VOLuntarilyConservative

At 11 A.M. this morning on the steps of the Supreme Court, Public Advocate, a Virginia-based pro-family group, will hold a press conference in which the group will withdraw its support for President Bush's Supreme Court nominee, John Roberts.

I can't say that I am too surprised. What will be interesting is to see if other conservative groups continue to make excuses for a nominee that is blanketed by red flags (Focus on the Family, Family Research Council, American Family Association, Progress for America) or whether they will start questioning if they are fighting for a nominee that is worth fighting for.

I had questions about Roberts before he was the nominee. When the e-mail blitz from these groups started (literally) 30 seconds after President Bush introduced Roberts as his nominee, I was even more skeptical. This relates back to Justice Souter's confirmation, which had many of the same propagandists pushing him. I think I might just be with Ann Coulter on this one:

"Finally, let's ponder the fact that Roberts has gone through 50 years on this planet without ever saying anything controversial. That's just unnatural... Apparently, Roberts decided early on that he wanted to be on the Supreme Court and that the way to do that was not to express a personal opinion on anything to anybody ever. It's as if he is from some space alien sleeper cell. Maybe the space aliens are trying to help us, but I wish we knew that."

As Ann has said, Supreme Court nominees shouldn't be akin to playing Russian Roulette. Not when you have majorities in the Senate and the House. Not when most Americans are on your side.

MORE: This article comes from the Baptist Press regarding an interview that Roberts gave in 2000 that many interest groups are using to gauge his values and judicial philosophy. After watching the video, how can the ACLJ's Jay Sekulow (quoted in the article) believe this to be good news? I tell ya' folks, something stinks here...