Who makes the list?

CURRENT EVENTS

Though Obama made masterful use of the third-person singular Friday in discussing his ideal replacement for Supreme Court Justice David Souter--no "he" or "she," just "they"--the papers still dominated their second-day stories with the names of possible leading ladies. But where did these names come from? The Los Angeles Times cites amorphous "political and legal observers," while both the New York Times and Washington Post magic away the sources with subject-less phrases. The Wall Street Journal goes much farther than its peers in exploring this (though it ultimately credits "court observers"):

The process for identifying a high court nominee began well before Mr. Obama became president, when a judicial-selection working group was set up in his transition offices to identify candidates for Supreme Court and appellate-court vacancies.

Mr. Obama, a former constitutional-law instructor, suggested names for consideration to the Supreme Court in December during working-group meetings in Chicago and Washington, aides said.

Now, I know these lists are nothing more than an amalgamation of the guesses of top legal experts, bloggers' hopes and reporters' hunches, but why not be more honest about that? Especially given how wrong these initial lists have proved in the past? Did anyone see Bush's Harriet Miers coming?

# # #

Idiot quote of the day goes to the Washington Post:

"He says he wants to appoint judges who show empathy, but what does that mean?" said Wendy Long, chief counsel to the Judicial Confirmation Network. "Who do you have empathy for? If you have empathy for everybody, you have empathy for nobody."

Is that the most articulate conservative they could find?