Did Ann Coulter read FlynnFiles before penning this controversial column? "The Supreme Court shouldn't be a game of Russian roulette," Coulter concludes, arguing that a strong Republican majority in the Senate should have resulted in a pick whose record inspired more confidence for conservatives. With little to go on, conservatives were left to weakly point out that John Roberts' wife once served as a vice president for Feminists for Life. That's encouraging, but if a political figure's spouse dictates his position on abortion what are we to make of Laura Bush's husband?

For pointing out the uncertainty of the Roberts selection, Coulter was dubbed "the Terrell Owens of the Right Wing Team" by one blogger. But if conservatives have no idea what plays John Roberts will be calling, why should Coulter take one for the team? Like Republican appointees David Souter, John Paul Stevens, and Harry Blackmun before him, John Roberts may not even play for our team. Before charging Coulter with disloyalty, shouldn't we have a better idea of the loyalties of John Roberts?

For Coulter, John Roberts is a human "Rorschach blot." If so, he's a Rorschach test that has revealed some interesting quirks among conservative supporters of George W. Bush. "Pop the champagne corks, conservatives," Poweline's John Hinderaker reacted. "Roberts is a fantastic choice, a brilliant and bulletproof conservative." Hinderaker's colleague, Paul Mirengoff, confessed: "I'm over the moon." Right Thinking Girl proclaimed, "I'm ready to have the man's baby!" BulldogPundit declared, "This is a huge victory for we conservatives." "BRAVO...an inspired choice," believes Orin Kerr of the Volokh Conspiracy.

On what basis this joy? John Roberts' record as a judge is thin. He's been careful to stay mum on controversial issues. Thus, Roberts is mostly a blank slate upon which conservatives have projected their hopes and desires and liberals their nightmares and worst-case-scenarios. John Roberts may become a hero in the eyes of conservatives, but there's next to nothing in his short paper trail that would indicate so. John Roberts may become a disaster in the eyes of conservatives, but there's next to nothing in his short paper trail that would indicate so. What's the point of Bush taking such a risk when he holds all the cards?

It seems Coulter loves to create a buzz. She has a habit of coming off as a reactionary and over the top on any hot topic.

The fact that he has two degrees from Harvard, including his law degree is a red enough flag for me to be skeptical. I am very interested to find out his views on Roe v. Wade.

Was Souter a member of the Federalist Society too?

Right Thinking Girl wasn't thinking right, but after your quote apparently she has reconsidered.

At least we know he has a "good heart," ... that, and he played football in highschool.

While I'll agree it's premature to pop the champagne corks, I am willing to look positively upon this nomination based upon the recommendations of people like Hugh Hewitt who know's Roberts personally.

J