I'm an adopted person of color

[Modem Butterfly]

And I say when someone allows themselves to be nominated to the highest court in the land, they have opened their lives, and the lives of their family, to scrutiny. Whatever examination is going on into the adoption of John Roberts' children is an issue about that adoption, not the children themselves. If the adoption was done legally and ethically, then it will be easy to show. If the adoption was not done legally and ethically, well, that's something we should know about before he gets a lifetime position.


Edited to correct one DILLY of a Freudian slip!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. It's a typical bullshit GOP deflection.

Even though the kids themselves have absolutely nothing to do with the question, they intentionally make them part of the question to depict us as inhumane. They're merely fucking assholes.

[Mandate My Ass]

2. Actually they were adopted "ethnically"

they're from S. America, IIRC. ;-) With utmost respect, I don't see how a person's family should face scrutiny, especially the kids or what may impact the kids.

I'm also sure there's plenty in his closet which would cast doubt on his nomination without going into the details of his kids' adoption, which despite the best of intentions, would impact the children themselves.

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. How do you know

their adoption was ethical?

[Mandate My Ass]

6. I don't

but I still don't think it should be an issue in a court nomination. His kids should be off limits and any scrutiny into the adoption would potentially be more harmful to them than him.

[Modem Butterfly]

8. Why do you say that?

If Roberts did nothing wrong in his adoption, how would that harm his children? If Roberts did do something wrong in his adoption and gets a lifetime appointment because we were too squeamish to look, doesn't that also hurt his children?

[Mandate My Ass]

13. Why ask anybody to prove their innocence in the absence of

a crime?

If there is something fishy it is incumbent upon the accuser to come up with some damning evidence and prove their point, or at least cast enough doubt that opening the records would be legally justified.

[Modem Butterfly]

16. No one is accusing him of anything

All of John Roberts' records will be looked at. His credit and criminal records, his college transcripts, his SATs, probably even his high school grades.

Why should these records be treated any differently?

[proud2BlibKansan]

15. This isn't about his kids

It's about how he got them. If they were kidnapped and sold on the black market to him and his wife, wouldn't it be good to know that? I am curious as to why they went to South America for these kids. A prominent attorney wouldn't have much problem adopting here in the US, I wouldn't think.

[Mandate My Ass]

19. I know many people who've adopted outside the US

Some because of age discrimination here, some because it's simply easier, others because they feared the courts would overturn the adoption if an American biological parent changed their mind. :shrug:

There was nothing shady in any of their adoptions. It's very difficult here.

[proud2BlibKansan]

27. And again, I ask how you know

there was nothing shady.

These people stole a presidential election! If they are bold enough to do that, it only follows that illegal adoptions are not beyond them either.

[Mandate My Ass]

32. Nobody has to prove they didn't act in a shady manner

in the absence of evidence. It's the law here. Go after his opinions and stances on legal issues and leave his family out of it.

These people stole a presidential election! If they are bold enough to do that, it only follows that illegal adoptions are not beyond them either.

You do recognize the logical fallacy here? Maybe he should have to prove he didn't club baby seals and wasn't involved in the Lindberg baby kidnapping.

[Modem Butterfly]

38. If that were true, why does he have to submit his financial records?

Why do we do a criminal background check, if not to prove that he's not a criminal?

[rinsd]

10. Why do we assume white adoptees = unethical? (nt)

[ulysses]

12. what does their race have to do with anything?

:boggle:

[rinsd]

22. See most threads dealing with this....

....blond haired blue eyed, aryan etc etc. are the descripts of the children used in conjunction with they're coming from South America as a not so subtle implication that something is fishy.

[Mandate My Ass]

24. thanks for clearing that up

I can't for the life of me imagine why he should have to produce records of the adoption of his children. It's unduly invasive and baseless, IMHO.

[Modem Butterfly]

26. Right. And we can forget his school transcripts and tax records, too

In fact, let's not ask for any records at all and just rubber-stamp the guy. He has an honest face. We wouldn't want to be invasive when someone is going to be appointed to the last chance for justice in America...

[proud2BlibKansan]

29. LOL

Well said my dear, well said. :rofl:

[Mandate My Ass]

42. because financial records can indicate possible conflicts of interest

and transcripts can indicate lack of intellectual ability. Adoption records....nada.

[Modem Butterfly]

44. If we're looking at potential ethical violations...

...then yes, adoption records should be part of what we look at.

[Mandate My Ass]

46. well OK. Then biological kids should be DNA tested to make

sure they're who they are passed off as being. If someone would pass an "illegitimate" child off as one conceived properly in the blessed sacrament of marriage, that person should not be confirmed either.

Sorry, this reminds me too much of the Clinton crotch sniffing. But by all means, be my guest.

[Modem Butterfly]

47. At the end of the day, they are public documents.

A person opens their lives to examination when they accept a nomination to this position. We're looking at all his legal records. I don't see why these records above all others, including the birth certificates of bioloical children, should be exempted.

[rinsd]

52. I didn't think of this before....

...but it was brought up elsewhere.

Aren't adoption records sealed, therefore they wouldn't be pulbic documents?

[me b zola]

53. Most American adoptions are sealed

I don't believe the same holds true for international adoptions.

[rinsd]

37. See post # 33 (nt)

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. I am not assuming that

I am thinking more along the lines of Bushbot adoption = unethical.

Or there is whacky RW conservative (with a poor memory) adoption = unethical.

I do not trust these people - not in the least. I know two adoptive families with kids the same age as Roberts' and they had no trouble finding infants to adopt right here in the USA. It took some $$ but they have adopted 4 kids between these two families. Roberts is a prominent attorney with connections to the highest level of our govt. He also is very wealthy. It makes no sense that he had to go out of the country to adopt. Something just doesn't smell right here.

[rinsd]

31. "Bushbot adoption = unethical."

I can understand that.

"Roberts is a prominent attorney with connections to the highest level of our govt. He also is very wealthy. It makes no sense that he had to go out of the country to adopt."

LOL...and if he did use those connections we would skewer him for it and rightly so. Personally I don't care where he went to adopt them, it means two kids have parents irregardless. Unless there's some kind of "buy american" ideal that you are putting forth.

"Something just doesn't smell right here."

With Bushies it rarely does. I just think this is the wrong tree to bark up based on the info at hand.

[okieinpain]

4. I agree, leave the adoption alone. unless of course he killed

someone to do it.

[Modem Butterfly]

5. The nomination process impacts the family, no matter what

The mere fact of having your dad nominated for the Supreme Court impacts you. The adoptions of his children are essentially a matter of public records, just like a marriage or a divorce. They should not be exempted or treated differently.

[Mandate My Ass]

7. I see your point

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

Peace.

[bryant69]

14. I wonder how we will handle it (or we and the press)

Right now we've created the impression that there might be something wrong with this adoption - something ethically questionable. So we look into it - what if everything turns out to be shipshape (which I suspect it will). Will it go a little like this bit from Simpsons.

Homer: This is my quest. I'm like that guy. That Spanish guy.
You know, he fought the windmill...
Marge: Don Quixote?
Homer: No, that's not it. What's-his-name, the Man of La Mancha.
Marge: Don Quixote.
Homer: No!
Marge: I really think that was the character's name. Don Quixote.
Homer: Fine! I'll look it up!
Marge: Well, who was it?
Homer: Nevermind.

What motive do we have to clear Roberts if it turns out he's innocent?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Modem Butterfly]

17. No one is accusing Roberts of anything

All of his records are open to scrutiny. Why should these records be treated differently?

[bryant69]

25. Well that's a little bit of a hair split

After all your Original Post contained this line "If the adoption was not done legally and ethically, well, that's something we should know about before he gets a lifetime position."

I don't know why the New York Times is looking into this, and I don't know why we are looking into it either. Frankly it's entirely possible that the New York Times simply requested all of Roberts personal records, the adoption papers were in there, and Drudge selected that as his point of attack.

But if we are choosing to focus on the adoption or if we elevate this issue, well it's naturally going to create in peoples minds the idea that there is something wrong there.

[Modem Butterfly]

28. You're quoting me out of context

Whatever examination is going on into the adoption of John Roberts' children is an issue about that adoption, not the children themselves. If the adoption was done legally and ethically, then it will be easy to show. If the adoption was not done legally and ethically, well, that's something we should know about before he gets a lifetime position.

We're examining Roberts' financial records. We're examining his criminal records. We're examining his academic records. Why should his adoption records be exempted?

[bryant69]

35. I don't know that they shouldn't be

I don't want to make it seem like I've made up my mind - but I don't think it is as black and white as you seem to make it out.

We'll have to see what comes of this, but I hope that it turns out the Adoption was above board and honorable and we all acknowledge that. If it turns out that he did some shaky things in his adoption, that should come out as well.

But, in my opinion, an obvious political tactic is to make a lot of noise about looking into this adoption and then, assuming we don't find proof of wrong doing, to basically shut up about the adoption or to vindicate Roberts very very faintly, thus leaving the impression that there is something questionable in those records.

And that's a tactic I would hope we wouldn't use (although I can't deny it's effectiveness).

[rinsd]

39. Thank you.....

....that has been my impression of this.

Kind of like the Swift Vets needing Kerry's military records on a much less slimier scale.

I haven't made up my mind about this either but I do have a reaction to immediate suspiscion that the children were adopted from a foreign country and that they are white.

Another poster put it more plainly that anything and everything about anyone in the admin is suspicious and I can certainly understand that. It just seems the most of those with suspicion had it raised by the former.

[Modem Butterfly]

40. The other tactic is to make a big noise about these specific records

...as though they should be handled differently and make the Dems look like big, fat meanies.

[bryant69]

43. Well no arguments here

And, as I speculated earlier, I think that's most likely what happened. Someone requested ALL the records and Drudge zeroed on the one record he could use to slime the New York Times.

There's enough room right now for both sides to end up being bastards. We'll have to see how everything shakes out.

[rinsd]

45. Good catch....

"Someone requested ALL the records and Drudge zeroed on the one record he could use to slime the New York Times."

I didn't think about that angle.

Instead I got to caught up in the arguing...a lesson to be learned I guess.

[Modem Butterfly]

49. That's exactly why I brought it up

It's interesting to note that when my dad applied for a job requiring a security clearance in the 70's, the adoption records of both myself and my brother were examined.

[kath]

20. BS- The kids are too young at this pointto have any awareness of this.

[in_cog_ni_to]

9. If the adoption was illegal...he should NOT be on the SCOTUS!

End of subject. Do the investigation, find the info....legal or not.

I know the repukes don't think the laws apply to them, but they really do.

[Modem Butterfly]

11. The information will get out there

If Roberts gets his seat, the rest of his life will be in the public eye. If there is anything less than completely above board with this adoption, it will get out there.

[Tsiyu]

50. There have been more than a few cases of children in SA

stolen from parents and illegally adopted by affluent couples. There are many, many weeping mamas in South America. And, yes, there are blond Brazilians, Peruvians, Argentinians and Mexicans, so the "color" of the children's hair matters nada to me.

What matters is whether this man used his $$$, influence, whatever to adopt a child whom A) Was not really relinquished by the parents and/or B)he would not have been able to adopt without twisting some arms, paying off shady baby dealers, etc.

A Supreme Court nominee must have a history of complying completely with laws governing adoption or any other aspect of his life. If approved, he will define laws for the rest of us. Adoption, taxes, whatever. Nothing had better stink here.

[julialnyc]

18. Call me crazy, but I think

this is making the times not because of the records, but for some insight into his views on abortion.

[Modem Butterfly]

21. I don't follow. What would the adoptions have anything to do w/abortion?

They're international adoptions from a country that doesn't have choice.

[proud2BlibKansan]

30. Well think about this

and try to think like a fundie. But I am assuming the logic goes like this: no more legal abortions = more babies available to adopt here in the USA.

[Modem Butterfly]

34. Domestic supply isn't really the problem

In fact, foreigners are coming to the US to adopt children of color. And most anti-choice types are also anti-adoption. But I think I hear what you're saying.

[proud2BlibKansan]

36. A good friend adopted about 12 years ago

and a fundie anti-choice nutjob at her work said just this to her - that legal abortion means there are no kids to adopt here in this country.

[Jersey Devil]

33. I think they are trying to find out if he paid for white kids

Did he go through legitimate adoption channels or did he pay a bundle of money to some black market abortion ring to guarantee healthy white kids for adoption?

This is a legit question and has nothing to do with the kids themselves.

What's the odds on adopting 2 kids from South America who both look like Scandanavians?

[Cleita]

41. There are a lot of northern European types in Latin America.

Many German farmers moved there in the nineteenth century. There are towns in the South of Chile, like Osorno where the population is mostly northern european looking and German is taught in the schools along with Spanish and English.

Also, many British moved there about the same time to build railroads and other engineering projects. They stayed. Many of these decendants of European preferred to remain in enclaves with their own ethnic fellowmen. They have their own schools for their children and clubs that they frequent.

One of my boyfriends in Chile back then was a third generation Anglo-Chilean who spoke perfect English and Spanish. He often took me to the polo club in that town for lunch (a thorough boring place, incidentally) where all the local Brits gathered. Most of them did not intermarry with locals so they kept the blood line pretty European.

I am familiar with the European decendents in Chile, but many Germans also settled in Argentina (famous for harboring escaped Nazi members of their families) Uruguay and Brazil among many.

Unlike in the USA, the decendents of Europeans did not intermarry with others outside their ethnic group as often in the previous two centuries. There was also always a fresh insurgence of European immigrants during those centuries as well.

True they are a minority but very much present.

[Jersey Devil]

48. That may be so but how many of those kids are up for adoption

vs the number of kids who do not have that ancestry who are up for adoption and if you or I were to apply to adopt a child from SA what are the odds that both kids would be of that ancestry? I would think the odds would be astronomically against it.

[Cleita]

51. Where did they get blond kids here before Roe vs. Wade

and access to birth control? It was usually the unwed mother's home. South America being predominantly Catholic including many of those of German extraction, doesn't have all the options available to women that we have here. Unwed pregnant daughters of any ethnicity would be sent to live with an "aunt" (convent) in another city for a visit and return afterward with no child in sight. I can imagine blond, blue eyed babies would have a better chance of being adopted by affluent Americans just like they were here in this country in the last century.

I knew of a case where the mother and daughter went to "Europe" for a year and the mother came back with a new baby, which she raised as her own and the real mother was designated the aunt.

Many Latin American countries are way behind in women's rights thanks to the Church. I forgot to mention that there are also large communities from eastern Europe scattered throughout Latin American. Many were displaced persons after WWII. With the unrest in the Balkans, I'm sure many more have immigrated, especially if they have family somewhere. Since many of these Christian slavs are Catholics, I think there would be a baby market there.

Also, you assume that all these people are well off because they are European. That isn't true. Many of the DP's from WWII arrived with the shirts on their back and not much more.