« Corzine Pays His Girlfriends Well | Main | Check the Bill When It Comes to Your Rights »
August 04, 2005
Daddy, Where Do Babies Come From?
If you don't know, the New York Times will find out.
NY TIMES INVESTIGATES ADOPTION RECORDS OF SUPREME COURT NOMINEE'S CHILDREN**Exclusive**
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.
What a sorry a$$ waste of outhouse paper they've become.
Notice the little guy cuts a handsomer slice of rug than the Guv wanna be below.
I'll bet his girlfriends are less expensive, too.
UPDATE: Michelle Malkin has posted a NYT response to an email on of her readers sent. It calls the Drudge Report overwrought, among other things. But then, to my ear, they slip up and I've highlighted the offending and offensive passage below:
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.
What low lifes. A child is not an aspect of someone's background.
UPDATE: Talk about crawling up someone's intestinal tract! I shall summarize.
This is almost everything you might, or might not, want to know about Judge Roberts. (AND what the Times wants you to know, whether you want to know it or not.)
It's about everyone else who wants to know about Judge Roberts. (Holy crap, Batman! He zips his pants from bottom to top! E. Ver. Y. Day.)
It's about who has what to say about Judge Roberts... (Ted Kennedy hints it's sink or swim time and he's the resident expert on submersibles.)
...before they even talk to...you guessed it...Judge Roberts. (Boxer Babs says, "And I would have a very difficult time - an impossible time, frankly - voting for someone who doesn't respect the privacy of half the population." Of course, the two halves of the population his children represent are fair game, privacy wise...there are two Americas, as far as the Democratic Party remembers.)
I'm sure by first light tomorrow there'll be six more links added. Hopefully one of them will be to an apology for the Times' craven classlessness. Ya think?
Pffft.
Posted by tree hugging sister at August 4, 2005 01:42 PM
Comments
A sad and sorry state of affairs.
Posted by: Mr. Bingley at August 4, 2005 02:52 PM
Since he doesn't have a South American maid, the kids are the next best thing.
Posted by: tree hugging sister at August 4, 2005 03:17 PM
Is the daughter named Zoe?
Posted by: Mr. Bingley at August 4, 2005 03:26 PM
They look like they were adopted from Norway. It is not beneath the Times to wonder why the Roberts discriminated against minorities in their adopting practices.
Posted by: Nightfly at August 4, 2005 03:51 PM
That's pretty low, looking for dirt via the kids.
Posted by: Cindermutha at August 4, 2005 03:59 PM
The crap thing is, some sombitch reporter is going to go find the mother/parents of these poor sweet kids and stir up a whole heck of a lot of stuff that is no one's business.
disgusting.
Posted by: Mr. Bingley at August 4, 2005 04:08 PM
Anchoress says Brit Hume's source said the Times asked lawyers about unsealing the adoption records.
Posted by: jack at August 4, 2005 08:43 PM
OK, let me see if I can think this through:
The Slimes makes "initial inquiries" and found "nothing irregular" so they decided to let it go. And if they had found something "irregular" what would they have done? Uummm, let's see...How about destroy the Roberts family? Maybe get the screaming children wrenched from their parents' arms and returned to the slums from whence they came? How about driving Mrs. Roberts to the brink of madness?
Maybe they can get Judge Roberts to withdraw? Maybe they can strike such fear into the hearts of all non-liberals in the country that they will never agree to be judges, thus leaving the courts in the hands of those loving, caring liberals...
On the other hand, on a more positive note, they apparently decided not to go to a Kinko's in South America and send a fax claiming that the children are actually Fidel's kidnapped grandchildren.
The contempt I feel for the NYT is impossible to express.
Posted by: Julie at August 4, 2005 10:04 PM
Jack, that is EXACTLY the impression I got from that weasely answer they passed out ~ that they had tried everything they could, skulking along while hoping not to touch off a firestorm. Despicable.
And Julie, that was a spot on post! I highlighted that particular sentence in the official 'nothing up my sleeve' excuse, for just that reason. Have I said 'despicable' enough yet?
A warm Swill welcome to you both!
Posted by: tree hugging sister at August 4, 2005 10:39 PM
Jerks. A free press needs to be a responsible press. This is clearly irresponsible.
My respect for the MSM died when they abandoned their responsibilities. If I want a tabloid, I'll go read National Enquirer or People magazine.
Posted by: The Real JeffS at August 5, 2005 03:39 AM
sadly, you might find better journalism at the National Enquirer.
You'd be hard-pressed to find worse...
Posted by: true_rocat at August 5, 2005 05:16 PM