Another reason to promote Clarence Thomas to Chief Justice

On Sunday's Meet the Press, Tim Russert had this exchange with incoming Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid regarding the most likely candidates to replace ailing Chief Justice Rehnquist:

MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to judicial nominations. Again, Harry Reid on National Public Radio, November 19: "If they"--the Bush White House--"for example, gave us Clarence Thomas as chief justice, I personally feel that would be wrong. If they give us Antonin Scalia, that's a little different question. I may not agree with some of his opinions, but I agree with the brilliance of his mind."

Could you support Antonin Scalia to be chief justice of the Supreme Court?

SEN. REID: If he can overcome the ethics problems that have arisen since he was selected as a justice of the Supreme Court. And those ethics problems--you've talked about them; every people talk--every reporter's talked about them in town--where he took trips that were probably not in keeping with the code of judicial ethics. So we have to get over this. I cannot dispute the fact, as I have said, that this is one smart guy. And I disagree with many of the results that he arrives at, but his reason for arriving at those results are very hard to dispute. So...

MR. RUSSERT: Why couldn't you accept Clarence Thomas?

SEN. REID: I think that he has been an embarrassment to the Supreme Court. I think that his opinions are poorly written. I don't--I just don't think that he's done a good job as a Supreme Court justice.

While the "ethics problems" charge against Scalia are debatable, at least it's a (somewhat) specific accusation. Reid doesn't bother to go into any specifics regarding how Thomas is an "embarrassment" to the court. He doesn't give any examples of poorly written opinions. He doesn't given any particular reason why he doesn't think Thomas has done a good job. A sharp-minded, unbiased interviewer would have called Reid on this, but it didn't happen.

This exchange actually is quite encouraging to me. It tells me that the Dems consider Clarence Thomas to be the single most credible threat to their agenda. They hate him, but they have nothing they can sink their teeth into to minimize the threat (partly because there's no merit to Reid's charges, but also because a concerted attack on Thomas runs the risk of a backlash from black activists).

Bring it on, Dems.