Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Stupid is as Stupid Says

So I was reading a story on CNN about the whole Anna Nicole Smith fiasco when I came across this stunningly ignorant quote from a lawyer interviewed about her opinion of the custody issues surrounding Smith's baby:
Many men who father children don't want to be found after they are born. But in this case, there are motives to come forward.

"One is they actually want to raise the child because they love her," said (Beverly Hills family law attorney Alexandra) Leichter, who has practiced family law for 34 years and handled her share of celebrity cases. "The other motive is money. You wonder if so many fathers would be coming forward if this was a child born in a tenement on the south side of Chicago." (emphasis added)

Maybe there is still a little naivete left in me, but I am shocked that an innately bigoted and racist comment like that would flow so trippingly off the tongue of a supposedly intelligent person.

There were a thousand ways for her to convey her opinion that the men may be after the child's potential inheritance. But to say what she did makes her come off as a modern-day Archie Bunker. Then again, maybe she is.


At February 15, 2007 at 11:29 AM, Blogger Rich Miller said...

Agreed. Imagine what CNN might do if a candidate had said something like that?

At February 15, 2007 at 2:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

wJohn you have time to blog about a comment on Anna Nicole Smiths baby but we have not heard much on Emil Jones in the pocket of Com Ed the practice of family succession to "elected offices" the corruption and waste at state & local government mostly run by democrats. I thought you were an agent for change however like most politicians you are relatively soft spoke on corruption and those responsible within their own parties.

At February 15, 2007 at 3:07 PM, Blogger Hon. John Fritchey said...


Without overstating it, I think that I have been as outspoken and proactive on corruption and ethics issues as most anybody you will find in state or local government.

In fact, I presently have bills pending dealing with: ending pay to play; lobbyist regulation; Cook County pension reforms; and prohibiting convicted public officials from running for office.

I think that you would be hard pressed to find a more ambitious agenda out there right now.

I have also posted multiple times on the Com Ed issue as well.

I respect your opinion, but I just don't think that the facts back you up. I hope that you agree.

At February 20, 2007 at 7:06 PM, Anonymous DuPage Saint said...

Just a curiosty question, and I really appreciate your efforts to reform Springfield (lots of meat cooking?) ,how narrow is your bill to stop convicted felons from running for office? Is it as you say, stopping convicted public officials from running, or exfelons, and why bother,its the people's choice you know. Andy Jackson, the founder of the Democrat party (at least as you Dems claim) killed a few people but he was an ok President. Work on the double & triple dipping pensions and save us all money.

At February 20, 2007 at 9:24 PM, Blogger Hon. John Fritchey said...


The bill prohibits elected officials convicted of a felony relating to their duties as public officials from running from office again. It actually removes the bar on other felons from running for municipal office (which I think is just about to be ruled unconstitutional any day now)

And my pension reform bill is on the way.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home