WaPo still on the anti-Roberts path
By Darleen Posted in User Blogs — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Do recall that it was the WaPo who ran and supported the nasty politicking against Roberts by allowing Robin Givhan to attack his wife and children on the Fasion pages. Now we have stuff like this
Roberts Resisted Women's Rights
Ooooo. Aaaah. Pretty scary headline, eh? Now, let's read the first paragraph!
Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. consistently opposed legal and legislative attempts to strengthen women's rights during his years as a legal adviser in the Reagan White House, disparaging what he called "the purported gender gap" and, at one point, questioning "whether encouraging homemakers to become lawyers contributes to the common good."
Well, that tears it. Roberts is definitely one of the "keep women barefoot and preggers in the kitchen" cavemen. Right?
WRONG WRONG WRONG!
It is not until paragraphs 12 and 13 that we find out the perfidy of WaPo's opening --
His remark on whether homemakers should become lawyers came in 1985 in reply to a suggestion from Linda Chavez, then the White House's director of public liaison. Chavez had proposed entering her deputy, Linda Arey, in a contest sponsored by the Clairol shampoo company to honor women who had changed their lives after age 30. Arey had been a schoolteacher who decided to change careers and went to law school.In a July 31, 1985, memo, Roberts noted that, as an assistant dean at the University of Richmond law school before she joined the Reagan administration, Arey had "encouraged many former homemakers to enter law school and become lawyers." Roberts said in his memo that he saw no legal objection to her taking part in the Clairol contest. Then he added a personal aside: "Some might question whether encouraging homemakers to become lawyers contributes to the common good, but I suppose that is for the judges to decide."
Roberts was making a LAWYER JOKE not a 'barefoot and preggers' statement!
Michael Getler is the WaPo's Ombudsman -- write him:
ombudsman@washpost.com
- Liberals don't have a sense of humor (duh)
- MRS. Roberts (Jane, his wife) is a lawyer (with the firm of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pitman LLP according to Wiki)
And of course, we knew that it would. Between the fundraising and the need to satisfy all the people who have given them money, the abortion lobby is going into overdrive to oppose the Roberts nomination.
Terry Neal from the Washington Post has an interview with the President of the National Abortion Federation, Vicki Saports about guess who?
Here's the NAF's website. It's all done in nice pastels, with soothing shades and calming hues. Abortion with diversity and a smile!
Not Saports, but that's alright; I actually like the way I misspelling. She sure Saports abortion!
If they don't get one, they will invent one.
The media gushes over the importances of centrists, fair jurists, yet they lash out at any nominee of a Republican President.
I can't wait to see their reaction to a Justice Owen or Justice Luttig.