Not really. He’s actually my very good friend who is speaking on the future of PBS tonight, along with Rob Long and Harry Shearer. If you are anywhere near Los Angeles tonight and not attending GodBlogCon I, go listen in on this most interesting trio.
Speaking of Cornerites, Jonah’s produced a very useful and hopefully influential column this morning.
UPDATE II: Go ahead and throw things at Peter.
Again, not really. But look at my post yesterday on my conversation with Karl Rove. It specifically addresses the “judicial philosophy question,” and the charge, made by many, that the president and by extension his staff could not have known Miers’ judicial philosophy when she was selected. A specific response to a specific charge.
To which Peter responds that “Have I got this right? As the result of sitting on a committee with him–a committee that involved poring over great big binders–Harriet Miers is now just as thoroughly qualified to sit on the highest court in the land as is…Karl Rove.”
To which I respond, with a tilt of my head and a small smile, “Well, there you go again…”
The post did not purport to present an argument for Miers’ qualifications, though others have and more will do so. I suspect Peter will repent upon rereading.
As for the Third Amendment, or the Seventh, or the Ninth, or the dormant commerce clause or the damned 11th Amendment which is almost impossible to teach –the questions being compiled by the Cornerites have almost nothing to do with judging! Do they think John Roberts was prepared to discuss the quartering of troops in private homes?
What the Cornerites continue to look for as an indication of SCOTUS credentials is a facility with words that matches their facility with words. I will be back later to explain why witty, deft posting, or long and persuasive op-eds are not signs of SCOTUS greatness.