You and I have one thing in common: we don't know how Ms. Kagan will vote as a SCOTUS justice.

As a liberal, however, I do believe there is some reason to be optimistic.

She clerked for both Ab Mikva and Thurgood Marshall. Both of those men were liberals of unquestioned integrity and courage. I doubt seriously that these men would have retained her had she not shared many of their core values.

She has served as Dean of Harvard Law School and was selected by President Obama to serve as his Solicitor General. She also served in the Clinton Administration.

Does some part of me wish we could get a fire-breathing in-your-face lefty who would make wingnuts like Limbaugh GENUINELY apoplectic? Yes, that would be fun, but, it is just not realistic. People who speak out openly and passionately in support of liberal values don't get appointed to the SCOTUS. What counts is how she votes and writes and speaks AFTER she's confirmed. I think, for the most part, we will be pleased.

As for the criticism that she has not previously served as a judge, that was true for 8 of the 9 SCOTUS justices who decided BROWN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION in 1954. On the other hand, Roberts and Alito and Scalia all "came up through the system" and they might as well have been Brownshirts.

the only thing I have against her is that she is the very first SCOTUS nominee who is younger than me. First, a President born in the 1960's, now this! I'm feeling old!!!

...in support of liberal values don't get appointed to the SCOTUS"

That statement in and of itself makes me sadder than almost anything I've read today.

We've apparently accepted the status quo.

conservative values---a teabagger, for example---could be appointed and confirmed to the SCOTUS. People don't want to contemplate serious change, in either direction. That would require thinking and likely more than 140 characters.

entitles him to the benefit of the doubt for his second.