Love Her or Hate Her, Ann Coulter Warned Us About John Roberts 10 Years Ago

After conservatives took another gut punch from black-robed Obamacare cheerleader Chief Justice John Roberts, many of us were left wondering just what in the heck is wrong with this guy. After all, these Republican appointees to the Supreme Court are supposed to be on our side, right? They can’t all be David Souter.

It turns out that Ann Coulter sniffed another Souter-esque betrayal in the offing ten years ago:

After pretending to consider various women and minorities for the Supreme Court these past few weeks, President Bush decided to disappoint all the groups he had just ginned up and nominate a white male.

So all we know about him for sure is that he can't dance and he probably doesn't know who Jay-Z is. Other than that, he is a blank slate. Tabula rasa. Big zippo. Nada. Oh, yeah ... We also know he's argued cases before the Supreme Court. Big deal; so has Larry Flynt's attorney.

But unfortunately, other than that that, we don't know much about John Roberts. Stealth nominees have never turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives. Never. Not ever.

Since the announcement, court-watchers have been like the old Kremlinologists from Soviet days looking for clues as to what kind of justice Roberts will be.

-- Will he let us vote?

-- Does he trust democracy? Or will he make all the important decisions for us and call them "constitutional rights"?

-- Does he live in a small, rough-hewn cabin in the woods of New Hampshire and avoid "womenfolk"?

It means absolutely nothing that NARAL and Planned Parenthood attack him: They also attacked Sandra Day O'Connor, Anthony Kennedy and David Hackett Souter.

The only way a Supreme Court nominee could win the approval of NARAL and Planned Parenthood would be to actually perform an abortion during his confirmation hearing, live, on camera, and preferably a partial-birth one.

Read the whole thing.

Ann Coulter is very, very smart ... and fast with a quip which hides the fact that she's wise. We tend to support those who are attacked by Liberals, but as Ann points out, Liberals will attack anyone who has not come out - loudly and strongly - for abortion, gun control and government control of everything. This causes us to fall into the trap of supporting people with personal agendas that have nothing to do with the good of the country and protecting the right of everyone to live the life as they see fit.

On a related note, Roberts came out against the the judicial decree making gay marriage the law of the land. I suspect that this is his attempt to make up with conservatives, giving a throw-away vote to the dissent, knowing his vote was not needed to change the definition of marriage. had his vote been needed one can be sure that he would have switched positions.