It was opposition research generated by pro-abortion group NARAL
— and distributed to Democratic operatives working against the
Supreme Court nomination of Judge John Roberts —
that spurred these operatives to encourage reporters in Washington
to look into the Roberts’ adoption process.
“They [NARAL and other anti-Roberts groups] went into this with
a laundry list of things, and the idea that given what was at stake
nothing was out of bounds,” says a Democratic lobbyist who is part
of the Roberts fight. “That’s why you saw that ridiculous
Roberts-is-gay thing spinning through the blogosphere, and why you
had serious reporters looking at the adoption issue.”
Another Democratic operative said that NARAL officials hit on
the adoption issue because “Some of these NARAL and really
aggressive pro-choice groups see political motivations behind
everything. They see people who adopt children — beyond the desire
for children — having an ideological predisposition against choice
issues. It isn’t just about kids, it’s about politics.”
The Democratic lobbyist says the very fact that the adoption
issues reached so far as the New York Times, as well as
other Washington bureaus for major newspapers and wire services,
shows how desperate Roberts opponents have become: “There is a lot
of Roberts writing, but there isn’t anything much to hang our hat
on. He’s clean, and it’s frustrating our ability to paint him
anything other than what the White House put forward: a smart,
sharp and fair legal mind.”
Thus far, the White House has handled the Roberts nomination
process exceedingly well. Seemingly sensing that the left was
organizing a whispering campaign about Roberts, the White House
through back channels encouraged the leak of information that
Roberts through his law firm did pro bono work on behalf of a
gay-rights lawsuit before the Supreme Court. “That story just
killed us,” says the lobbyist. “How do you push back on that?”
The White House and Roberts supporters saw little downside to
encouraging the gay lawsuit story to get out, according to
Republican sources. “The guys who normally would have gone out
there and really blasted Roberts were already out there backing
him. They could criticize him, but not pummel him the way they
might have were the story released before the nomination was made,”
says a GOP surrogate on the Roberts nomination. “If this continues,
this nomination fight will be the model for future
nominations.”
As for talk that the New York Times or other news
outlets got very far on the adoption story, the Republican
operative doubts they got anywhere. “Our impression is that the
left was just trying to get others to do their dirty work, so they
could say, ‘We’ve heard the New York Times is doing
something,’ just to get the left all agitated and talking about
something on Air America,” says the operative.
