PRESTOPUNDIT -- A Good Blog at a Great Price. Guaranteed.

Randy Barnett -- legal scholar -- and Nick Schulz -- PrestoPundit junky -- are blogging over at The Corner. Some of their tasty recent postings:

Randy Barnett --

Even in the realm of Legal Abstraction--a wondrous realm close to Nirvana, and up the road from Shangri-La--it helps a lot to be defending a correct position. As Isaac Penington said in 1651: "Those who are to govern by Laws should have little or no hand in making the Laws they are to govern by.� This is true both of legislatures and judges, and requires a �dead� constitution interpreted according to its original meaning to accomplish. All the dead constitution thesis means is that �the Constitution should remain the same until it is properly changed� and neither legislatures nor judges may change it on their own. This is really what my forthcoming book, Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty is all about.

Nick Schulz --

When Ronald Reagan was President he used to claim -- with some justification -- that he didn�t cut spending as much as he would have liked to since Democrats in Congress controlled the purse strings. Well, now Republicans control the purse strings in Congress. But the current Republican White House isn�t making the House GOP�s efforts to curtail spending any easier. CATO�s Tad DeHaven alerts Corner readers to this telling Official Statement of Administration Policy[PDF] which blasts House members for not approving even more spending for such federal jewels as the Mentoring of Middle School Students program and the Mentoring Children of Prisoners program. (Inquiring minds: Do Children of Prisoners who are also Middle School Students qualify for two scoops of federal raisins with these programs, or just one?)

Randy Barnett --

This morning in The Corner, Peter Robinson writes: �Next week I'll be shooting a couple of episodes of Uncommon Knowledge, one with Judge Robert Bork, another with Paul Johnson, the English historian. Within his field, each knows everything.� During his Senate confirmation hearing, Judge Bork revealed that there was one thing about which he knew nothing, The Ninth Amendment:

I do not think you can use the ninth amendment unless you know something of what it means. For example, if you had an amendment that says �Congress shall make no� and then there is an ink blot and you cannot read the rest of it and that is the only copy you have, I do not think the court can make up what might be under the ink blot if you cannot read it.

Years later, I was on a Federalist Society panel moderated by Judge Bork. During his introduction, he noted my books on the Ninth Amendment and remarked, �seems like something I should read.� Indeed. In your interview, Peter, you night ask him what he now thinks it means. If he says it refers to state statutory and common law rights (the answer he gave in The Tempting of America)�BUZZ�wrong answer. (The correct answer: natural �liberty� rights.)

Anyway, check it out yourself. Lots more there, including Peter Robinson, the former Reagan speech writer. I really think group blogs are a big part of the future of blogging, and I've talked to a few folks about starting a liberal / Hayek / human science themed group blog at the Hayek Center. If any of you folks have some thoughts, suggestions or ideas, send me a note or leave a comment.