So does Matthew Yglesias acknowledge that I’m right that Obama was talking about Supreme Court cases when he absurdly stated that differing judicial philosophies don’t matter in “ninety-nine percent of cases [because] the Constitution is actually going to be clear? Or does he explain why he thinks I’m wrong? No. Here’s the entirety of his “update”: “Ed Whelan has a response here that I do agree makes his point of view on this look a bit less ridiculous, but I would still stand by the contention that he’s completely misrepresenting Obama’s fairly clear and basic point here.” No explanation why he would stand by a contention that I have shown is wrong.