I can't wait for the salute to show tunes

It's bad enough that the Cons seem to want to put Supreme Court nominees through a U.S.-style publicity wringer, but criticizing Cotler for inviting public input into the nomination seems way off base:

Some critics are dismissing it as nothing more than Canadian Idol for the legal set, as Justice Minister Irwin Cotler seeks public input into who should fill the next vacancy on Canada's Supreme Court.

The federal Justice Department issued a release today asking Canadians to submit suggestions for potential candidates to replace Justice John Major, who retires Dec. 25.

While I'm more than willing to be critical of Cotler when he deserves it, this strikes me as a solid balance to be struck in appointing a Supreme Court justice. Many different people and groups will get a voice in the selection, and in fact there are a couple of points where any overly partisan judges could be filtered out (not that that's an issue among the top candidates anyway), but ultimately a prime ministerial appointment carried out in good faith goes a long way toward avoiding a SCOTUS-style circus.

Of course, there are those who seem to think that the SCOTUS frenzy doesn't go far enough. In the article, Democracy Watch suggests giving each federal party a veto over any one candidate for the nomination. A brilliant suggestion, if one's goal is to force the government to horse-trade other policies in order to get the best candidate to the bench against a threatened veto. But the most I can say from a democracy perspective is that it'll provide for equal-opportunity mudslinging as parties slam each other's motives for using (or threatening to use, or not using) the veto.

Sadly, the article doesn't actually name anybody willing to go on record comparing a life appointment to the bench to Canadian Idol. Anybody with a better idea of the source of the reference, please post a comment.