Roberts: Opposition to Miers "Sexism" and Fear of "Pragmatism" --10/10/2005

1. Roberts: Opposition to Miers "Sexism" and Fear of "Pragmatism"
During the roundtable segment on Sunday's This Week with George Stephanopoulos, ABC reporter Cokie Roberts charged that "I do think there's sexism here" and went on to approvingly cite a left-wing Democratic Senator: "I do think that there is a degree of sexism, as Barbara Mikulski has also said, and I do think that there is a certain Ivy League prejudice going on here." Roberts contended that Miers' "experience on the Dallas city council showed her to be a great pragmatist and that's what people are really worried about." Roberts soon gushed: "Praise the Lord she doesn't have a judicial philosophy." She cited Justice O'Connor's approach as desirable: "You're presented with a case on the Supreme Court instead of an argument, and you decide the case and that's exactly what Sandra Day O'Connor did and that's exactly what makes conservatives angry." She also lamented how "the people who are complaining about this didn't complain about Clarence Thomas, who was hardly a distinguished jurist when he was picked for the bench." To that, George Will shot back: "He was, however, a jurist on America's most distinguished appellate court."

2. Iraq Vet Rues Lack of Positive Images on U.S. TV About Iraq
Asked Friday afternoon on FNC's DaySide whether "good things" happening in Iraq are being overlooked by the U.S. media, Kayla Williams, an Arabic interpreter for the U.S. Army who held the rank of Sergeant and appeared on FNC to tout her new book, Love My Rifle More Than You: Young and Female in the U.S. Army, replied: "Absolutely." She explained that "one of the things that sticks out most clearly in my mind would be driving down the road and we would pass schools where children were getting to go to school for the first time in a generation. They would lean out their windows of their classrooms cheering and waving to us in their little school uniforms. And you don't see the images of soldiers passing out school supplies."

3. Matthews Attacks Republican from Left on NBC's 'West Wing' Too
MSNBC viewers are used to seeing Hardball host Chris Matthews take on Republicans from the left, but in a new twist, he did the same this weekend on NBC's Sunday drama, The West Wing. As shown on Friday's Hardball, Matthews plays himself in a scene in which the "Josh Lyman" character, the campaign manager for imaginary left-wing Democratic presidential candidate "Matt Santos" (played by Jimmy Smits), cheers on Matthews for his questions to "Arnie Vinick," the very un-conservative Republican presidential candidate played by Alan Alda. "Lyman" exclaims, "Yeah, welcome to Hardball, Arnie!" and "Chris, baby, keep slugging!" Following the preview, MSNBC aired a taped interview by Matthews with Alda from the West Wing set. Matthews conceded "the script was written for me," but he that he "thought it was really smart." Matthews applauded Hollywood's ideal GOP candidate: "You come off as kind of a Giuliani guy...." Sunday's episode also featured "Vinick" going on a rant against the head of the "American Christian Assembly." Vinick asserts: "Tell that lying little creep the United States Senate gets to advise and consent on judges, not the clergy."

Roberts: Opposition to Miers "Sexism"
and Fear of "Pragmatism"

During the roundtable segment on Sunday's This Week with George Stephanopoulos, ABC reporter Cokie Roberts charged that "I do think there's sexism here" and went on to approvingly cite a left-wing Democratic Senator: "I do think that there is a degree of sexism, as Barbara Mikulski has also said, and I do think that there is a certain Ivy League prejudice going on here." Roberts contended that Miers' "experience on the Dallas city council showed her to be a great pragmatist and that's what people are really worried about." Roberts soon gushed: "Praise the Lord she doesn't have a judicial philosophy." She cited Justice O'Connor's approach as desirable: "You're presented with a case on the Supreme Court instead of an argument, and you decide the case and that's exactly what Sandra Day O'Connor did and that's exactly what makes conservatives angry."

When former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich suggested that "a lot of conservatives are worried that she is going to be another David Souter," Roberts interjected: "A pragmatist." (So, Roberts sees the liberal Souter as merely a "pragmatist"? Or, maybe she was trying to correct Reich and just meant that conservatives are upset not by how Miers will be another Souter but by how Miers might be another "pragmatist.")

She also lamented how "the people who are complaining about this didn't complain about Clarence Thomas, who was hardly a distinguished jurist when he was picked for the bench." To that, George Will shot back: "He was, however, a jurist on America's most distinguished appellate court."

[This item was posted Sunday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org. To share your comments, go to: newsbusters.org ]

George Will asserted at the start of the October 9 This Week roundtable: "Well, look, the problem with this nomination is illustrated by Senator Specter, who in his gallant defense of her against the lynch mob of unelected columnists said, 'they should be quiet because they don't know anything about her,' which is the point. She is now in her seventh decade of life and has left no trail, no evidence, not a law review article, not a judicial opinion, no evidence of an interest in what Mr. Specter said are complex and esoteric questions of constitutional law. It being virtually impossible, the administration has now shown in six days, to come up with the reasons for the nomination. They have defended it not with reasons but with bombast and name-calling. Bombast. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina's advice was to conservatives was, and I quote, to 'shut up.' Reminds me of a Ring Lardner short story in which the line occurs, 'shut up, he explained.' Name calling, we're snobs. We're supposed to have some nameless grudge against the SMU law school which is not true. The idea that conservatives sit around at night brooding about how to defend and dignify Harvard University is peculiar."
George Stephanopoulos, to laughter from panel: "You have strong feelings on this, George?"
Will: "I didn't until the administration decided to take a shambles, work on it six days, and make it worse by sending out the likes of Ed Gillespie, who's way out of his depth in this argument, to say this is elitism and sexism. It is about elitism if that is a synonym for excellence which the American people are owed on the Supreme Court."
Cokie Roberts reasonably pointed how some obvious White House hypocrisy: "It seems to me that there is so much hypocrisy going on here. We were told, you know, we shouldn't pay any attention to John Roberts' views, that they were inappropriate to be asked, and now we have -- well you had a minute George, hold on."
Will: "I wrote a column giving questions to ask Roberts."
Roberts: "And we should pay attention to John Roberts' religion. And now we're being told religion matters and that the views do matter. I do think there's sexism here. I'm not accusing you [Will] my friend of that, but I do think that there is a degree of sexism, as Barbara Mikulski has also said, and I do think that there is a certain Ivy League prejudice going on here. I think that's absolutely true. The truth is anybody who has dealt with this woman comes back saying that she is very smart, very prepared and her experience on the Dallas city council showed her to be a great pragmatist and that's what people are really worried about."
Stephanopoulos: "That she will be a pragmatist."
Roberts: "That she'll be a pragmatist and that she doesn't have a judicial philosophy. Praise the Lord she doesn't have a judicial philosophy."

A bit later:

Robert Reich: "To call her undistinguished grossly overstates her qualifications for this office. And the problem is by putting up somebody who has such little evidence, such a little track record you're feeding, inevitably, the paranoia on both sides of the aisle. I mean, a lot of conservatives are worried that she is going to be another David Souter,-"
Roberts over Reich: "A pragmatist."
Reich: "-a lot of, you know, a lot of Democrats are very worried she is going to be a kind of religious zealot in disguise."

And soon after that:

Roberts: "What I'm saying is from what little we do know of her background, her background is that of a pragmatist and her not changing means that that's the way she's likely to turn out, and really, again, the people who are complaining about this didn't complain about Clarence Thomas, who was hardly a distinguished jurist when he was picked for the bench."
Will: "He was, however, a jurist on America's most distinguished appellate court. What the President, in effect, and her defenders are saying is trust us, she'll vote right. That is, she'll produce the right results. If there's anything conservatives have argued about, series jurisprudential conservatives, is against result-oriented jurisprudence. In constitutional reasoning, how you get to your conclusion is as important as -- and in some senses -- is the conclusion you come to."
Roberts: "This is a judicial philosophy. The problem with that is that often you're presented with a case on the Supreme Court instead of an argument, and you decide the case and that's exactly what Sandra Day O'Connor did and that's exactly what makes conservatives angry."

Iraq Vet Rues Lack of Positive Images
on U.S. TV About Iraq

Asked Friday afternoon on FNC's DaySide whether "good things" happening in Iraq are being overlooked by the U.S. media, Kayla Williams, an Arabic interpreter for the U.S. Army who held the rank of Sergeant and appeared on FNC to tout her new book, Love My Rifle More Than You: Young and Female in the U.S. Army, replied: "Absolutely." She explained that "one of the things that sticks out most clearly in my mind would be driving down the road and we would pass schools where children were getting to go to school for the first time in a generation. They would lean out their windows of their classrooms cheering and waving to us in their little school uniforms. And you don't see the images of soldiers passing out school supplies."

National Guardsman Jason Christopher Hartley, author of Just Another Soldier: A Year on the Ground in Iraq, offered a more generous assessment of media coverage, pointing out that even if you have good news on water treatment plants, voting and schools, but in "the process of those things, three civilians get killed," then "there's going to be a lot of focus on that" and, therefore, "there is enough horrible things happening that kind of like overshadows maybe all of the great things that might take place there." Transcripts of the exchanges follow.

[This item was posted Friday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org. To post a comment, go to: newsbusters.org ]

Williams and Hartley appeared together late in the hour on the 1pm EDT DaySide show on FNC co-hosted by Mike Jerrick and Juliet Huddy.

# First exchange on media coverage:

Man in audience: "We have a nephew that returned from Baghdad. And he was over there at the start and on an extended tour. I think one of the things that upset him more than anything was the way that the war is reported over here versus what's really going on."
Co-host Mike Jerrick: "We hear that all the time, too."
Man in audience: "Yes, except for Fox. Really, in all seriousness. It was very disturbing to him. Because of all of the good things that are happening, all of the good things that we're doing in that country and what we're trying to establish and it was just really upsetting to him."
Jerrick: "Kayla, do you agree with that? Are there good things happening on over there?"
Kayla Williams: "Absolutely. And there are very few times that I've seen those images on television. One of the things that sticks out most clearly in my mind would be driving down the road and we would pass schools where children were getting to go to school for the first time in a generation. They would lean out their windows of their classrooms cheering and waving to us in their little school uniforms. And you don't see the images of soldiers passing out school supplies."

#Second exchange on media coverage:

Juliet Huddy: "How do you feel about the reporting from the media here in the United States. Do you feel it's accurate? That is captures what is really happening there?"
Jason Christopher Hartley: "Well, it's a difficult question to answer because, you know, you can say install a water treatment plant, you could have all the schools up and running, you could, you know, have voting taking place. But then maybe in the process of those things, three civilians get killed. You know, there's going to be a lot of focus on that. So, you know, the answer to that question really is like yes and no. There is enough horrible things happening that kind of like overshadows maybe all of the great things that might take place there."

For Amazon.com's page on the Williams book: www.amazon.com


For Amazon.com's page for Hartley's book: www.amazon.com

Matthews Attacks Republican from Left
on NBC's 'West Wing' Too

MSNBC viewers are used to seeing Hardball host Chris Matthews take on Republicans from the left, but in a new twist, he did the same this weekend on NBC's Sunday drama, The West Wing. As shown on Friday's Hardball, Matthews plays himself in a scene in which the "Josh Lyman" character, the campaign manager for imaginary left-wing Democratic presidential candidate "Matt Santos" (played by Jimmy Smits), cheers on Matthews for his questions to "Arnie Vinick," the very un-conservative Republican presidential candidate played by Alan Alda. "Lyman" exclaims, "Yeah, welcome to Hardball, Arnie!" and "Chris, baby, keep slugging!"

Following the preview, MSNBC aired a taped interview by Matthews with Alda from the West Wing set. Matthews conceded "the script was written for me," but he that he "thought it was really smart." Matthews applauded Hollywood's ideal GOP candidate: "You come off as kind of a Giuliani guy. You're for abortion rights, but you don't like the idea of partial birth. You're kind of a maverick Republican, you're from California. You shine your own shoes. What an interesting guy you are." Matthews admired how "your character this last season [said] he'd studied the Bible...and you just couldn't go along with having people die because they didn't go to church or didn't honor the Sabbath, but yet slavery was okay in the Bible back in those days." Matthews fretted: "It's a very thoughtful sort of inquiry, but do you think a guy like that could ever be elected President in this church-going country of ours?"

Indeed, as recounted in an April MRC CyberAlert item: "Hollywood's ideal Republican President, as brought to life two weeks ago by NBC's The West Wing, is 'pro-choice,' 'pro-environment,' will save the party from the 'right wing,' engineers a deal to raise the minimum wage and lectures about keeping religion out of politics." For the full rundown in the April 6 CyberAlert: www.mrc.org

[This item was posted Friday night on the MRC's NewsBusters.org blog: newsbusters.org Sunday's episode also featured Republican presidential candidate Arnie Vinick (Alda) going on another rant against the head of the "American Christian Assembly" who had told Drudge that Vinick promised to appoint only pro-life judges: "I lied to a liar. Miserable little," Vinick's voice trails off as he slams folder down and stands up: "He's what's wrong with this party. He's the problem, not me! Tell that lying little creep the United States Senate gets to advise and consent on judges, not the clergy. If his gang wants to have a say in picking judges, tell him to run for the Senate."]

The plots on The West Wing (Sundays at 8pm EDT/PDT, 7pm CDT/MDT) have largely moved out of the White House, with the first couple of episodes this fall devoted mostly to the presidential campaign of liberal Democratic Congressman "Matt Santos." In the imaginary NBC timeline, we are now a couple of weeks after the summer party conventions.

Matthews set up the October 7 Hardball segment, as corrected against the closed captioning by the MRC's Brad Wilmouth:
"This season, NBC's The West Wing heats up with a tough presidential campaign between Jimmy Smits' character, Matt Santos, who's the Democrat, and Alan Alda's character, Arnold Vinick, who's the Republican Senator running for President. This Sunday on West Wing, I get into the middle of the fray by playing Hardball with the Republican candidate. Let's take a look:"

[Scene from October 9 West Wing, with "Josh Lyman," played by Bradley Whitford, watching "Vinick" on Hardball:
Matthews: "Haven't you come up with a guest worker program before? Aren't you suddenly leaning on these Mexican border issues because your opponent is Latino and you figure he can't talk tough about the border patrol or risk saying anything that sounds like amnesty for illegals."
"Josh Lyman," manager of Democrat "Matt Santos'" campaign: "Yeah, welcome to Hardball, Arnie!"
Alan Alda as "Arnie Vinick": "I think I counted five questions that time, Chris."
Matthews: "Come on, Senator, you're trying to jam Santos, right?"
Lyman: "Chris, baby, keep slugging!"]

END of preview of scene

Matthews, to Alda on West Wing set: "Well, what did you think of Hardball, Alan Alda?"
Alda praised Matthews: "I think that this clip that you just showed, that's going to be on the air Sunday night, really shows you to be the most knowledgeable, quick-on-your-feet person in your spot in America. There I was trying to get out of a tough spot, and you picked up on exactly what was, we had been strategizing, we fictional characters had been strategizing how to get out of a tough spot and you saw right through it. And for the rest of the story, I have to make up for lost time. Look how smart you were."
Matthews: "Well, the script was written for me, but I thought it was really smart. Basically, what I'm doing is the commentator, the guy on the show saying, 'I know what you're up to. The other guy is an Hispanic. You want to remind everybody of that, so what you do is you go tough on the border issues with Mexico and then you go lenient on amnesty. Either way, you get the guy hooked. You get him talking like a Mexican-American. That's all you wanted to do, right, tactically?'"
Alda: "Yeah, yeah, and then you figure out that he's, you corner him on the question of whether or not he's going to do a litmus test or worse than a litmus test, let a separate group of people pick his Supreme Court justices for him."
Matthews: "That's right. Who's going to win, Alan Alda?"
Alda: "You know, it's very interesting. The people who write the show, and John Wells, who's the head of it, are telling people that they don't know who's going to win. And I don't know whether that's a good disinformation technique or they actually don't know."
Matthews: "I love the characters. I think Jimmy Smits playing this charismatic young, the only clue to me was I can't see a Congressman getting elected President. If they made him a Senator from Texas, well, maybe he can pull this thing off. You come off as kind of a Giuliani guy. You're for abortion rights, but you don't like the idea of partial birth. You're kind of a maverick Republican, you're from California. You shine your own shoes. What an interesting guy you are. Do you like the guy you're playing?"
Alda: "Yeah, I think he's a really interesting character because one of the things I admire about this character, the way they're writing him, is that he not only wants to bring his whole party together, he wants to bring the whole country together once he gets elected to the presidency. And he really has an eye on that while he's running. So he's trying not to cut off people who he wants to do business with later. He doesn't want to do attack ads. He doesn't want to destroy, doesn't want to have a kind of, you know, a march through the South, you know, and destroy everything in his path. He wants to, he wants to keep talking to the people and keep working with them. I think that's an admirable idea."
Matthews: "Yeah. Well, there is a fight in the Republican Party right now that's going to come to a head obviously in 2008 between the sort of suburban secular Republicans who want lower taxes and less government in their face, the sort of libertarians, and then the church people. And I was just amazed by your character this last season saying he'd studied the Bible, your character had studied the Bible, the New Testament, and you just couldn't go along with having people die because they didn't go to church or didn't honor the sabbath, but yet slavery was okay in the Bible back in those days. And, God, it's a very thoughtful sort of inquiry, but do you think a guy like that could ever be elected President in this church-going country of ours?"
Alda: "I don't know because I think he, this character himself is religious, has religious beliefs. But I think he's, I think he tries to make the point that people's private religious beliefs are separate from and ought to be separate from their political moorings. But the other point of view, the other side of the argument, one of the reasons I'm proud of West Wing and the people who write it, is the other argument, the argument against, against that, was presented, I thought, very well, very convincingly, oddly enough by the Democrat who was a very religious Catholic and feels that there's, you know, there's no, you don't have to be too worried about people expressing their religious views."

For NBC's page on Smits: www.nbc.com

For NBC's page on Alda: www.nbc.com

-- Brent Baker