This article is short enough to post in its entirety, yet it raises a few serious questions:
A conservative group in Virginia said Tuesday it was withdrawing its support for Supreme Court nominee John Roberts' confirmation because of his work helping overturn a Colorado referendum on gays.Question One: What level of acceptance of gays is acceptable to "conservatives?"
The group, Public Advocate of the United States, is one of the first conservative organizations to announce anything but support for the judge.
Eugene Delgaudio, the president of the group, said in an interview that he hopes his stance will prod others.
''I know that others feel the same way. I know they believe as I do. They're just not going to act,'' the 50-year-old Northern Virginia man said. ''But once I've done it, then they can't claim that no one's opposing Roberts.''
''We can't take our limited resources and put it toward a candidate who is not a strict constructionist when we were told he is,'' Delgaudio said.
This is not the first time Delgaudio has gone up against the Bush administration. He criticized Vice President Dick Cheney last year after the vice president, when asked about gay marriage, said, ''Freedom means freedom for everyone.''
Delgaudio said then: '''Freedom' is not embracing perversion.''
Question Two: At what point does a group go so far that it ceases to be called "conservative" and starts being called loony? I'm no fan of conservatives, but I still feel bad that people with bona-fide opinions and thoughts about the world have to be lumped in with crazies like Delgaudio. Not that it seems to be slowing down their progress toward world domination.
Apparently Bush can nominate the blandest judge in America and still bring out the kooks on both sides. Good to know.