Comments on: Judge John Roberts’ 1950s Family

By: Janey

Janey — Thu, 04 Aug 2005 18:22:09 +0000

A father in his 50's having 2 children under 6 years old seems more like a modern family.

By: ICallMasICM

ICallMasICM — Mon, 25 Jul 2005 12:22:29 +0000

If the wife had at least had the progressive sensibilities to wear a wife beater and low riders so we could see her ass tats then we would all know that choice would be safe!

By: Zsa Zsa

Zsa Zsa — Sun, 24 Jul 2005 01:25:58 +0000

The Judge and his family are just very retro!... I like their look!...

By: Eric Preston

Eric Preston — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 22:56:38 +0000

Mocking Roberts' children is pretty low. What's the deal? How do you expect his family to dress to meet the President? The snide arrogance of those who criticize the "50's family" is pathetic. And as for Roberts himself - would you make him take off his expensive suit, tie and shoes and dress him up in overalls and keep him in bare feet? Would that seem more trendy?

By: Maggie

Maggie — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 12:27:09 +0000

I knew it...Liberals hate "The Cunninghams"!

By: Gary and the Samoyeds

Gary and the Samoyeds — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 00:35:56 +0000

Well, OK, then. Their satorial inelegance counts as "exceptional circumstances," so the Democrats can go ahead and filibuster.

By: Scott in CA

Scott in CA — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 22:42:51 +0000

As many of us have been braying for years, there are simply dress "rules" and there are dress "fads". Well bred people pay no attention to fads. Many of us are still wearing the same clothes that we wore in college. We were well dressed then, and we are well dressed now. I can think of perhaps a thousand other things I would worry about other than their children's fashion statment.

By: The Galvin Opinion

The Galvin Opinion — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 22:31:00 +0000

SUPREME COURT'S HOLY CROSS CONNECTION

As focus turns away from what John Roberts is to who he is, will his religious beliefs be attacked? Will liberal groups who are pro-abortion and anti-Catholic criticize the Holy Cross connection among the Supreme Court justices?

By: Peter

Peter — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 22:09:03 +0000

Might it be possible that the reason why Easter outfits keep coming to mind is that Easter is about the only routine occasion a family has cause to dress more formally anymore?

By: GardenStater

GardenStater — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 21:55:20 +0000

Aww, that's kind of cute actually.

By: dw

dw — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 21:35:09 +0000

Iâm slightly curious, too, on the logistics of the situation. Givhan and others seem to be criticizing Mom and Dad for dressing the kids as if for Easter Sunday. But given that until, like, one hour before the announcement, the whole world thought Bush was nominating Edith Bunker to the Supreme Court, I wonder if the only clothes that still fit the kids and looked vaguely appropriate for the White House were, literally, the clothes they wore on Easter Sunday?

You know, that's what came to me as I looked at the picture -- they really do look like Easter outfits, and given the short notice that would be my first choice for throwing the kids in if they were headed for the White House. And given the state of five year olds in itchy Easter garb, that would also explain why he acted out (and thus the smirk).

I guess it's just another reminder of how the MSM just doesn't get religion.

By: David C

David C — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 20:57:45 +0000

I think some people are being a little rough on Givhan. Sure, she's being silly and frivolous, but she's got the fashion beat! It's an inherently silly and frivolous topic. And it's the fashion beat in *Washington*, a city notoriously uninterested in fashion, so nobody's going to read *any* of her articles if she doesn't talk about politicians and only covers fashion shows in Milan or wherever the fark. I'm slightly curious, too, on the logistics of the situation. Givhan and others seem to be criticizing Mom and Dad for dressing the kids as if for Easter Sunday. But given that until, like, one hour before the announcement, the whole world thought Bush was nominating Edith Bunker to the Supreme Court, I wonder if the only clothes that still fit the kids and looked vaguely appropriate for the White House were, literally, the clothes they wore on Easter Sunday?

By: McGehee

McGehee — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 20:12:54 +0000

I knew it was going to be fun, but I never guessed it would be this much fun.

By: Anderson

Anderson — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 19:02:29 +0000

I would have to guess Mrs. Roberts picked those clothes out.

What's amusing is how this plays with the Post article detailing Mrs. Roberts' vaguely feminist past.

Maybe the pink suit is actually meant to indicate her bold support of gay rights?

By: Scott W. Somerville

Scott W. Somerville — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 18:15:40 +0000

Memo to Judge Roberts: Apparently, flip-flops are "in." Saddle shoes are out. Unless you "flip-flop," the Washington Post will humiliate your wife and call your little boy names. Of course, they're already insinuating you aren't "man enough" for the Supreme Court already, based on YOUR clothing choices over the last 50 years. Why should clothing choices matter for a guy who's going to wear the same black robe for the next 35 years?