Flying Sola or Why Sola Scriptura doesn't mean "only scripture"

I was listening to a sermon by Mark Driscoll (who gives hour long sermons, so be thankful for your 30 minute-ish pastor) and he was talking about why Protestant American churches worship the way they do and how they decide that.  One point he makes in the grand scheme of this lesson is a difference between "Sola Scriptura" and what he calls "Solo Scriptura."  The latter, he says, is when you treat Scripture as the only measuring stick.  For me personally, it's when you say the Bible is purely objective.  The former is treating Scripture as the "supreme court" of decision making with several other lesser courts.

Being emergent-esque (since it's still emerging), I'm thinking the idea of Sola Scriptura presented by Driscoll is something I can grasp and say is true.  There are a lot of emergents out there you see Sola Scriptura as something to be avoided, but I think they're throwing the baby out with the bath water.  If we look at the way the supreme court in the United States is set up, we can see that there's more than just "my interpretation" needed when making a decision.  The SC is made up of nine justices who hear cases and decide together.  Right there is a perfect example for the need for community.  We don't leave our biggest cases to be decided upon by just one person because we see the fallacy and arrogance in that.  Maybe Sola Scriptura is meant to be a call to community as we work through understanding what the Scripture speaks to us today in our life instead of a call to fly solo.