in an article published by the chicago sun-times on 8/8/04, writer anne gearen reports supreme court justice clarence thomas has been interviewed by white house lawyers in anticipation of his being named chief justice of the court by president bush.   here's a link Link

the information comes from thomas' biographer ken foskett whose book about thomas' life (judging thomas) goes on sale this week.   according to foskett,  thomas isnt interested but could find it difficult to turn the job down. 

thomas is a regular guy, his biographer reports, who likes nascar racing and spends the court's summer recess driving around the country in a 40' rv decorated with orange flames.

 ''I think people would be surprised to know that Thomas knows everyone in the building by first name,'' Foskett said. 

i can't think of a better qualification for chief justice of the supreme court than that. 

nor can i think of a better reason to vote against bush than to ensure he doesnt have an opportunity to elevate one of the three justices who--in a decision totally inconsistent with their past record and oft-stated principles--decided the 2000 presidential election in his favor.   

that decision will always give the appearance of impropriety (which is of itself nothing more than appearance).  elevating thomas over the other members of the court--considering his activist tendencies, skewed view of constitutional law (he recently granted an interview in which he claimed the declaration of independence provides the primary key to extrapolating the intentions of those who authored the constitution)  and his comparative lack of experience--casts a pall on 2 of our 3 branches of government.