Posted on 08/04/2005 8:48:41 AM PDT by kennedy
“The kids were dressed perfectly, unlike the womans field hockey team, whose members mostly wore flip-flops to meet the President.”
It's a generational thing. Flip Flops are the new heels of America's youth. Only “old ladies” and “trashy girls” wear heals with a sundress. Heels are only for black tie events. This mentality is especially common among suburban middle to upper class girls. The girls mistakenly assumed older generations have the same standard for what is trashy. Plus these were college aged girls who don't tend to have a lot of money or occasions to shell out 50-100 dollars for heels when they will at most wear them once or twice a year.
The kids were born in Ireland but for some reason were adopted in latin america. They had diff. birth mothers.
I read, I emailed, I felt GOOD.
ME TOO!
CONTACT
• E-mail: public@nytimes.com
• Phone: (212) 556-7652
• Address: Public Editor
The New York Times
229 West 43rd St.
New York, NY 10036-3959
Tell him what you think!
I did and now I feel better!
Interesting. Thanks!!
who are these reporters really? the time will come when some people will not only ask , but find out. lets look.
This despicable judgmental look is standar operation procedures when women, feminists and Child Protective Services decide on the total character of a working father. Personal interests in dress trump strategic interests. Deconstruction of men through their "tooling" as bicycle is also a way to make them look discardable and to destroy their credibility. It's nasty, but for Roberts, remember, he has only liberal lawyers to blame for this atmosphere.
I e-mailed the NY Slimes and asked what happened to a once great newspaper that I stopped reading about 20 years ago.
I e-mailed and here is the answer I got:
Thanks for giving us a chance to reply to the account on the
Drudge Report. As is often the case, the Drudge Report is wrong, overwrought and a gross misrepresentation of what has happened.
Like all major news organizations, we report extensively on the life and career of any nominee or candidate for high public office. Most of the inquiries we make do not report in published articles at all; we would simply be remiss if we did not ask the questions.
In the case of Judge Roberts's family, our reporters made initial inquiries about the adoptions, as they did about many other aspects of his background. They did so with great care, understanding the sensitivity of the issue. We did not order up an investigation of the
adoptions. We have not pursued the issue after the initial inquiries, which detected nothing irregular about the adoptions.
Next will be what type of toilet paper he wipes with!
The insanity must stop! We are at war! Get the judges on the benches!!
NY Times 'Fishing Expedition' Prompts Call for Probe By Melanie Hunter
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
August 05, 2005
(CNSNews.com) - A free enterprise group is calling for an investigation into the New York Times' effort to get sealed court records regarding the adoptions of Supreme Court nominee John Roberts' children.
The Free Enterprise Action Fund, which is a shareholder in the New York Times Company, sent a letter Friday to the company's chairman Arthur Sulzberger requesting that the findings of such a probe be made public and "appropriate disciplinary action" be taken towards anyone guilty of employee misconduct.
"We can't understand why a responsible, publicly-owned company would risk alienating even more of the news-seeking public for a political jihad where innocent children become collateral damage," said Steven Milloy, managing partner and adviser to the Free Enterprise Action Fund, in a statement.
"As the NYT achieves new lows in journalism, shareholder concern grows," Milloy added.
In a letter to Sulzberger, Milloy said the paper's staff consulted lawyers for advice on how to go about unsealing the adoption records of Roberts' five-year-old daughter and four-year-old son.
"Not only does this line of investigation appear to be of little bona fide news value, it appears to have been undertaken without any basis whatsoever except as a fishing expedition hoping to uncover embarrassing information," Milloy wrote.
"Based on news reports, the Times' inquiry seems to be a grotesque invasion of privacy and, as it involves two small children, lacks fundamental decency," Milloy added.
"We are hard-pressed to see how an unethical, invasive and irrelevant investigation apparently intended solely to humiliate a Supreme Court nominee for political purposes and without regard to the well-being of two very small children will in any way advance the Times' commitment to journalistic integrity," said Milloy.
Yes holes. That reminds me that liberals are the armpits(and other unmentionable crevices) of our society.
Don't forget the right to jihad.
Oh, come on.
They have money for ipods, cds, whatever.
It's called priorities.
My nephews's grandmother, grandma Racquel - Peruvian, 100% northern Italian stock, almost six feet tall, blue eyes, blond hair.
Ugh! I wouldn't wear flipflops to the White House unless the President was going barefoot.
Hence my tagline!
There is a rumor out there that Dan Rather and his search team are working for the NY Times.
Possibly so. Chances are they're digging to see if the kids were adopted legally. Though I can't imagine a man in Roberts' position would knowingly adopt kids illegally.
SW
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.