Alpine Summit

Friday, August 05, 2005

More Liberal Media Coverage

JimK posted an exclusive by Drudge saying the NY Times was looking into getting adoption records for John Roberts' kids. An absolute low-blow even for the Times. It's pretty weird they're doing that, too considering they want to change their image as a liberal rag. Here's the text of the Drudge report:




The NEW YORK TIMES is looking into the adoption records of the children of Supreme Court Nominee John G. Roberts, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

The TIMES has investigative reporter Glen Justice hot on the case to investigate the status of adoption records of Judge Roberts’ two young children, Josie age 5 and Jack age 4, a top source reveals.

Judge Roberts and his wife Jane adopted the children when they each were infants.

Both children were adopted from Latin America.

A TIMES insider claims the look into the adoption papers are part of the paper’s “standard background check.”

Roberts’ young son Jack delighted millions of Americans during his father’s Supreme Court nomination announcement ceremony when he wouldn’t stop dancing while the President and his father spoke to a national television audience.

Previously the WASHINGTON POST Style section had published a story criticizing the outfits Mrs. Roberts had them wear at the announcement ceremony.

One top Washington official with knowledge of the NEW YORK TIMES action declared: “Trying to pry into the lives of the Roberts’ family like this is despicable. Children’s lives should be off limits. The TIMES is putting politics over fundamental decency.”

One top Republican official when told of the situation was incredulous. “This can’t possibly be true?”


Yet another example of how liberals will do anything, anything, to soil the name of someone they don't like. The Anchoress had some thoughts on this:

Standard background check my patootie - does anyone believe for one second that this were a Clinton (or any Democrat president) SCOTUS nominee with adopted children that such an intrustive “background check” would be undertaken. Is it too much to expect, at this point, that a nominee’s CHILDREN, at least, would be off-limits to dirt-digging?

I guess it is, Anchoress. I've mentioned before how we have free trial copies of the NYT on my campus. I don't even bother to look at it anymore- even for the business articles. The Internet is far more diverse and a LOT less biased than this. I had considered getting a subscription to the Times after graduating for the business section alone, but after this, even THAT won't make me decide NOT to give them my money. Anchoress also links to an awesome post by Sensible Mom who decided to break her summer silence to post about it.

So rather than sending a reporter to investigate Air America, an organization that did something as immoral as taking money set aside for the poor and infirm, constituencies they and all liberals claim to protect, they choose to delve into an extremely personal and emotional issue that has no bearing on John Robert's nomination. And in the process possibly throw the children's lives into upheaval."

Yeah, Air America is found to have taken money from the handicapped (Michelle Malkin is covering this) and totally get a pass in the MSM, John Roberts has adopted kids- SCANDAL! WE MUST INVESTIGATE! People who think the MSM is unbiased or conservatively biased is either incredibly stupid or willfully ignorant. Read the whole post by Sensible Mom. She completely nails it.