= new reply since forum marked as read
We'll be lucky to get one generation out of him. They'll get two out of Roberts. 
"That seems to be why he is became a prosecutor, in order to kill while being 'the law'."
The notion of "Obama's bluff" is silly. Obama reasonably takes into consideration the "legitimate" degree of veto power that a Republican senate has, and is proposing the very justice that RWer Orrin Hatch recently hinted he might be willing to support but Obama would never have the sense to nominate.
Why would he do that? Well, given the scorched earth policy from which I know of NOT A SINGLE GOP dissenter in the senate to date, they are digging in their heels about even vetting or holding hearings for the nominee, let alone making the "concession" of actually voting him down. There is nothing to stop the GOP from digging in their heels and holding up the nomination until after the election. But Garland has the maximum chance of prying away some defectors, unlikely as the possibility of getting enough defectors may be. As for the Repugs "saving their skins", they were never punished for threatening the credit of the US, or any of their other obstructionism since Obama has taken office (or their obstructionism in the 93-4 period). The problem is that the Democrats for decades or longer have been bringing a nerf ball to a gunfight (when they conflict w/their right) as opposed to playing tough (as they have no trouble doing towards those on the Left, overtly &/or discreetly). The GOP has been counting on this.
One relatively recent example -- the Democrats secured more votes (by more than a million nationally I believe, but the number was substantial) in elections for the House in 2012, but due to Repug gerrymandering, they retained control of the House. This should have been in the face day after day for main street America (a "gerrymandority"
and a major effort launched in State politics in states like Virginia and PA and others carried by Obama where the GOP padded their representation. Like "death panels" and 'Benghazi" the Democrats should have made this concern a household word. But they let the right win all the time, and now the GOP are extracting the price. When runaway global warming hits, we will see the full dimensions of the price the world has to pay not only for Bergen-and-McCarthy power but cowardice and indulgence of the RightWing from quarters themselves at least ostensibly not themselves RW. But given the facts on the ground as they are today, Garland may very well be the best bet
The Judicial Crisis Network claims he has a strong anti-gun bias and would vote that the Second Amendment is not an individual right (i.e. that a collective militia, rather than individual private citizens, has the right to bear arms). Some of the gun nuts around me already think Garland himself is going to kick down doors and confiscate firearms if he becomes a Supreme Court Justice
Apparently delaying the nomination after the election and making sure that Republicans control both the Senate and the White House in 2017 is our only and very remote chance of not filling the Supreme Court with another 'commie' 
