A Former Fleet Manager on Jalopnik's, Andrew P. Collins' rant about Pickup Trucks that are over 8500 lbs. Gross Vehicle Weight Rating

Yesterday in Jalopnik, Andrew P. Colins acted as if he was reviewing the new Ford Super Duty Pickups (and touched on the Super Duty Cab and Chassis), but instead, chose to loose his mind and went on a rant about Trucks over 8500 lbs. GVWR and the need for the government to publish fuel economy standards for these vehicles.  The rant was brought about over the new 48 gallon fuel tank that is available on Ford's Super Duty trucks and what the approximate range of the truck is.  With these numbers, you can "back into" the fuel economy.

While Mr. Collins has the luxury of being a Journalist, I 've been a Fleet Manager for a larger utility company, specifying things like Tare Weight, Gross Vehicle Weight Ratings, and Gross COMBINATION Weight Ratings for Class 1 - 7 trucks that keep energy moving to its end users.

Before I could get the Operations Department what they needed in a truck (choosing a utility body to hold tools and supplies), the Safety Department the features on vehicles that will protect drivers from being injured, and protect others around these vehicles from being injured due to collision (e.g. back-up alarms, sensors, and cameras), I have to take into consideration other things such as:

• What is the maximum payload for the vehicle, 
• What are the worst conditions the vehicle will see as far as gradient, road surface and payload are concerned
• Will the vehicle have to go off road?
• Will it have to tow a trailer and equipment in addition to its usual payload?

These are the basic requirements to know about a vehicle chassis and its intended use.

• Will the driver be required to have a Medical Card/What laws the driver must follow (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards or Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act), 
• Will/can an individual driver pass a DOT Physical? 
• Will his/her 2 year DOT Physical Card be shortened by non-Insulin Controlled Diabetes Mellitus, Sleep Apanea, Hypertension or Heart Disease?, 
• Will the driver be disqualified from driving a Commercial Motor Veicle (with a GVWR of 10,0001 lbs or greater) because of Insulin Dependant Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes?   

(The reader will note that most of these "diseases" are associated with workers of older age and  have the ability to disqualify the expert technicians, who have the most experience and are (in theory) the best people that a company has in the field.)
 
These are regulatory requirements relating to the GVWR and Tare Weight of the Vehicle, related to driver qualifications and driver safety.  After this, you can design the upfit of the vehicle, in order to make it the mobile tool box the driver/technician needs to allow productive work.

And working at a utility, the company that employed me was considered (by the Federal Government) to be an energy producer, requiring us to purchase and use the alternative fuel for a required percentage of Alternative Fueled Vehicles (even though we only TRANSPORTED the energy to the consumer - this rule is about as silly as calling the railroads or trucking companies Energy Producers and forcing them to use alternative fuels to run their trains or trucks).  These regulations bring their own set of problems whether the vehicles are fueled with Liquid Propane Gas, Compressed Natural Gas, Liquified Natural Gas or Batteries, as each system has to have it's own real estate and lessen the payload on the truck, each has it's own special needs in order to produce power to move the vehicle.  Natural Gas Vehicles need to have Heated High Pressure Regulators to keep the regulator orifice from freezing, constricting the orifice and leaning out the mixture to the point of misfire, which destroys the Catalytic Converters of the vehicle, as well as a 3-year inspection of their high pressure fuel tanks.  Propane Powered Vehicles need to have heated fuel rails to prevent the injectors from freezing, when the Liquid Propane Gas is injected into the intake manifold.  Battery powered vehicles pose their own problems with extreme weight and heat generated during the charging and discharging of the batteries.

I ALWAYS specified the largest fuel tank(s) available for any of my company's trucks, as the less time that a driver/technician is filling a vehicle with fuel (including the trip to the filling station), the more time he's working.  So let's discount the rant about the size of the Fuel Tank.

The sweet spot for heavier pickup trucks is where Ford has been since about 2008, with their 3/4 ton truck at 10,000 lbs. GVWR (GM followed along at 9600 lbs and Dodge/RAM followed back at 9200 lbs.).  Above this weight, any drivers would have to get and keep a DOT Medical Card as governed by the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act.  This was followed in 2013 by a new FMVSS regulations on vehicle TARE WEIGHT from 8000 lbs.to 7840 lbs.), as Ford's competitions secondary completed vehicles (where a utility body is commonly added) were sometimes overloaded by their new owners, past the point of where their brakes and suspension could keep up with the loaded vehicle and were involved in wrecks.

So, just how does Mr. Collins want to measure the fuel economy of this type of vehicle?  Does he intend to be the sole arbiter for the individual needs of a buyer or for a company?

The job for which the vehicle is purchased must be the sole determining factor for the purchase of a truck. It's a business decision, whether it's a "home business" of pulling horses or a race car around, or an incorporated business that allows an inspector to cruise the right of way on his company's energy delivery system.

Different Utility bodies have different aerodynamic characteristics, leading to more drag and poorer fuel economy.  Likewise, different trailers suffer with the same issue.  So a one aspect will not fit all in evaluating Fuel Economy (or setting standards) for these vehicles.

Environmental regulatory issues also lead to the poor fuel economy of pickup trucks.  As engines are now tuned to produce fewer oxides of nitrogen, which is thought to be a primary contributor to acid rain, engines are no longer allowed to "lug" or pull very hard at low rpms. This lugging allows better fuel economy, but produces the oxides of nitrogen.  So the engines' power bands are moved upwards, using more fuel to create less of one type of pollution.  As a result, a 3/4 ton pickup, that's bed has been replaced by a 96" utility service body, feels sluggish and underpowered off of the line in normal acceleration, despite new transmissions with 8 forward gears.  It feels much like an older heavier Muscle Car that someone has swapped a higher performance camshaft into, with a "soggy," sluggish acceleration until the vehicle "gets up on the cam (in the rpm range in which the camshaft operates with maximum performance -which is beyond the cruising rpms)."  This is explained at the 1:15 second mark, and dramatically illustrated by this The Fast Lane Truck video, over the whole video as the truck and trailer pulls the "Ike Gauntlet" through the Eisenhower Tunnel in Colorado.  The RAM's 6.4 Hemi makes more Horse Power and Torque than the Chevrolet, but the Silverado beats the RAM with the same load (could it possibly be the gearing in the transmission?).  Additionally, the Ethanol laced gasoline that we are required by law to use, contains fewer BTUs and requires more fuel to make the same power as "pure gasoline."

To mitigate this issue, Ford has now gone to their 3.5 Liter Eco-Boost, Twin Turbocharged, Direct Injected, Twin Independent Cam Timing System in their pickup trucks (and are expanding into their Explorer EL and Navigator SUVs), but overall, the real world Fuel Economy between the 3.5 Liter Eco-Boost V-6 and their older Single Overhead Cam V-8s shows little difference, if any.  Performance is equivalent to marginally better with the Eco-Boost V-6.

I suspect, as GAWKER owns JALOPNIK, that it's left leaning viewpoints about (radical, forced) environmentalism, our hydrocarbon consumption and our carbon footprint are making it through the editorial process, telling us what we can/should drive as good stewards of the environment. 

A Message to "Friends" Who've Chosen to Be Different and Now Feel Uncomfortable

I write this post in response to some of my "friends," who feel the need to preach to everyone around them that they are bigots and need to think twice about how they treat them and others like them.  Their perceived bigotry could be racial, gender, sexual orientation, religion or even economic based.  That doesn't matter.  What does matter is the unforgiving spirit that is present within their hearts against the people who are around them. 

It amuses me to consider the irony of the situation, where you both feel walled-off and segregated from the main group and then accuse and attack others, which further segregates you from that main group.  

There is a story in the New Testament, where Peter was frustrated by a brother who had sinned against him.  He asked Jesus how many times he needed to forgive his brother.  The Hebrew custom was to forgive your brother 7 times, where after that 7th time, if your brother sinned against you again, you no longer needed to forgive him.  Jesus told Peter to forgive his brother 70 times 7, which was considered an unreachable number.  Another way of looking at this is that if our absolution from sin is as far as the east is from the west, that it is as if the sin never happened.  I say this to you as well as to myself:  Forgiveness is something with which we ALL struggle.  It's tough, but let it go.

When I look at you, I see a child of GOD's creation, with the same needs as I have.  We have the same flaws.  And in a perfect we are polite and serve each other.  

I would hope that you'd want me to remember you for who you are (or as the late Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. said, the content of your character) rather than your skin color, your economic status, your choices in sexual partners, etc..  But apparently, because you bring it up so often, you've been so badly hurt by others that forgiveness isn't possible.  You must remember each offense and keep bringing it up.  Retribution is apparently far more important than reconciliation.  Your actions say that the external is judged to be of more value than the internal.  Your retrograde feelings of pay back and hatred are more important than the sublime love of our fellow man.  Sympathy Is looked upon as derision and hatred is all that can be reflected. 

Or to put it mildly, I can't see the real you, because all you want to show me is your race, gender, national origin, sexual preference/orientation, religion, or paycheck/house/car.  Your constant reminders to me (and everyone else around us) of with which group you've decided identify, just tell me of how separated from the rest of us you would like to keep yourselves, despite your desperate protests to me.  The caste system is alive and well in America and you're helping to keep it going.

The Death of the Republican Establishment (or How Trump becomes ourNextPresident)

When Barack Obama set about to divide and conquer the country, he started by using race as a wedge. Then, emphasizing differences and pitting groups against each other, he set up what may be permanent fractures along the cultural lines on which it was founded.  I believe that this was intentional and he has prepared for it by arming various Government agencies to the teeth. 

Concurrently, the Country Club/Establishment Republicans (GOPe, RNC, Republi-crats or whatever you might want to call them), by running on a platform to stop Obama and then reneging and governing against the will of their constituents (with their lack of response), were setting forces in motion that are far greater than they could control.  

Together, by governing against the will of the majority of people, emphasizing our differences, and pitting us against each other, they have created conditions where the disaffected coalesced behind what the establishment of both parties consider to be a "vulgar monster" that truly scares them.  With this "monster" ignoring the rules and decorum they've so carefully crafted to throttle debate and keep themselves in power, by their own actions, they have created an opening for a TV Savvy businessman with no past political experience.  So, in walks Donald Trump, playing the creature from the backwoods of America. 

I think that, besides being a MARKETING GENIUS and UNDERSTANDING HOW TO HOLD THE ATTENTION OF AN AUDIENCE, Donald Trump is VERY  POLITICALLY SAVVY.  He sees the gap that he can run to get to the finish line to win the Presidency.  While he is no Conservative, he's picked up and extended Ronald Reagan's old messages of "Are you better off today than you were 4 years ago" and "It's Morning Again in America," by claiming that he will "Make America Great Again."  In doing this, he is running as a Republican, although he espouses few Republican principles and is FAR more comfortable as. Democrat.  And he's leading the pack after the Super Tuesday Primary Elections, much to the chagrin and exploding heads at the Republican National Committee.

I figure that much of the support that Trump is getting is from the disaffected Democrats, the former blue-collar, Reagan Democrats, who are now persona non grata within the Democrat Party.  They are fueling the Trump movement and will give him enough status to muck up the works of both Conservatives and the Country Club/Establishment Republicans.  And since the Country Club/Establishment Republican's can't find a candidate that can win over the hearts of the Republican Party voters, their only hope and chance is to steal it through a brokered convention, where the power brokers (MitchMcConnell and Reince Priebus) get to choose the winner. 

In The American Conservative,  Donald Devine (a campaign strategist and Director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, during President Reagan's first term) wrote an article asking "Will the GOP Allow a Convention Fight?"  Based on the article, I'd say that the Republican nomination has already been rigged toward an establishment candidate from way back in 2012.  That explains why Reince Priebus relented and allowed Carly Fiorina on the big debate stage for the second debate, giving her supporters time to vent before she burned out.  

I'm expecting a brokered convention, where the sensibility of our Country Club/Establishment "betters" will elect their chosen nominee (currently John Kasich, but maybe Rubio or even Jeb!), driving Trump to be outsider and spoiler.  (Mitch McConnell and Priebus have set up rules where the delegates awarded to candidates from the early, primaries - before March 15 - are proportionally divided, rather than a winner take all system.  Then they hope for a close race between two candidates, instead of a runaway.  If the delegates are close, but neither has enough delegates to win the nomination, McConnell and Priebus can throw out votes for a particular candidate, from a particular race for various "technicalities and rules violations," and pick the candidate they want as the Republican nominee.).

Conservative's understand that Trump will never be a conservative in any sense of the word. He's a New York, Rockerfeller ("Rocky, Don't Steal My Sign!)" Republican at best and an ally of big business.  So they are hoping for Cruz to win the primaries and be nominated.  In this tale of pathos, Mitch McConnell is playing "the deeply offended Southern Gentleman ('Why sir, you've insulted my honor!'), whose honor and integrity has been called out by the young interloper, Cruz, who called him "A Liar" on the Senate floor and into the recorded minutes of the Senate.  McConnell now feels that he must defend his honor and position at all costs to prove his masculinity and retain the position of Majority Leader in the Senate, even if it means the destruction of every thing around him.  Meanwhile, former Speaker Boehner has his own axe to grind with Cruz for standing with Conservative Representatives  in the House, who forced Former Speaker John Boehner to vacate the chair of the Speaker of the House.

IF the Republican nomination process plays out with Cruz winning, McConnell is just waiting to bitch-slap Cruz and all of the Conservative Insurrection down for calling him a liar.  Reince Priebus (along with most of the rest of the establishment) would love to be done with the social conservatives they consider to be a poor representation of the party.  I'm of the opinion that they want to squash Conservative Idealism once and for all time.  If this happens, I expect a full implosion and marginalization of the Republican Party, as its disaffected Conservative members leave in droves and the Reagan Democrats that have been driven out of their party find the Country Club/Establishment inhospitable as well.

So if Trump wins the primary contest, the question is "who will Trump choose as a running mate?"  Of course if Trump (or Cruz) were to run as the outsider and pick the other as VEEP,  it could seriously backfire on the Country Club/Establishment's "brokered convention" plans in a 'YUUGE' way.  (But these are probably not realistic scenarios, considering the size of these guys egos.). 

So the question is "who would Trump choose as a running mate?" 

• Conservative's understand that Trump will never be a conservative in any sense of the word.  With his Ego leading, I believe that he's insulted ALL of the Conservatives, who are generally too pure to sully their reputations with an Opportunist such as Trump. Maybe Lindsey Graham (who is strong on the US defense, but no Conservative) would consider it, but he would have to get his head out of John McCain's ass first....  
• If Trump chooses to pick liberal RINO, Michael Bloomberg (whom I consider to be the most dangerous Republi-crat in politics today, by threatening to run as a spoiler during Presidential Contests), while they would have the money to beat the political machines, I doubt they could gather enough support to be competitive.  Bloomberg erodes the base that Trump has worked so hard to court.
• If he were to choose a likable liberal Democrat (does there exist there such a political animal anymore?), his populist message might steal the election from Hillary (the unindicted felon), Joe (still grieving the death of my son, Beau) Biden, or Bernie (the old Hippie Socialist) Sanders.
• Or is it possible that Trump just expects to replace Hillary as the Democrat Candidate, after her candidacy implodes?

 My best guess is that Trump chooses Sarah Palin as VP, because: 

1. Maybe Trump thinks that she can 'help to heal the gender rift' he caused with the "Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?" comment about Carly Fiorina.
2. Palin is a popular television personality, who has a LARGE following on Facebook.
3. She's an outsider and a reform candidate that broke away from the Republican Party. 
4. And while she was picked by then candidate, Senator John McCain (who liked to think himself as a Maverick because he'd cross party lines to look like a reasonable politician), she is the real deal as far as being a Maverick is concerned.
5. Sarah Palin (and her family, by extension) has already been politically raped by the Democrat Media Apparatchik and was left undefended by the Republi-crat Machine, who thought her too unsophisticated, evangelical and blue-collar redneck to hold a national office.
6. And, maybe, most importantly, because Payback is a Bitch.  Choosing Sarah Palin for VEEP gives the finger to both the ideological conservatives and the Country Club Establishment Republi-crats at the same time.

 As an ideological Conservative, I'm glad that I left the Republican Party 4 years ago.  After  watching Mitt Romney become a two-time loser, I knew it was time to jump ship.  I understood that the Republican  Party was dead, as it lacked the will to "prosecute" a political campaign against a sitting POTUS because of his race.  

This all makes for great political theater.  So sit back if you can and have a beer as you watch this coming comedy of errors, the last dying gasp of the Country Club/Establishment Republicans, as Donald Trump plays Al Czervik.

But be prepared, as the cultural divisions that once added to our greatness as a country, have been turned against us.  Because trust has been broken between these cultural groups, everyone suspects those outside of their own group.  Uneasy alliances have been made, but in the current culture battle between the Liberals of Yankeedom, New Netherlands, New France, the Tidewater Gentry and the Left Coast, versus the Appalachian Borderlanders, the Midlanders, the Deep South, El Norte and the Far West (what Rush Limbaugh would describe as "fly-over country") the ultimate loser is unity of spirit of the United States.

Transparency Shouldn't Be Exclusive to Corporations: A Plan To Stop theGovernment from Cooking The Books

I believe that I have a pretty good understanding of Economics. Now, before you hold up a Wooden Cross, Try to Douse Me with Holy Water or Shoot Me with a Silver Bullet, realize that if you deal with money, barter or trade your time and skills for money, you've also involved yourself in Economics. 

One of the Economic Indicators (of how well we are doing as a country) is employment.  Specifically, it's a trailing indicator, so, in economic terms, things are already getting better before more jobs happen or already getting worse before jobs start getting cut.  "Unemployment Figures" are important to the public, because we usually know when a friend or acquaintance somewhere within our circle has lost a job.  It is personal, understandable and something to which we can relate.

So I had to write this post, when I saw this post from "The FEE:" Is There a Conspiracy to Protect Obama's Record?

Merging Economics with Politics is easy, because they can't be separated.  Most things that are demanded by a populist constituency and given by a politician, require additional costs.   

• When additional regulations are put in place to alter behavior or to protect the public from a manufacturer, it costs consumers in monetary value, convenience or time. 
• When government continually over spends and runs a large national debt, where borrowing costs must be raised to pay the debt off, it costs businesses and citizens more in taxes. 
• When a country's Central Bank chooses to increase the amount of money in circulation, without increasing the commodity on which money is based upon, money has less value and prices go up to reflect that loss of value.
  

Because of the dishonest decisions of Executives in reporting the financial results of energy giant, Enron, many investors and employees were hurt and lost investments and jobs.  Because of the high visibility of the bankruptcy and financial dissolution of Enron, laws were eventually passed that require a company's executives to be responsible for its economic claims.  So Congress passed and President Clinton signed the Sarbanes-Oxley regulations into law.  And while this costs a company time and its customers money, it has been the law of the land for nearly 20 years.

About 200 years ago, Alexis de Tocqueville, upon visiting America, wrote, "Liberty cannot be established without morality, nor morality without faith."  While I could easily turn this into an ethical issue, making a case for that basic morality has disappeared because Christianity, as a value system, has been forced out of society, there is another more important point to be made: Equality under the Law. 

Our government issues debt (Bonds) to cover the gap between what it takes in as income tax and what it actually spends (deficit spending).  Because of the run-away spending that has happened under President Barack Obama, our bonds were recently down graded, due to the risk associated with the amount of debt we are carrying as compared to our Gross Domestic Product.  Because of the downgrade, the government must now pay a higher rate of return on these bonds.  This is a death spiral that will continue until the Bonds are of Junk Status, paying high returns, but not a safe investment, due to the risk of non-payment, requiring large amounts of Capital Returns to attract investors.  Ultimately, it's the tax payer that will have to deal with all of this.

Because this situation, is similar to the Enron debacle, wouldn't it make sense that Sarbanes-Oxley Financial Reporting Laws should apply to the Federal Government?  I am not an expert on Sarbanes-Oxley Financial Reporting Law requirements (and I would not be surprised if the government had exempted itself from this law.)  However, our investors and tax payers should have reasonable assurances that we can and will repay the purchasers of this debt in a timely manner and at the rate of return to which we've obligated ourselves.

 In Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution states that the President "shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient;..."  The State of the Union is not a place to announce the latest Social Program or some other nation building expedition. 

The State of the Union Speech, would be the BEST time for the President (not a White House Press Secretary) to OWN the economic news, whether good or bad.  This news should include:

1. REAL Unemployment Rates (not the manipulated numbers that don't include people that have dropped out of the job market, having given up all hope of ever finding employment again.  It should include the whole story, including the percentage of working aged adults that are participating in the workforce)
2. The Debt to Gross Domestic Product Ratio, so we can really understand what we owe to bond holders.
3. A Budget Pie Chart, showing percentages for Military, Social Services, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the ACA, SNAP, WIC, AFDC and Debt Payments
   
4. The Expected Revenue from Taxes and How We should Deal with any budgetary shortfall
   

The President's proposed fiscal Budget should be sent out electronically to Congressional Representatives, Senators and their Staffs, with copies available to any citizen that wants to see it, at least 2 weeks before the State of the Union.  It should be in a streamlined form that is understandable to the general public and limited to no more that 10 pages total of data and graphs, not 1400 pages of minutiae designed to bore the individual to death. 

At that point in time the president should make his case as to which programs are necessary, which programs are required by the Constitution and which programs are superfluous.  Then and only then should Congress respond to the President's budgetary request and the president should have the bully pulpit to sell his programs.

This system would work well with the proposed Balanced Budget Amendment and former President, Ronald Reagan's much sought after Line Item Veto, giving the President the chance to veto a line item he finds unnecessary or wasteful, but giving Congress the ultimate authority to override any Presidential Veto and still control the purse strings.

When any law excludes the ruling oligarchy, but applies to the rest of us, the American people think that it's time for a house cleaning.  With the carved out exemptions for Congress in Obamacare, America's citizens are on a voting rampage against the establishment, supporting outsider candidates for President in a 2 to 1 ratio over the establishment candidates.   

If we are all equal under the law, shouldn't LAWS apply to all citizens, including those who we elected and are paying to govern us?  Sarbanes-Oxley is the law of the land.  If Sarbanes-Oxley Financial Requirement Laws are a requirement for America's Businesses, shouldn't they be a requirement for the Federal Government?  

It is past time that our elected leaders take responsibility for the decisions that they make.  The Government needs to follow any law it created. 

Predicting President Obama's Supreme Court Appointment, To Replace Antonin Scalia

Antonin Scalia was the greatest Supreme Court Justice, appointed by Ronald Reagan, the Greatest President, of this late Baby-Boomer's life time.  Scalia's Literalist interpretation of the Constitution was both correct and sublime.  It took a President, with a vision to restore America to greatness, who had a moral character, inspired by belief in a Holy GOD, that was Ronald Reagan to seek out and appoint, a Jurist and Constitutional Literalist that was Judge Antonin Scalia.

 

So, can we extrapolate what Obama will do?  Unlike monetary futures, Past Results are quite often (direct) Predictors of Future Actions.  And while the reader might not ascribe to Christian principles, the Bible is a wonderful book of Wisdom.  Jesus said "You will recognize them by their fruits."  Let's look at some of the Major Influences of President Obama's personality, character, history and policies to see if we can determine the direction he would likely go and what the Fruit of his selection would look like:

• We currently have "the Prince of Fools," that sold impossible promises during his candidacy, to Foolish Citizens, without discretion, as our President.
• He's a  Chicagoland thug (and to clarify, I'm using "thug" as its definition as a ruffian or a violent criminal, not unlike the legendary mobsters from his home, that would bring a gun to a knife fight), that tries to run roughshod over Citizens, his Political Enemies, the Congress and to Bully the Supreme Court, 
• He was mentored by Weather Underground Revolutionaries William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn
• He was elected by the great throng as the leader of the Hope and Change Cult of Personality, 
• Obama the opportunist, has stated that he "will fulfill his duty" and make an appointment.  After all, why should he not follow Rahm Emmanuel's advice of not letting a  crisis go to waste.  
• Noted Communist Party USA member, Frank Marshall Davis is Barack Obama's spiritual (if not his biological) father.  
• He's anti-Business
• He's Anti-Industrial
• He's Pro-Socialized Medicine
• His mother married both Barack Obama Senior, an anti-colonial graduate student from Ethiopia and Lelo Soetero, an Indonesian Muslim that adopted his step son as Barry Soetero and had him attend a Muslim school.  
• In college, at Occidental, he wore the ring of another male student, with an Islamic verse inscribed on it. 
• He attended the church pastored by Jeremiah Wright, the noted Black Liberation Theology preacher. 
• He married Michelle Robinson, also a community and union organizer activist.

So, I don't expect Strict Constructionist as a the nominee to the position of Supreme Court Judge. Instead, I expect another Activist Judge and Social Justice Warrior, such as Our self-proclaimed "Wise Latina Woman" Justice.  I would expect that the litmus tests for Obama's Supreme Court nominee would be the following:

• A Progressive-Socialist Agenda to include Pro-Union, Higher Minumum Wages, and Closed Shop Work Rules
• An Anti-Military, (and specifically Anti-Hegemonic) stance on Foreign Policy
• An Anti-2nd Amendment Policy
• A Continuation of Unsustainable Open Borders, 
• A Continuation of Unsustainable Big Government Social Programs
• Non-Enforcement of Drug Laws (especially for marijuana)
• A Pro-Nationalized Healthcare Policy
• A Pro-Muslim Religious and Social Policy
• A Pro-Homosexual Policy
• A Continued Affirmative Action Policy to include Justice Department Civil Rights Suits against Law Enforcement Agencies
• A Continued Pro-Abortion on Demand (they will call it Women's & Reproductive Health) Policy
• A Pro-Green Energy/Anti-Hydrocarbon, Anti Industrial, Anti-Internal Combustion Policy
• An Unsustainable Budget Deficit/Inflationary Monetary Supply Policy and resultant Higher Taxes on both individuals and businesses

All of the above issues chip away at the foundations of our Representative Republic, destroying the positive characteristics of our culture.

Because of Justice Scalia's death, the upcoming Presidential Elections are now even more significant than before, and will require great wisdom for all citizens that will vote for the President, their Congressional Representatives and the Members of the Senate that are up for election, this coming November.  

IF the current majority Republican Senate, led by Senator Mitch McConnell, allows Obama to "cow," blackmail or manipulate him and Republican Senators into allowing another very liberal judge onto the Supreme Court, he and they would be derelict in the duty for which they were elected.