Supreme Court musings

I've been thinking a lot about the Supreme Court lately. My knowledge of it is minimal and as usual, my opinions are much stronger and broader and grander than my knowledge really should allow--but on I go.

As I understand it, the justices on the Supreme Court have a judicial philosophy that can either see the Constitution as a fairly rigid document that isn't meant to really stretch and flex to accommodate the changes in society and the writer's original intents are to be intuited and preserved OR the justices see the Constitution as a framework that our government and society were meant to grow up around. And then, of course, within that either/or philosophical bent you have the political leanings of the justices--conservative or liberal (there isn't much room for a moderate in Washington anymore is there?) I might have this all wrong.

At first I thought it would be fun to be on the Supreme Court--the cool robes, big chairs up high, everybody has to listen to you----those kind of things are important to a person like me, someone with lots of opinions--and summers off. But then I realized that mostly they read a lot of really boring legal stuff and then write a lot more really boring legal stuff.

Though I wouldn't want their jobs, I'd still like to meet Sandra Day O'Connor(retired) or Ruth Ginsberg--though I'm sure their intelligence would render me speechless. I wonder if Obama will have a chance to nominate a justice. A couple of the current justices must be thinking about retiring.