[Congressman Billybob]

What are you, dumb and blind?

For the third time, the Chief Justice is separately appointed and separately confirmed, from the position of Associate Justice. So, exactly as I said, IF Scalia is named to replace Rehnquist, Bush will make five appointments.

One of those will be Scalia moving to Chief Justice, which does not, of course, change the number of Justices on the Court. Got it now? If not, I give up.

John / Billybob

[iconoclast]

What are you, dumb and blind?

Neither. Are you a hairsplitting technicality nut?

The "appointment" of the Chief Justice is dependent on Rehnquist's resignation (and is about as significant as the proverbial bucket of warm spit). The fact there would be an "appointment" is in no way related to Scalia or any other jurist.

So just what WAS your big whoopee point with this?:
Nope. The Bush Administration will make a total of four appointments to the Supreme Court. Five, if Scalia moves up to Chief Justice.:

What if the Senate refused to confirm Scalia as Chief Justice? Would the President (according to your water muddying logic) then "get to make a sixth "appointment"?