• The president must consult with the Senate. The Senate's advice function "must not be given short shrift." If the president abuses his power and nominates someone who will threaten constitutional rights and freedoms, the Democrats will fight.

• President Bush should choose a consensus candidate, one who is in the mainstream, has high standards and can bring our country together. The replacement candidate must be on with high regard for our freedom and constutional rights.

• Conservative groups have put up $18 million in anticipation of nominee.

• The Court ought to be reflective of society as a whole. We're entitled to have our judges reflect the diversity that is the strength of our nation.

The question and answer period: I'll let the other bloggers on the call who asked questions describe their questions and answers. (Atrios has his thoughts here.) Here were mine:

• I asked whether 5th Circuit Judge Edward Prado would be an acceptable consensus candidate. He said probably not because of his record on civil rights. I mentioned that he had a strong record of opposing mandatory minimum sentences and Sen. Kennedy said he knew that, because he opposes mandatory minimums as well, but on other issues he did not think Judge Prado would be acceptable. (I'm wondering if Sen. Kennedy didn't get Judge Prado confused with someone else.)

• I asked whether he thought that the nominee should have prior judicial experience. He said we've had justices before that haven’t been judges, but the individual would have to be "steeped in awareness of what Constitution is all about."

Other bloggers on the call (if there are a few I'm missing, I apologize, I'll try to update later): John from Crooks and Liars; Dave from Seeing the Forest; Duncan at Atrios; Bob Brigham from Swing State Project; Stirling Newberry from BOP News; Mark at Dembloggers; Pamela at Light Up the Darkness;