[Do not dub me shapka broham]

He had no special information-or insight-related to the Roberts confirmation, but that didn't prevent him from endorsing the choice, however ambivalently.

I agree with you, but take exception to the characterization of Scalia.

There are only a few justices during the 20th century, e.g. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Justice Harlan, Potter Stewart, William Rehnquist, who even approach the towering intellect and judicial foresight of Antonin Scalia.

I'm also pretty keen on Clarence Thomas, in case you haven't already noticed.

:O)

[AmishDude]

Remember that the general perception of Thomas was also that he was a lightweight. Scalia's fine as far as it goes, but he's no Paul Erdõs. Speaking of Scalia, some interesting comments.