MEGAN MCARDLE characterizes the confirmation battle: “The battle for control of the courts between Democrats who think they have a right to a pro-Roe judge, and Republicans who are salivating to get an originalist on the court, will now commence.”

Heck, it’s possible to be both. Here’s a not-so-encouraging prediction:

At this point, a confirmation battle will be supply-side driven–the interest groups have the money already, and they are going to spend it one way or the other. And then try to raise some more. And the politicians are going to try to raise money by pandering to these same players. No one is going to roll over on either side just because a particular nominee is thought to be “moderate” rather than “conservative”.

Maybe I’ll just go back to the beach . . . .

UPDATE: Reader Paul Carbone emails:

If a libertarian like yourself was nominated to the Supreme Court (something I’d certainly support) Do you think that would make it easier for he Democrats to swallow?

Maybe instead of going to the beach, you could go to the bench…

I think Bush could mess with the Democrats by appointing a libertarian like Eugene Volokh, Alex Kozinski, or Randy Barnett. I suspect that I’m a bit too far to the pro-choice end of the spectrum for the Bushies.

ANOTHER UPDATE: On the other hand, here’s someone who grudgingly suggests that I’d be an improvement over Sandra Day O’Connor, even though I’m pro-choice. Karl Rove is pretty much guaranteed not to agree.