I was wrong about RobertsWed Sep 14, 2005 00:3964.140.158.14
I was wrong about Roberts
Posted: September 13, 2005
Joseph Farah
http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46291
John Roberts still has most conservatives buffaloed.
They just can't believe George W. Bush would betray them so boldly.
But he has.
Even I, the ultimate skeptic, am just beginning to fathom the extent of the shell game that has been played on conservatives most of whom are actively working on behalf of the confirmation of a new chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court who will make Ruth Bader Ginsberg look like a moderate.
That's right.
Up until now, I've been comparing Roberts to Sandra Day O'Connor, Anthony Kennedy and David Souter. I've got news for you. He's worse.
That, according to his close friend Edward Lazarus. Here's what he has to say about the next chief justice:
"Roberts is not burdened by a Bork-like record of speaking out in his own voice ... Roberts presents a sharp contrast to [Robert] Bork in judicial philosophy. Roberts is already on record strongly disclaiming an allegiance to any particular theory of constitutional interpretation, such as original intent jurisprudence. Roberts says that he picks and chooses what interpretive tools to use (such as textual analysis, historical analysis, or reliance on precedent) depending on which tools seem best to fit a particular case ..."
But it gets worse. Lazarus says Roberts will be very influential because of this style.
"Why could Roberts be influential?" he asks rhetorically. "Because of the very collegiality that is cited as a reason to confirm him. Justice Thomas, for instance, is isolated on the court by his extreme and often unusual views; like Bork, he too is susceptible to caricature due to a strong emphasis on Framers' intent. So while Thomas is a reliable conservative vote, he is not an effective wooer of moderates. But Roberts could both be a reliable conservative vote, and also convince moderates such as Justice Kennedy to join his side. Similarly, while Thomas is too extreme to ever be a chief justice candidate, Roberts, in contrast, could easily become one."
This statement, by the way, made long before Bush nominated Roberts to the job of chief justice following the death of William Rehnquist.
Again, it gets worse much worse.
"Putting politics aside, the current court member Roberts most resembles is Stephen Breyer. Roberts is far more intellectual than Rehnquist, far more politic than Scalia, and as noted above far less extreme than Thomas."
Stephen Breyer. That's who Roberts most resembles, according to his friend.
Roberts is a Washington establishment operative who has been fooling conservatives for much of his life.
In 1981, he worked hand in glove with his good friend Kenneth Starr, another shill for the establishment, to fool President Reagan and the American people into thinking Sandra Day O'Connor was a "conservative," Reagan Republican. He was a plotter, a co-conspirator, a devious manipulator, a spinner.
John Roberts still has most conservatives buffaloed.
In a Feb. 16, 1982, memo he wrote to Attorney General William French Smith advising him on how to handle conservative criticism of the O'Connor choice, which had been engineered by Starr, he wrote:
A related criticism focuses on the screening and appointment of federal judges, highlighted by the O'Connor debate. The assertion is that appointees are not ideologically committed to the president's policies, again with particular emphasis on the social agenda ... Here again I do not think we should respond with a "yes, they are"; rather we should shift the debate and briefly touch on our judicial restraint themes (for which this audience should give us some credit).
It really should not matter what the personal ideology of our appointees may be, so long as they recognize that their ideology should have no role in the decisional process i.e., so long as they believe in judicial restraint. This theme should be glossed somewhat, because of the platform, but we can make the point that much criticism of our appointees has been misdirected.
This is what conservatives got for all their hard work on behalf of George W. Bush a betrayal. Conservatives were told they had nowhere else to go in the presidential election if they cared about the U.S. Supreme Court.
And what did they get? Not Souter. Not Kennedy. But Breyer.
In a Feb. 16, 1982, memo he wrote to Attorney General William French Smith advising him on how to handle conservative criticism of the O'Connor choice, which had been engineered by Starr, he wrote:
A related criticism focuses on the screening and appointment of federal judges, highlighted by the O'Connor debate. The assertion is that appointees are not ideologically committed to the president's policies, again with particular emphasis on the social agenda ... Here again I do not think we should respond with a "yes, they are"; rather we should shift the debate and briefly touch on our judicial restraint themes (for which this audience should give us some credit).
It really should not matter what the personal ideology of our appointees may be, so long as they recognize that their ideology should have no role in the decisional process i.e., so long as they believe in judicial restraint. This theme should be glossed somewhat, because of the platform, but we can make the point that much criticism of our appointees has been misdirected.
This is what conservatives got for all their hard work on behalf of George W. Bush a betrayal. Conservatives were told they had nowhere else to go in the presidential election if they cared about the U.S. Supreme Court.
And what did they get? Not Souter. Not Kennedy. But Breyer.
Can't get enough of Joseph Farah? Subscribe to his premium, online, intelligence newsletter, Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, in which he utilizes sources developed over 30 years in the news business to bring you news before it's news.
Joseph Farah is founder, editor and chief executive officer of WND and a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host. He is also the founder of WND Books, publishes the premium, online, intelligence newsletter Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, and is the author of the highly acclaimed book "Taking America Back." In addition to his daily column in WND, he writes a nationally syndicated weekly column available to U.S. newspapers through Creators Syndicate.
http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46291
========================
ACTION ALERT: Misjudging Roberts
Tue Aug 2, 2005 20:15
http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/08-03-05/discussion.cgi.13.html
FAIR-L
Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
Media analysis, critiques and activism
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2608
ACTION ALERT:
Misjudging Roberts
Newsweek dismisses accurate information on judge's record
August 2, 2005
Like much of the mainstream media coverage, Newsweek magazine's August 1 cover story on Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts was overwhelmingly positive. But Newsweek went even further than most, dismissing as inaccurate stories that depicted Roberts as a conservative partisan--even though it was Newsweek, in fact, that was getting the stories wrong.
Newsweek led off its report by saying that "true believers on the left and the right, hoping to rouse their armies for a showdown over John Roberts, immediately trumpeted two 'facts'.... Both intriguing items about Roberts, widely reported in the mainstream media, served as fodder for the talkshow blab wars. Problem is, they aren't true."
The first supposed falsehood: "Liberal bloggers floated conspiracy theories about the behind-the-scenes role he played on Bush's legal team in the epic court fight after the 2000 election, a contribution that supposedly earned the president's undying gratitude." The reality, according to Newsweek: "Roberts's role in the case of Bush v. Gore was minimal, according to colleagues who worked with him. Roberts did briefly go to Florida to be on hand as a legal consultant, but he was preoccupied with working on the adoption of a baby son."
As it turns out, the liberal bloggers' "conspiracy theories" were closer to the mark, as more careful reporting revealed that Roberts was an important part of the Bush legal team. According to a report in the Miami Herald (7/27/05), Roberts worked "as legal consultant, lawsuit editor and prep coach for arguments before the nation's highest court, according to the man who drafted him for the job." The Herald noted that Roberts was considered one of the top names for the effort, which he worked on for "a week to 10 days"; as Bush adviser Ted Cruz told the paper, "There was no one better for the job."
Newsweek's other gotcha: "Right-wingers smugly assumed Roberts's membership in the Federalist Society, an organization that has taken on an almost cultish mystique as both incubator and old boys' network for conservative jurists and lawyers in Washington." Here Newsweek was following the line of the White House, which went so far as to demand corrections from media outlets that had reported Roberts was a Federalist Society member. But as the Washington Post revealed (7/25/05), Roberts was not only listed in the group's 1997-98 leadership directory--he's named as a member of the Washington chapter's steering committee.
Dismissing these accurate stories served to bolster Newsweek's claim that Roberts was "conservative, but apolitical," and that his confirmation was a sure thing. As the magazine put it, "Roberts's marginal involvement as a political activist is revealing. It suggests that Roberts is not the hard-line ideologue that true believers on both sides had hoped for.... Barring unforeseen and unlikely bombshells, Roberts seems destined to be confirmed without the kind of stormy melodrama that boosts cable-TV ratings and fills the coffers of activist groups in Washington."
Indeed, Newsweek could hardly contain its enthusiasm about a nominee who "sees the law as a set of time-tested rules that allow people to work out their differences and to trust each other--a body of principles and precedents that bring order and predictability to civic life, which have the effect not of dividing, but of harmonizing and unifying society." The magazine concluded that "from all that can be gleaned about Roberts, he will decide each case, one at a time, with great intellectual rigor and honesty."
Given that Newsweek led its story with mischaracterizations about Roberts' record, "intellectual rigor and honesty" would compel the magazine to set the record straight for its readers. But this week's issue of the magazine (8/8/05) did not correct the article's inaccurate assertions.
ACTION:
Ask Newsweek to correct the inaccurate claims in its August 1 story about John G. Roberts' role in the Florida recount and his connections to the Federalist Society.
CONTACT:
Newsweek
letters@newsweek.com
To read the Newsweek article, go to:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8683401/site/newsweek/
----------
=================
ROBERTS: His wife is big in Iraq satellite systems; Magie Burns
http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495;article=87609;search_term=magie+burns;show_parent=1
# WINOKUR AND DYNCORP, HARVARD, ROBERTS CONNECTIONS.... Magie Burns
http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495;article=87842;search_term=magie+burns;show_parent=1
Our new Supreme Ct Nominee: His wife is big in satellite systems; her company is targeting Iraq
by margieburns at 11:08AM (CDT) on July 20, 2005
http://www.margieburns.com/blog/_archives/2005/7/20/1054893.html
Yet another first for our boundary-breaching White House: for the first time in American history, we're going to have a justice on the high court whose spouse facilitates financing and putting together global satellite systems.
Also, the company in which she is a partner, Shaw Pittman, emphasizes among other things its expertise in facilitating business in Iraq:
We offer one-stop service to clients pursuing projects in Iraq, from solicitation and RFP counseling to working with key government and multilateral agencies, and from initially penetrating the Iraqi marketplace to final project implementation. Our attorneys are recognized as leaders in their fields, and at the cutting-edge in a variety of disciplines relevant to Iraq reconstruction. A number have served in senior government positions in key agencies including the Departments of Transportation, Navy, Justice and Commerce, as well as the Agency for International Development (USAID) and the World Bank.
http://www.pillsburylaw.com/go/areamaster.nsf/practices-all/International:%20Iraq%20Reconstruction
Iraq has not yet been able to achieve an integrated communications service (many Iraqis don't even have their electricity back, yet.) By numerous accounts, satellite communications/networks loom as a large unfilled need in Iraq. Jane Sullivan Roberts credentials are solid, and business-wise, her walk in life is largely helping clients put together and get financing for satellite systems, according to her company bio:
Ms. Roberts practices with the firm's communications and global sourcing groups, concentrating in representing clients in sophisticated transactions involving technology. She has extensive experience in representing clients in the buying and selling of space-related goods and services, including companies involved in the development of multi-billion dollar global and regional satellite systems. Ms. Roberts' experience also includes representing clients in information technology outsourcing transactions; software licensing, development, and maintenance contracts; and professional services arrangements. Prior to 1992, Ms. Roberts practiced litigation in a wide variety of matters before various courts and decision-making bodies, including large international commercial arbitrations involving nuclear power plants before the International Chamber of Commerce. http://www.pillsburylaw.com/Go/bios.nsf/professionals/Jane%20Sullivan%20Roberts
(I like that afterthought re nuclear power plants. Shades of Homer Simpson.)
The following statements by and about Ms. Roberts come from an article titled High flyers, high margins, high society and space VC, in the publication Space Business International (4th quarter 2000):
Shaw Pittman is a composite organization, in which teams of associates, corporate finance partners, technology procurement and transfer partners, intellectual property strategists, corporate deal-makers work together with the clear aim of dominating Washington's high-tech legal world. They've made a good start - hands on involvement already in 25 percent of all metropolitan VC closures in Q1-2000.
Despite the March 2000 downturn in US stock markets, there is still lots of VC money available, says Roberts. But the way the money is channelled has changed - it's harder to fund business-to-business dot.coms, especially where you have to build a brand; and likewise for business-to-consumer deals. But there is still plenty of money left to fund wireless technologies, Internet infrastructure, next generation networking devices and b2b software plays.
And Washington DC is cementing its position as an international hub of the commercial space and satellite industry. In terms of corporate headquarters, we have many major players, including Loral Cyberstar, Astrolink, Skybridge, Hughes Spaceway, Final Analysis, Ellipso, INTELSAT, COMSAT, WorldSpace, and XM Satellite Radio. Not to mention the major aerospace players
Ms Roberts specific targets are the procurement of satellite systems and related services and technologies such as launch services, l
- ACTION ALERT: Misjudging Roberts — Wed Sep 14 00:41
Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]
