Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

To be fair, Nagourney misled about Lieberman's enthusiasm for Roberts

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:34 PM
Original message
To be fair, Nagourney misled about Lieberman's enthusiasm for Roberts
According to Media Matters.

http://mediamatters.org/items/leftsideitem/n1/200507200007

NY Times, others misrepresented Lieberman's comments on Roberts
The New York Times misrepresented a comment made by Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-CT) to falsely report that Lieberman had said he would likely support John G. Roberts Jr.'s nomination to the Supreme Court. In a July 20 article, Times reporter Adam Nagourney referred to a Lieberman quote that appeared in a July 14 Hartford Courant article. Nagourney wrote: "Even before the nomination, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, a moderate Democrat and one of the 14 senators whose recent compromise averted a shutdown on the process of confirming judicial nominees, said he was likely to support Mr. Roberts if he was nominated."

But in fact, the Courant reported that Lieberman had said that Roberts was "in the ballpark" of potential Supreme Court justices who could be considered without sparking a filibuster. Far from offering an endorsement, Lieberman insisted that Roberts "would be carefully scrutinized":

Lieberman offered reporters Wednesday three names he said could be considered without sparking a talk-athon. He would not say whether he brought them up to Rove.

He said federal appellate Judges Michael McConnell and John G. Roberts were "in the ballpark," and that "people tell me" appeals court Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson is "very similar."

Lieberman emphasized that should they be nominated, they would be carefully scrutinized.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
unfrigginreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:43 PM
Response to Original message
1. Leave it to Lieberman where...
amenability trounces principle everytime.

Damn I hope someone challenges him in the primaries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lecky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Did you read the original post?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unfrigginreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Yes, did you?
Edited on Thu Jul-21-05 12:20 AM by unfrigginreal
Perhaps you and mediamatters are willing to give him a pass for suggesting that Roberts *might* be palatable but I'm not. Why give the press the fodder to mis-characterize his remarks. If he'd have said that all nominees would be scrutinized before a decision about filibuster could be made, then he wouldn't have been in the position of having MULTIPLE news outlets suggesting that he's cool with the Roberts nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bleacher Creature Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
3. OK -- I'll take it back on this one.
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 11:47 PM by abernste
I actually posted about Lieberman's comments earlier tonight -- and not in a complimentary way. I'll take back what I said about him tonight - just to be fair. But there's still issues with this guy that can't be erased by one crappy article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 05:42 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC