<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Big Hollywood &#187; John Roberts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/tag/john-roberts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bighollywood.breitbart.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 01:31:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Michael Jackson and the Supremes</title>
		<link>http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jmeath/2009/07/16/michael-jackson-and-the-supremes/</link>
		<comments>http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jmeath/2009/07/16/michael-jackson-and-the-supremes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 18:32:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jason Killian Meath</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Celebrity News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George H.W. Bush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Roberts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Jackson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ronald reagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sotomayor]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/?p=183210</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As we endure the endless hours of Sotomayor testimony, let&#8217;s remember that rehashing the bizarre lives of dead pop stars can be SO much more interesting than 99.9% of Senate testimony. That said, in researching my new book &#8220;Hollywood on the Potomac,&#8221; I found an historic tidbit that spoke volumes about both Michael Jackson and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As we endure the endless hours of Sotomayor testimony, let&#8217;s remember that rehashing the bizarre lives of dead pop stars can be SO much more interesting than 99.9% of Senate testimony. That said, in researching my new book &#8220;<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Hollywood-Potomac-Images-America-Killian/dp/0738567558/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1247583529&amp;sr=8-1">Hollywood on the Potomac</a>,&#8221; I found an historic tidbit that spoke volumes about both Michael Jackson and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. He wasn&#8217;t Chief Justice at the time&#8230; but when John Roberts was a young lawyer in the Reagan White House, he was very much concerned with Michael Jackson.</p>
<p style="text-align: center"><a href="http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/files/2009/07/michael_jackson_ronald_and_nancy_reagan.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-183342 aligncenter" src="http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/files/2009/07/michael_jackson_ronald_and_nancy_reagan.jpg" alt="" width="334" height="211" /></a></p>
<p>The year was 1984 and Michael Jackson was the biggest sensation since Elvis &#8211; moonwalking was rapidly replacing blue suede shoes in America&#8217;s pop culture lexicon.  Jackson&#8217;s notorious publicity machine was becoming a global tour de force, and he was sending the White House requests for visits, concert tickets and more!  Most of all, Jackson was keen on having Reagan present him with a major award.<span id="more-183210"></span></p>
<p>After all, Michael Jackson always gets what he wants, right? This has been a familiar refrain in the stories to emerge from the recent coverage of the pop star&#8217;s death &#8212; Jackson wanted a Chimp named Bubbles, he got it.  Jackson wanted a rocket suit, he got it.  New nose? Done, done and done again!  One of the tragedies about Michael Jackson is that no one would ever say &#8220;no&#8221; to him.  Makes you wonder if Jackson was not only the King of Pop, but the Prince of little Punks. </p>
<p>In 1984, when the Jackson&#8217;s &#8220;Victory&#8221; tour was heading to Washington, D.C., the White House received a list of wishes Jackson expected to have granted: Presidential attendance at the performance, official White House invitations along with special honors from the President lauding &#8212; and practically knighting &#8212; him in front of the world press (though Jackson didn&#8217;t use the word &#8220;knight,&#8221; we know he had probably picked out the outfit as evidenced in the above photo).</p>
<p>The whole affair would mean big, big headlines.  But there was one hiccup.  Jackson&#8217;s requests had to go through a certain 29 year old lawyer named John Roberts &#8212; and he was no pushover. Roberts fired off this memo:</p>
<blockquote><p>Frankly, I find the obsequious attitude of some members of the White House staff toward Mr. Jackson&#8217;s attendants, and the fawning posture they would have the President of the United States adopt, more than a little embarrassing.</p></blockquote>
<p>With that, the bubble burst on the King of Pop. While most of the world was going ga-ga, Roberts was unimpressed and level headed. Denying Jackson&#8217;s request for a major award to be presented by President Reagan, Roberts penned a confidential memo to his boss saying:</p>
<blockquote><p>Enough is enough. The Office of Presidential Correspondence is not yet an adjunct of Michael Jackson&#8217;s PR firm.</p></blockquote>
<p>Not&#8230; yet. Perhaps even Roberts recognized the immense, inevitable power of Jacko.  Eventually Reagan held a ceremony in the Rose Garden to present a lesser, symbolic humanitarian award to Jackson for a PSA announcement on teen drinking and driving.  A scant six years later, Roberts had moved on, and Jackson was back at the White House.  This time, he received his much bigger, super-duper award from President George H.W. Bush: &#8220;Artist of the Decade.&#8221;  When even Presidents can&#8217;t say &#8220;no,&#8221; druggists have no chance.</p>
<p>Now, I can&#8217;t speak for Judge Sotomayor, but all this raises a VERY important question that I hope someone asks: would a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male, like John Roberts, who hasn&#8217;t lived that life?  Or put more simply: would she have said &#8216;no&#8217; to Jacko?</p>
<span class="fdPrintIncludeParentsPreviousSiblings"></span><span class="fdPrintIncludeParentsChildren"></span>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jmeath/2009/07/16/michael-jackson-and-the-supremes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>80</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

