Talk:Andrew Napolitano

Relation to Janet Napolitano?

Not related to Janet Napolitano, I presume? -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 11:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Well Andrew and Janet look almost identical so if they aren't brother and sister there must be some relation along the line. Cousins perhaps?12.25.109.71 (talk) 20:06, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

They both are related, no doubt whatsoever. However citation is needed. --93.82.9.129 (talk) 10:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

He has said numerous times that he is not related to her. Arzel (talk) 17:04, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Citation? --Ftsw (talk) 14:18, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Start-class Rating

I've given this article a start-class rating. More information on his career as a judge and correspondent, and information about his books would improve the article. I might do this if I get time. Any input would be greatly appreciated! --Nemilar 23:42, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Oxymoron

Wouldn't a "pro-life" Libertarian be an oxymoron? Libertarians are supposed to be against government controlling the lives of private citizens. As a real Libertarian, it always disgusts me when Republicans try and label themselves as Libertarians to contend claims of bias.

This guy is an _extremely_ strong critic of the any infringement of rights based on the "war on terror". Opposes the PATRIOT act for example. There ought to be some discussion, because his libertarianism really sets him apart from typical conservative analysts. As to pro-life, he's Catholic. He addresses the issue in the last question of this interview, which is probably a good source on other aspects of him as well. Derex 07:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. Libertarians can be pro-life, such as Ron Paul, who is the most well-known libertarian in the U.S. Sadistik 06:00, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

One can be pro-life without advocating government intervention. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ikilled007 (talk • contribs) 02:04, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

Abortion is not a definite libertarian issue, and there are many pro-life libertarians. It all goes back to the old issue of when human life begins. If you believe that life begins at conception, then there is no apparent contradiction in being a libertarian against abortion.

The only issue here is when you as a libertarian believe life begins. If you believe life begins at conception, a libertarian must defend the individual rights of the fetus from that moment forward. If you believe life begins at birth, a libertarian must defend the right of the mother to abort the fetus any time up until birth. Most people believe life begins somewhere in between. It's a murky subject, one where no position can preclude one's claims to libertarianism. If and when we can answer this question definitively, then we can set a rigid standard that all libertarians would be obliged to defend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.198.109 (talk) 16:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

"Several Sources"?

The article claims taht "several sources" have criticized the judge, but although there are 8 references they come from only two sources. Might it be more accurate to say "sources on both the left and the right..."? Either that, or more than two sources should be cited, I would think --Brons 04:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

There used to be more listed, but your suggestion is better anyway. Derex 05:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Replaced Serveral Sources with Some. Arzel 14:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Foundation for defence of democracies...:Bill Kristol-Sen. Joseph Lieberman,R. James Woolsey Chairman of FDD, Fmr. Director of the CIA Judge Louis J. Freeh Fmr. Director of the FBI Robert 'Bud' McFarlane Fmr. National Security AdvisorDr. Paula J. Dobriansky Fmr. Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs Steve Forbes CEO Forbes Magazine Amb. Richard Carlson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.200.24.32 (talk) 06:20, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

"Endorsement of Ron Paul's Presidential Campaign"

The David Allen Show Podcast of Judge Napolitano's endorsement.

Source for "pro-life libertarian?"

There is no source listed after the sentence that declares Judge Napolitano is a "pro-life libertarian". There needs to be a source where he actually said he is a 'pro-life libertarian", otherwise it has no foundation in fact. I have had several interviews with the Judge, and he always identified himself as a "rugged individualist" over our conversations. He could have called himself a libertarian, it just simply needs to be properly sourced.Rpchristiano (talk) 09:45, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

This description comes from Sean Hannity's interview of Napolitano. Napolitano agreed that the "pro-life libertarian" was an accurate description of himself. I changed the article to say "libertarian" in place of "Libertarian" as the capital L is often understood to imply affiliation with the Libertarian Party. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.246.200 (talk) 01:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

JudgeNapolitano.com

Under the Politics header, the link to the website that apparently encouraged Napolitano to run for president in February 2009 no longer serves that function, and in fact has no mention of the judge whatsoever. While it maintains the judgenapolitano.com address, the home page link redirects to reteaparty.com. Should the line about the website be removed from the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rpogge (talk • contribs) 19:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Christian

No doubt Andrew Napolitano labels himself as a Christian. However in the English language the word Christian has been so diluted as to mean almost nothing at all. After all Glenn Beck thinks he is a Christian and he things God is an alien. Is there any way to be just a little more specific on this? Just Christian would have been good enough a thousand years ago since back then it would have meant that you are a Catholic but it isn't good enough to day, at least not in the English language. Is Napolitano a Catholic or some form of protestant? Either way, the article needs to be more specific or just not mention it at all. In modern English the word Christian by itself is not enough since it has lost most of its meaning. Catholic/Orthodox and the various forms of protestantism are so far removed from each other that they can not be grouped together under a term that has now become vague like "christian". They are about as different from each other as Islam and Judaism; kind of the same from far away but completely different upon closer inspection. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.47.45.207 (talk) 12:12, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Freedom Watch

Just a suggestion to add a section for (or just a mention of / link to) Napolitano's online show, Freedom Watch. -FJ | hello 00:43, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

WTC 7

Should there be a mention of his comments on the subject of World Trade Center 7? Stonemason89 (talk) 19:50, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Termination from Fox for political purposes?

Various websites have attributed the Feb 2012 cancellation of Napolitano's show to his support for presidential candidate Ron Paul and other positions perceived as outside of the poltical mainstream. But one example can be found in this link: http://americanfreepress.net/?p=2841. Internet searches will reveal a number of others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.189.243 (talk) 20:16, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

A quick look at the Fox News website indicates he is still "senior judicial analyst" and posted commentary as recently as yesterday (March 2, 2012). While it is true that the blogs have postulated a variety of theories why the show he hosted was cancelled, he clearly was not fired by the network. Ratings looks to be the prime culprit given the ongoing shakeup in the lineup.

Disappointed by this analysis. Just because Fox keeps him on the payroll doesn't mean his show wasn't taken off the air for political purposes; in fact it could be a way of keeping him off rival stations. Trusting Fox website as a source on this matter is problematic, no matter what it reports. Would welcome other sources on this matter. Capitalismojo (talk) 17:13, 3 March 2012 (UTC)