Word: judgmental
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1960-1969
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...stubborn willfulness. And he should not delude himself into thinking that he can do everything himself. America today cannot afford vest-pocket government, no matter who wears the vest. The President is trusted not to follow the fluctuations of the public-opinion polls but to bring his own best judgment to bear on the best ideas his Administration can muster. There are occasions on which a President must take unpopular measures. But his responsibility does not stop there. The President has a duty to decide, but the people have a right to know why. Only through an open, candid dialogue...
...direction, and to let them do the job. This requires surrounding the President with men of stature, including young men, and giving them responsibilities commensurate with that stature. Officials of a new Administration will not have to check their consciences at the door or leave their powers of independent judgment at home...
Just how the Faculty will go about passing judgment on house courses is not yet clear. Last spring Dean Ford created a committee chaired by George C. Homans, professor of Sociology, to study the role of Faculty in the Houses, and it seems probable that this group will consider house courses as well as less formal ways of pulling faculty members into the houses...
With a predicted GOP landslide repudiating the machine's political judgment ("machines must not only make the choice, but the right one," as one ward boss said) coupled with Daley's long-announced retirement in '71, a New Politics coalition of urban blacks (like Chicago Alderman Raney), white suburban liberals (like North Shore party leader Williams), and down-state forces (like Richard Mudge of Edwardsville) is a serious possibility. A liberal coalition of such size could force major concessions from what is left of the machine. This fall McCarthy forces are fighting a hopeless battle against Sen. Dirksen for liberal...
...mattered little that nobody really knew what Fortas thought about the films. The court judgment involving them was one of the many per curiam decisions, which do not require Justices to write their opinions. In an obscenity case, what is often at issue is not the merits or demerits of the film, but the manner in which it was seized, the legality of the prior court action, and the definition of obscenity in the individual situation. Definitions have been vague ever since the landmark Roth decision of 1957, eight years before Fortas was appointed an Associate Justice. That decision established...