Simple, yet interesting post. I'm sure if this site got a lot of commenters, someone would be sure to say "What is your point?" But I think those numbers speak to the historical importance and long term influence of the position of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court .

I'm sure if this site got a lot of commenters. . .

That's an odd comment. Does 10365 comments in a year not count?

> someone would be sure to say "What is your point?"

An even more interesting comment. Did you not, in fact, say "What is your point?"

What is your point?

How many pandering Senators have there been from Indiana who would deny Indiana a Chief Justice?

Joshua, no offense was intended. This is a well respected blog, and I enjoy it. My favorite blog on the whole interenets has fewer commenters, and my statement was not at all meant as some kind of value judgement. Perhaps I should have said "If this site recieved a lot of posts on individual threads/topics?" I would stand by that statement; looking at the front page: on average less than seven comments per post, drop the bottom two and top two, and you get under 4.

Hit post too soon, continueing...
The numbers don't matter, I should have left it out. The blogs I read with lots of comments are too often filled with cheerleading or hyperbole, and I appreciate this site's relative lack of those.

Dave S: My point was that despite the shortness and simplicity of this post, it illustrated and highlighted the importance of the Chief Justice position. Nothing more.