Michael Newdow, the California man who challenged the Pledge on behalf of his public school student daughter--and who got the infamously liberal Ninth Circuit to declare the Pledge unconstitution--now wants to defend himself in the U.S. Supreme Court.

According to the Legal Times:

In a filing with the high court later this week, Newdow says, he plans to make it clear that he wants to take on the Supreme Court both pro se and pro hac vice -- joining the extremely small club of high court advocates who are not members of the Supreme Court bar but who argue their own cases nonetheless. **** "I think I am highly qualified to argue this case. There is no one who knows this case better than me," says Newdow, who notes that he has written every brief and argued every minute of his case so far. "There may be people who know the legal issues better, but I needed to get an atheist to argue this. I want me."

The article also reports that this is not sitting too well with Nedrow's fellow liberals:

Newdow's insistence about pressing his own case before the Supreme Court is causing discomfort among some of his natural allies.**** Both the American Civil Liberties Union and People for the American Way are staying on the sidelines **** "He's in over his head, but he won't let anyone else take it over," says one civil liberties activist who is monitoring the case. "A lot of us would breathe a sigh of relief if the case would just go away. It's a no-win situation."

Furthermore, according to the article, Nedrow is not even the girl's custodial parent, and has only limited visitation with her.

Solicitor General Theodore Olson's brief challenges Newdow's standing in the case, because he is the noncustodial parent of his daughter. When asked about the standing issue in a phone interview, Newdow angrily launched into an indictment of the "insane and grossly unconstitutional family law system" that resulted in his loss of custody. "I am a terrific father, and yet I am the only person in the world who is forbidden to see her -- except every two weeks."

Based on all of this. You have to wonder: is this case about his daughter? Or about him?

In fact, is it even about a Constitutional principle? It seems to me that, if Nedrow really wanted to win this case before the High Court, he would be accepting help from professional attorney, the ACLU and other liberal groups that he has driven away. Instead, it seems, he is trying to make this case about himself.

Someone should tell this guy there are better ways to get notoriety, especially since the Supreme Court will most likely rule against him.

Maybe he should audition for a new reality show: When Idiots Attack.