I've been consistently saying to my friends how John Roberts is not nearly the worst candidate that Bush Co. could have nominated to the Supreme Court. Do I think he should be Chief Justice? Probably not--not enough experience. But he's definitely not a strict constructionist (originalist
...whatever), and in Wednesday's hearings he seemed to prove by pointing out that he disagreed with this narrow originalist approach and would apply the Constitution in light of today's concerns and understandings. He went on to say that words such as liberty or equality should not be given a:
...cramped or narrow construction, based on just the conditions at the time
Damn sensible, in my opinion.