Talk:Dana Rohrabacher

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.


This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.
Dana Rohrabacher is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, which collaborates on the United States Congress and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, visit the project page for more information.

Contents

[edit] Experience at The Register

Questions regarding Rohrabacher's tenure at The Register

  1. When did he work there? Right after college graduation? or did he do other work before working at The Register?
  2. Did the job there provide him the connections and/or give him the experience to get into the Reagen White House?

There is currently not enough information to put this work experience in the main body of the article. If nobody knows the answers, I will put this one sentence back in the Misc section. --Asbl 18:01, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure if the work at The Register was part of it, but he had been an anarcho-capitalist activist, and had been supported by libertarian billionare Charles Koch. Koch decided to change from spending his financial influence on the radical extreme of libertarianism for a more mainstream approach of attempting to move the existing political right towards libertarianism instead of the radical Murray Rothbard type approach. When Koch took his Cato Institute towards the mainstream, Rohrabacher went with him. Koch funded Rohrabacher's first two failed congressional campains. From there he went on to be a Reagan speechwriter. Though without hard proof, I'd be pretty certain, that Koch and his money was the important factor. See http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=rr_main&Number=1352628&page=&view=&sb=&o= and also contact Jeff Riggenbach and some other famous libertarians for more of Rohrabacher's early political history from his friends of that time. He might be compared to Alan Greenspan as a former libertarian turned establishment leader, or oppositely to Karl Hess as a former Nixon and Goldwater speechwriter turned into a Black Panther supporting radical under watch of the FBI. Carltonh 17:33, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
One more thing. Per this 1976 Journal of Libertarian Studies, http://64.233.167.104/u/Mises?q=cache:uY5EThP4-3MJ:www.mises.org/journals/lf/1976/1976_10.pdf+Dana+Rohrabacher+&hl=en&ie=UTF-8, Rohrabacher was already calling himself a "anarcho-pragmatist" and supporting Reagan in California politics long before there was a Reagan White House, so the Koch funding might not be the primary cause, though still likely a precursor. Carltonh 19:59, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Taliban Support?"

Was the purported support of the Taliban really support, or was he simply supporting the mujahadin? The two need to be separated, and I'm not sure the original author of that section notes that properly. That said, perhaps he did support the Taliban specifically, but there needs to be precision in the way this is worded. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ShawnLee (talk • contribs).

I changed the wording before (I agree that the original author used too-sweeping language). I've revised it again so that it is (hopefully) clearer and more accurate. (For example, there were certainly groups fighting the Soviet Union who ended up fighting the Taliban rather than becoming part of that government/regime; the U.S. allied with such groups when U.S. troops entered Afganistan after 9/11.) John Broughton 16:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
The Taliban was created in large part within Pakistan and in the aftermath of the Afghan-Soviet War, not during its inception.
The phrasing is still inaccurate, especially when you say he supported fighters under the command of Osama Bin-Laden.
Osama Bin-Laden was not known as a visible entity and major figure during the Soviet-Afghan War.
At least, not by United States authorities, who didn't really begin to track him until 1996, at the very earliest. Ruthfulbarbarity 19:05, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the sentence you refer to; it wasn't particularly useful or necessary. John Broughton | Talk 15:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eagle Scout

Here is a reference stating that Rohrabacher is both an Eagle Scout and a Distinguished Eagle Scout:

Since my addition of the reference and the categories was reverted, I leave it to any interested party to do with this as they desire. I have no other interest in this and I have no further interest in discussing the issue. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Apologies - my error. I've added back the categories. John Broughton 21:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wrongdoing of aide

Mattfiller - The section I just deleted,which you had added, included the following sentence: "The OC Weekly article implies that Rohrabacher and/or the District attorney have contributed to the delay of this trial for political reasons." If the "and/or" means "and", then the sentence is FALSE; the article does not, as far as I can tell, mention Rohrabacher in any way delaying the case. If the "and/or means" "or", then the sentence is true (the article implies the DA has delayed, mentioning the aide was once an intern in the DA's office) in the same way that the sentence "George W. Bush and/or Jimmy Carter and/or someone else assassinated John F. Kennedy" - yet such a sentence would be instantly removed from the Bush or Carter articles as a violation of WP:BLP and probably other policies. So in either case, the sentence does NOT justify having this section in the article.

The edit summary, Rohrabacher has not denied public charges by the OCWeekly that he contributed to delaying of prosecution of Nielsen, seems even less supported by the news article than the text added to wikipedia: the OCWeekly article in no way "charged" that Rohrabacher "contributed" to the delay.

Anything added to this wikipedia article needs to fully comply with WP:BLP. What I've been doing is Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Remove unsourced or poorly sourced negative material. If the aide's wrongdoing is NOT connected to Rohrabacher, except for the fact that the aide worked for him, it's irrelevant; if Rohrabacher covered up or otherwise obstructed the legal process of prosecuting the aide, or even knew about it and failed to report it, then the description of what Rohrabacher did wrong needs to be QUOTED in order to justify having this section in the article at all. John Broughton | Talk 22:29, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/a/n/Talk%7EDana_Rohrabacher_29d3.html"