This time, even Hotline On Call picked up the headline and wrote this with a link to the story:
Gov. Mitt Romney praises judges while in MA; outside the state...eh...he says something a little different
It appears that Hotline's staff doesn't appear that they read the article though--Romney's comments were IN Massachussetts--not out of state.
Back to the Globe now . . .
BOSTON --Anyone who has listened closely to Gov. Mitt Romney in recent years has heard him rail against the Supreme Judicial Court and the "activist judges" . . . [next comes one of my favorite "unbiased" sentences]. Romney did so as recently as last weekend, when the potential 2008 presidential candidate interrupted his national travels to return to Boston for a televised religious gathering that condemned the concept of gay marriage.
Essentially, the article's conclusion hinges on kindergarten logic . . . Romney, to be consistent, must hate all judges since he criticized the 4 of 7 justices on the MA Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) that acted in an activist way by ruling that Gay Marriage is a constitutional right in MA.
So, according to their logic, since Romney criticized that ruling (as he should have and will continue to do), the Globe now labels him a hypocrite for praising his own appointee, Phillip Rapoza, for Cheif Justice of the MA APPELATE court (not even same court!)
Amid an elaborate ceremony in the Statehouse to commemorate the appointment of Phillip Rapoza as chief justice of the Massachusetts Appeals Court, the governor showed no contempt for the Supreme Judicial Court or its leader, Chief Justice Margaret Marshall, who sat with him on the dais.
To my knowledged, Romney has never personally attacked Marshall . . . would this be the appropriate forum to start? Sorry Globe, Romney's too much of a class act for that (though if he did and maintained the apparent consistency that the Globe requires, the Globe headline would have read: "Romney Bashes First Woman Cheif Justice of Massachussetts")
Romney praised Rapoza and told the audience he embodied many of the expected qualities in a judge, presumably including those who are able to win appointment to the Supreme Judicial Court: intelligence, experience, legal understanding, "wonderful" judgment and "Solomonic" character.
Sounds good to me.
Marshall, who in the past has elliptically criticized Romney for creating a hostile environment toward jurists, also took a different tack in her remarks to the audience at Rapoza's swearing-in.
She praised the Massachusetts constitution as "one of the great, great documents in the long march towards human freedom" before celebrating the fact that Rapoza would be among those jurists to ensure it is upheld via his service on the appellate court.
"You could not have made a better appointment for this critical role," Marshall told Romney.
So, Marshall looks like the real inconsistant one here, eh? Why isn't that the headline then?
Rapoza is Romneys highest appointment in the MA judiciary and an impressive one too. Find out more about Rapoza here and here.