[I believe the last time I used this title, it was for a post called "Eminem: Genius or Idiot
?" Someone could do an interesting comparison between Sullivan and Mathers, but it won't be me.]
Sullivan writes an awesome piece for The Times
* about Clinton's bid for the presidency. Here's the part that blows my mind:
Besides, there is a perfect position for her in American public life -- and it's not in the Senate, despite her eminently respectable record there. She belongs on the Supreme Court. She's a lawyer who wants to change the world. That's almost a job description for a liberal justice.
Good idea or bad? Obviously, I disagree with Sully's ideas about what constitutes a "respectable" record, but what of this Supreme Court nonsense? I have to say, it's kind of intriguing.
*London, not NY, so no registration necessary.