is well thought out" or too pro-corporation. I want a judge who understands the principle of a limited government of enumerated powers set forth by our founders.

The Liberal left will have zero credability if they do not rebuke Pelosi.

She exposed herself as is a partison hack and she is bad for America.

Hate to break into the dream world that Steve Kay lives in but it was the Dems when they took over Congress and forced banks to lend to people with no jobs, no desire to have a job and no money that brought on the collapse. And Obama has managed in a few short months to turn something that was pretty bad into a wonderful crisis not to be wasted to basically devistate the financial and constitutional fundamentals that have made this country great...and they are not done destroying us yet. So easy to blame Bush but so not true...try thinking for yourself and for god's sake turn off MSNBC!!!!!!

I have always sat by the sideline and been a back seat quarterback in referencing all of these politicians that I hear and read about.
Having served in Vietnam and been an upstanding American, it galls me to think that anyone outside of the Political Arena would think that Ms Polosi is telling the truth. Now we all know that there are many politicians that practice the fine art of fibbulation, but I would include Ms Polosi in the Hall of Shame for what she attempted to do in front of all us Americans. In Governmenr you are in fine company, so do not resign, since there will be more to come from you.

I can't believe people are actually turning this around on Nancy. Have the US forgot about the thousands of US not counting the Iraq people that's been killed because of a lie? What make you think the CIA do not consist of humans that can and will lie. The CIA is not an organization of Gods. When I think of all the lies floating around during the years of Bush, why not the CIA lie also. Bush, Cheney and others just flat out lied to the US. Now the right-wing has found a footing to steer the public away from those lies and focus on something so silly as what Nancy knew. She was not the president during those times. We the people of the US needs to stay focused on what's real. The lies Bush told, interrogation, and most of all "ALL THE PEOPLE THAT LOST THEIR LIVES BECAUSE OF A GREAT BIG LIE TOLD BY BUSH AND HIS PEOPLE". They saw all those people getting killed for nothing and it didn't bother them one bit. Now the US has forgiven the Bushies of all those murders and turning on Nancy about what she knew. People of the US "PLEASE STOP BEING STUPID AND WAKE UP TO REALITY". HOW CAN YOU BE SO STUPID AND BUY INTO THE LIES AND DISMISS WHAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. There are a lot of families who have lost love ones because of this lie. I wonder have they forgot or how can they live with themselves that a family member is dead and probably died a horrible death, an unnecessary death because of Bush's FLAT OUT LIE. People, please wake up and THIIIIIIIIIINK.

WANDA JONES,
Where to start? Spelling? Grammar? Erroneous notions? Never mind.

It is rational to reject the idea that an economy with a fiat money supply arbitrarily dictated by a quasi governmental entity constitutes "free market capitalism". Free markets use gold and silver, and always have. Under the banner of the "Community Reinvestment Act", and in the face of the soft recession of 2001-2004, the Fed pumped so much "money" into the economy that they stopped publishing the M3 numbers. The Fed, Fanny, and Freddy did this to inflate the housing market after the tech stock collapse. It doesn't matter if you support the welfare party or the warfare party. Neither is going to give you liberty. President Obama ought to honor his oath and find someone qualified to interpret and defend the principles of liberty in the Constitution.

It should not be a surprise what the right-wing is doing to Pelosi. If you do not like the current reality, i.e., thievery by banks and Paulson, crimes against humanity, torture, illegal Iraq invasion, criminal negligence over 9/11, Katrina, etc. etc., you create a separate reality which you can do by listening all day long to right-wing talk radio (3000 stations 24X7) and Fox.

The Idea that Justices on the Supreme Court just "follow precedent" is laughable. Why dont' we stop pretending that we agree with each other: we don't. I support choice, you don't. I support free flow of information, you don't. I support Habeas Corpus, you don't. Your judges have been deciding that the decisions "my" judges made in the 40s, 50s and 60s were "wrong." My judges will decide that your decisions are "wrong." You talk about how we aren't a dictatorship, yet your "strict constructionist" philosophy would have yeilded us the society of 1950. NO THANKS! Blacks had no rights, women had a few. Thank god there were Democrats fighting for your rights and privileges!

One other thing: when did the CIA become a better safeguard for our democracy then the US Congress??? So far this week I hear one Republican traitor after another telling us to believe some secretive police organization, and take their word for things over the word of our ELECTED representatives. This despite the fact that this organization WILL NOT RELEASE the transcripts of the meetings they supposedly "told all" in. Can you be any more stupid, thinking that the CIA is the GUARDIAN OF YOUR LIBERTIES???? Are you on drugs???? Which part of "you can't trust the secret police" do you NOT UNDERSTAND???

President Obama, I believe as a majority of Americans, should respect the Constitution by nominating someone to the Supreme Court who believes in judicial restraint. I also believe, President Obama should nominate a judge who will interpret the law as a neutral umpire instead of imposing personal political preferences from the bench. CNN reported 72% of Americans want a moderate to conservative Supreme Court Judge appointed.

I guess polls are in the eye of the beholder. What I read and it says is""37 percent said they believed Obama should nominate a moderate, while 27 percent said someone who was very or somewhat liberal."" My math says a majority of 64% says they don't want a conservative. To further make the point ""68 percent said they do not want to see the Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade"" and that is no way, shape , or form is a "conservative" result.
It doesn't appear to me that the so-called conservatives here have little or no hope to make the argument, except to their own.

Good Day. Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
I am from Nigeria and learning to write in English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Ful lace wigs, shape flecked workers can have the plays killed to the broadcast by shirt, while it is on the nudity or, as is traumatic with blue lined pants, made to a bizarre information by dead everyone effect works."

Thank you very much :). Lester.