Piling on would be pointless. When every newspaper and web site in America and Europe is carrying some version of the Catholic Church's abusive clergy scandal, there isn't much to add. Individual stories of atrocities and cover-ups will continue to ooze from all corners of the Christian world. Rome will continue to vacillate between apology and excuse. Victims will write books and Cardinals from here and there will offer explanations. Everyone is missing the point.
The most interesting and comprehensive attempt at justification was penned by Rev. James Martin, S.J. who divides his treatise equally between plausible ("bishops had no idea how widespread the problem was" or "bishops were uncomfortable confronting abusive priests") and ridiculous ("bishops under-appreciated the harm to the victims" and" it's too hard to defrock a priest"). He does however strike two issues that go to the heart of the matter: bishops feared litigation because of the bad press and, the Church did not want to give its enemies a club with which to beat it. How's that working out for you?
I'd carpel tunnel from listing the scandals that would have been minimized or forgotten if only the public figures involved had come clean at the outset. From Nixon to Clinton, from Heidi Fleiss to Tiger Woods the story is always the same: scandal strikes...the spin doctors converge to plan how to keep the story contained...reporters, smelling a cover-up, dig furiously...the cover-up unravels...the spin doctors are nowhere to be found...Jay Leno and Co. have a new punching bag for three months.
The Church in Rome is currently working overtime to 1) spread the blame, 2) avoid blame, 3) attack critics and 4) minimize the crime. In recent years the College of Cardinals has swelled to more than 120 members and one can surmise that most have been put to work in the PR Dept. The latest attempt to exonerate the former Archbishop of Munich/current Pope is to blame the guy who had the job before him, John Paul II. This stratagem has worked well, up to a point, for President Obama. The story is that Cardinal Ratzinger of Munich reported an abusive priest to Rome and Rome demurred. As to why the Cardinal allowed the priest to return to parish work (and abuse more kids) is a bit fuzzy. I guess the defense is "hey, I did my job..." This might hold water if you're working at the GM plant but, when you're the Vicar of Christ, we hold you to a higher standard.
The idea of blaming your dead predecessor is a tricky business. JP II is revered throughout Christendom. There is talk of fast-tracking him to sainthood. The faithful will surely take a dim view of besmirching John Paul to save the hide of a guilty German. The Church is already trailing in the PR wars. The Pope's polling numbers in America (yes Virginia, even the Pope has poll numbers) have slipped so far that you'd think he voted for the healthcare bill.
The "Catholic Church as Victim" strategy has loser written all over it. You are not the victim when priests who answer to you abuse children and you do nothing but suborn the abuse. You are not the victim when your cozy relationship with the government of Ireland caused the institutionalizing of torture, imprisonment and intolerable abuse for 100+ years. You are not the victim when self preservation and secrecy were preferred over concern for the children entrusted to your care. What you are is a self-perpetuating, self-serving ecclesiastical bureaucracy whose first thought in any crisis is self-protection.
Yes, the Catholic Church has enemies but none as dangerous as bishops who sweep every controversial issue under their very expensive carpet. If Rome doesn't start dealing with this issue openly and honestly, future generations will visit the Vatican with the same curiosity with which they visit Chichen Itza in Mexico; wondering what could have destroyed the culture that built such wonderful buildings.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Saturday, March 27, 2010
...or is there a good reason Bill Clinton never campaigned for Al Gore?
If anyone in Arizona should happen to find John McCain's soul, please drop it in any mailbox. Postage is paid. Honestly, how badly do you want to stay in the U.S. Senate that you would agree to appear on another stage with Sarah Palin? How little self worth must you have to attempt a smile and a hug from the runner-up Miss Vapid 1999? Jesus, John! Your wife has millions. You have more houses than you can count. The Democrats hate you. The Conservative wing of your own party (which is all but seven people) hate you. Your fan club consists of Joe Lieberman and two old guys from the VFW hall in Flagstaff. You have given 27 years to the Congress and all you have to show is a primary challenge from a dickweed talkshow host who, in a sane society, couldn't get elected to secretary of the Bisbee school board. I know you hate to lose John, but... Sarah Palin?
In case you missed "Sarah and John Deux", you didn't miss much. They were all there. Cindy McCain, who was promised after Nov. '08 that she would never have to stand on another platform and look at Sarah Palin's ass, was there. She still has the look of a traveling nurse ready to rush in at a minute's notice if John needs his meds. Todd "the cigar store Indian" Palin was there. Seriously, I get that Todd's wife is the gravy-train from heaven but shouldn't a real man from Alaska want to do more than adopt the fig-leaf pose one pace behind and to the left? Does he speak? Can he speak? Don't we all suspect there is a barc-a-lounger and a beer somewhere with his name on it? Jesus, the lead dog from the Iditarod winner has more personality.
Anyone tuning in midway through the news last night and seeing Johnny Mac and Sister Sarah on the platform must have thought they caught the tail end of America's Biggest Loser. McCain is trailing in the polls and may soon be dusting off the "you won't have John McCain to kick around anymore" speech made famous by Richard Nixon in 1962. The good people of Arizona who admired McCain's tough, bi-partisan, rational approach to government now feel that he is a tad too bi-partisan. Enter the biker-chick. Sarah resurrected her black leathers (more suited to an appearance in Sturgis, S.D.) to appear for the embattled candidate in Phoenix. She trotted out the usual platitudes that played so well at the Tea-bagger confab in Tenn. last month. This lady has more bromides than the Farmer's Almanac.
As uncomfortable political events went, this was the best (or worst) since Sammy Davis kissed Richard Nixon. McCain hates everything about the tea-baggers. Their noisiness says nothing; their fire has no warmth and their lack of focus (we hate taxes, we hate government, we really hate the black president) brings no direction. Tea-baggers aren't a movement; they're a soft- core, Klan pep rally. McCain is incensed at being tossed over the side by the very people he thought he was representing.
Palin, for her part, would rather return her wardrobe to the RNC than help John McCain. His campaign staff spent the summer filling a wing of the Library of Congress with "Sarah Sucks" books: "Sarah Sucks as a Candidate", "Sarah Sucks as a Student"," Sarah Sucks as a Team Player". They blamed her for everything from the weather on election day to Joe the Plumber's hair loss. Now she is forced to bite back the rage and tell the good people of Arizona what a knee-jerk conservative Good Old John McCain really is. At least she got to spear McCain with an age joke which was as unfunny as it was inappropriate.
Palin left Arizona secure in the knowledge that she had burnished her reputation as a loyalist who pays her political debts. She may have ditched the people of Alaska midway through her term and ignored the RNC National Convention in favor of the Tea-baggers (six figure checks notwithstanding) but, by God, she wasn't going to abandon the man who made her a household name. Sarah moved on with a clear conscience to her next event: a rally against Senator Harry Reid in Nevada. New state...same audience. Maybe they could dress Todd up like a blackjack dealer.
In case you missed "Sarah and John Deux", you didn't miss much. They were all there. Cindy McCain, who was promised after Nov. '08 that she would never have to stand on another platform and look at Sarah Palin's ass, was there. She still has the look of a traveling nurse ready to rush in at a minute's notice if John needs his meds. Todd "the cigar store Indian" Palin was there. Seriously, I get that Todd's wife is the gravy-train from heaven but shouldn't a real man from Alaska want to do more than adopt the fig-leaf pose one pace behind and to the left? Does he speak? Can he speak? Don't we all suspect there is a barc-a-lounger and a beer somewhere with his name on it? Jesus, the lead dog from the Iditarod winner has more personality.
Anyone tuning in midway through the news last night and seeing Johnny Mac and Sister Sarah on the platform must have thought they caught the tail end of America's Biggest Loser. McCain is trailing in the polls and may soon be dusting off the "you won't have John McCain to kick around anymore" speech made famous by Richard Nixon in 1962. The good people of Arizona who admired McCain's tough, bi-partisan, rational approach to government now feel that he is a tad too bi-partisan. Enter the biker-chick. Sarah resurrected her black leathers (more suited to an appearance in Sturgis, S.D.) to appear for the embattled candidate in Phoenix. She trotted out the usual platitudes that played so well at the Tea-bagger confab in Tenn. last month. This lady has more bromides than the Farmer's Almanac.
As uncomfortable political events went, this was the best (or worst) since Sammy Davis kissed Richard Nixon. McCain hates everything about the tea-baggers. Their noisiness says nothing; their fire has no warmth and their lack of focus (we hate taxes, we hate government, we really hate the black president) brings no direction. Tea-baggers aren't a movement; they're a soft- core, Klan pep rally. McCain is incensed at being tossed over the side by the very people he thought he was representing.
Palin, for her part, would rather return her wardrobe to the RNC than help John McCain. His campaign staff spent the summer filling a wing of the Library of Congress with "Sarah Sucks" books: "Sarah Sucks as a Candidate", "Sarah Sucks as a Student"," Sarah Sucks as a Team Player". They blamed her for everything from the weather on election day to Joe the Plumber's hair loss. Now she is forced to bite back the rage and tell the good people of Arizona what a knee-jerk conservative Good Old John McCain really is. At least she got to spear McCain with an age joke which was as unfunny as it was inappropriate.
Palin left Arizona secure in the knowledge that she had burnished her reputation as a loyalist who pays her political debts. She may have ditched the people of Alaska midway through her term and ignored the RNC National Convention in favor of the Tea-baggers (six figure checks notwithstanding) but, by God, she wasn't going to abandon the man who made her a household name. Sarah moved on with a clear conscience to her next event: a rally against Senator Harry Reid in Nevada. New state...same audience. Maybe they could dress Todd up like a blackjack dealer.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
...or is confession only good for the soul when it's someone else's soul?
In response to Catholics who have taken me to task for criticizing the Church in Rome, I have decided to reserve my abuse for times when the RCC or its leaders land in the news. Well hang on to your cassocks kids because the boys in Rome are all over the press this week. The Catholic Church is making more news than Bart Stupak and Dennis Kucinich combined.
In the United States, the Church has taken a page straight from Mel Brooks. " We've flattened their fingers, we've branded their buns, nothing is working...send in the nuns." In stark opposition to the U.S. Conference of Bishops, Catholic nuns have sent a letter to Congress supporting the current healthcare legislation. The letter includes signatures from 50 Women's Orders including The Leadership Conference of Women Religious which professes to represent 90% of America's 59,000 nuns. That's enough habitted firepower to shrivel the manhood of the entire Roman Curia.
Unlike the bishops who sit in the chancery and get most of their news from Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly, the nuns actually work in hospitals and schools and get to see first hand the suffering brought about by the lack of healthcare. They also apparently read the bill and can't find the elusive abortion language Bart Stupak and America's bishops swear is in there. The nuns I remember could spot a slouching seventh grader in Church from 50 yards away. I'm confident they could detect sneaky abortion funding even if it were hiding in 2,000 pages of legislation.
Rome has been strangely silent on this issue. Not wishing to garner further abuse from Maureen Dowd and others regarding the Church's disgraceful treatment of women, the cardinals in the Vatican appear content to let America's bishops sort out America's squabbles. Smart play. Anyone who has tried to go toe-to-toe with even one nun knows how intimidating they can be. I watched Meryl Streep in "Doubt" and was afraid to chew gum for a month.
Rome has also maintained a guarded posture amid continuing allegations of 50 years of protecting pedophile priests in Germany and Ireland. The details of these accusations are as familiar as they are disturbing. Catholic bishops, including a certain Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger of Munich, aka, Benedict XVI, continually shielded clergymen accused of abusing children. These pedophiles were never referred to civil authorities or even disciplined by their superiors. Instead they were reassigned to new parishes where the abuse continued.
Sean Cardinal Brady, a top-ranking cleric in Ireland used part of his St. Patrick's Day homily to apologize for his role in perpetuating the abuse of children in his diocese. That's a start but hardly a cure. The Catholic Church in Ireland is the most heinous modern example of what happens when religion gains civil authority. Anyone appalled by the treatment of women in Afghanistan would be incensed by how children, especially girls, were systematically tortured in Ireland. If the RCC in Ireland is mystified by empty pews and dwindling collections, it need look no further than the Murphy Report of November, 2009.
The Vatican took time out from praying that the whole sordid mess would disappear to accuse the German government of persecuting the Church. In a statement worthy of the worst corporate weasel, the RCC has expressed shock and dismay that anyone would accuse Mother Church of harboring felons. They assert that the incidence of pedophilia within the ranks of the clergy is no worse than the population at large. Well that's comforting. Unfortunately, we don't usually invest the population at large with a presumption of holiness. We don't hand out Roman collars to just any citizen. We maintain a healthy skepticism of men who appear too eager to be scout masters and swim coaches until they wear rosary beads.
A priest is presumed to represent his church. Men with the power to administer the sacraments must adhere to a higher standard of moral conduct because of the damage done to both the flock and the institution. We don't expect priest to be saints but we should expect a slightly elevated degree of morality. They're priests for God sakes. They hear confessions, dole out advice, pray over the dead. They may be ordinary men but we imbue them with extraordinary respect and responsibility. If we wanted average people to act as our clergy we would be married by our grocer and confess our sins to our barber.
Besides, the issue isn't that priests are as flawed as the rest of us. The issue is that once those flaws are discovered, some responsible action should be taken. That action should not include cover-ups, denials and suborning repeated felonies. Not only did the Church systematically conceal these crimes from the police and the populace, they transferred the offenders to other parishes where, big surprise, similar crimes occurred. As long as Rome responds to these charges by appearing wounded and defensive, the congregation will continue to view them as just another sanctimonious corporation with a knee-jerk PR department and no moral fiber.
Please, Benedict, get out in front of this for once. Don't call the law firm of Duck, Dodge and Hyde. Call a press conference and promise to expose every bad apple in the ecclesiastical barrel. Act like the Vicar of Christ not the CEO of Lehman Bros after the crash. Then give yourself five Our Fathers and five Hail Mary's and go and sin no more.
In the United States, the Church has taken a page straight from Mel Brooks. " We've flattened their fingers, we've branded their buns, nothing is working...send in the nuns." In stark opposition to the U.S. Conference of Bishops, Catholic nuns have sent a letter to Congress supporting the current healthcare legislation. The letter includes signatures from 50 Women's Orders including The Leadership Conference of Women Religious which professes to represent 90% of America's 59,000 nuns. That's enough habitted firepower to shrivel the manhood of the entire Roman Curia.
Unlike the bishops who sit in the chancery and get most of their news from Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly, the nuns actually work in hospitals and schools and get to see first hand the suffering brought about by the lack of healthcare. They also apparently read the bill and can't find the elusive abortion language Bart Stupak and America's bishops swear is in there. The nuns I remember could spot a slouching seventh grader in Church from 50 yards away. I'm confident they could detect sneaky abortion funding even if it were hiding in 2,000 pages of legislation.
Rome has been strangely silent on this issue. Not wishing to garner further abuse from Maureen Dowd and others regarding the Church's disgraceful treatment of women, the cardinals in the Vatican appear content to let America's bishops sort out America's squabbles. Smart play. Anyone who has tried to go toe-to-toe with even one nun knows how intimidating they can be. I watched Meryl Streep in "Doubt" and was afraid to chew gum for a month.
----------------------
Rome has also maintained a guarded posture amid continuing allegations of 50 years of protecting pedophile priests in Germany and Ireland. The details of these accusations are as familiar as they are disturbing. Catholic bishops, including a certain Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger of Munich, aka, Benedict XVI, continually shielded clergymen accused of abusing children. These pedophiles were never referred to civil authorities or even disciplined by their superiors. Instead they were reassigned to new parishes where the abuse continued.
Sean Cardinal Brady, a top-ranking cleric in Ireland used part of his St. Patrick's Day homily to apologize for his role in perpetuating the abuse of children in his diocese. That's a start but hardly a cure. The Catholic Church in Ireland is the most heinous modern example of what happens when religion gains civil authority. Anyone appalled by the treatment of women in Afghanistan would be incensed by how children, especially girls, were systematically tortured in Ireland. If the RCC in Ireland is mystified by empty pews and dwindling collections, it need look no further than the Murphy Report of November, 2009.
The Vatican took time out from praying that the whole sordid mess would disappear to accuse the German government of persecuting the Church. In a statement worthy of the worst corporate weasel, the RCC has expressed shock and dismay that anyone would accuse Mother Church of harboring felons. They assert that the incidence of pedophilia within the ranks of the clergy is no worse than the population at large. Well that's comforting. Unfortunately, we don't usually invest the population at large with a presumption of holiness. We don't hand out Roman collars to just any citizen. We maintain a healthy skepticism of men who appear too eager to be scout masters and swim coaches until they wear rosary beads.
A priest is presumed to represent his church. Men with the power to administer the sacraments must adhere to a higher standard of moral conduct because of the damage done to both the flock and the institution. We don't expect priest to be saints but we should expect a slightly elevated degree of morality. They're priests for God sakes. They hear confessions, dole out advice, pray over the dead. They may be ordinary men but we imbue them with extraordinary respect and responsibility. If we wanted average people to act as our clergy we would be married by our grocer and confess our sins to our barber.
Besides, the issue isn't that priests are as flawed as the rest of us. The issue is that once those flaws are discovered, some responsible action should be taken. That action should not include cover-ups, denials and suborning repeated felonies. Not only did the Church systematically conceal these crimes from the police and the populace, they transferred the offenders to other parishes where, big surprise, similar crimes occurred. As long as Rome responds to these charges by appearing wounded and defensive, the congregation will continue to view them as just another sanctimonious corporation with a knee-jerk PR department and no moral fiber.
Please, Benedict, get out in front of this for once. Don't call the law firm of Duck, Dodge and Hyde. Call a press conference and promise to expose every bad apple in the ecclesiastical barrel. Act like the Vicar of Christ not the CEO of Lehman Bros after the crash. Then give yourself five Our Fathers and five Hail Mary's and go and sin no more.
Friday, March 12, 2010
...or is more of the same just more of the same?
Volume II
Item
Say what you will about former Congressman Eric Massa from New York. When forced to confront his somewhat unconventional behavior with staffers and anyone else in the showers, he resigned. That's more than can be said of Larry "love amongst the stalls"Craig or everybody's favorite international soulman Governor Mark Sanford of Appalachia. Massa might have been having a few too many sleepovers with the boys in the band but he only made his excuses after he left the Congress. John Ensign, the Senator who felt that sharing everything with his chief of staff included the man's wife, then ran to his parents to bail him out, is still in office. So is Senator David Vitter whose name and number appears in more call girl Roledexes in Louisiana than the number of the VD clinic. So here's to you Eric Massa. You might have crossed the line at your "crossing the line party" but your tickle parties gave America a good laugh.
____________________________________________________________________
Item
Washington D.C. said goodbye this week to Desiree Rogers. The former White House Social Secretary resigned her post amid allegations that she confused her role as party planner with co-first lady. Ms. Rogers made a spectacle of herself in more ways than one. Desiree was posing for the cameras at the President's State Dinner honoring India's Prime Minister while Michaele and Tareq Salahi were schmoozing their way past the Secret Service. While security is not among her duties, she became the face of the scandal. If you don't know who will replace Ms. Rogers, well, the Obama's hope you never do.
___________________________________________________________________
Item
And now we come to Colleen R. LaRose, aka, Jihad Jane. People like this make any sensible discussion of homeland security impossible. Conservative fear-mongers will use this arrest as proof that the Patriot Act and illegal wiretapping are noble and necessary. They will rail endlessly about evil subversives in our midst and how no one is safe from radical Islam. Borrowing a clinical term from the Kennedy School of International affairs...CRAP.
Jihad Jane is a dangerous, deluded misfit. In a country of 300 million I suspect she is not the only one. Had she chosen Christianity or Scientology as a cause and set out to assassinate Sean Penn or Arnold Schwarzenegger the arrest wouldn't have made page 10. The internet has given voice to every type of oddball and eccentric (including no-nothing bloggers). How many Nazi sympathizers might we have unearthed in 1942 if the world wide web were available? How many misguided souls, hungry for a little attention and frustrated by the lack of it, would have surfaced as "reds" during the commie-hunting days of the House Unamerican Activities Committee?
Ms. LaRose is a crazy person and a criminal. She should be prosecuted as such. (No star chamber military courts please.) She is not special or particularly sinister because her brand of lunatic affiliation is Middle Eastern. She is just another loner with a grudge. She is not the tip of some Jihadist wet dream. You have much more to fear from Tom Cruise recruiting your children than from Osama bin Laden. Really!
Item
Say what you will about former Congressman Eric Massa from New York. When forced to confront his somewhat unconventional behavior with staffers and anyone else in the showers, he resigned. That's more than can be said of Larry "love amongst the stalls"Craig or everybody's favorite international soulman Governor Mark Sanford of Appalachia. Massa might have been having a few too many sleepovers with the boys in the band but he only made his excuses after he left the Congress. John Ensign, the Senator who felt that sharing everything with his chief of staff included the man's wife, then ran to his parents to bail him out, is still in office. So is Senator David Vitter whose name and number appears in more call girl Roledexes in Louisiana than the number of the VD clinic. So here's to you Eric Massa. You might have crossed the line at your "crossing the line party" but your tickle parties gave America a good laugh.
____________________________________________________________________
Item
Washington D.C. said goodbye this week to Desiree Rogers. The former White House Social Secretary resigned her post amid allegations that she confused her role as party planner with co-first lady. Ms. Rogers made a spectacle of herself in more ways than one. Desiree was posing for the cameras at the President's State Dinner honoring India's Prime Minister while Michaele and Tareq Salahi were schmoozing their way past the Secret Service. While security is not among her duties, she became the face of the scandal. If you don't know who will replace Ms. Rogers, well, the Obama's hope you never do.
___________________________________________________________________
Item
And now we come to Colleen R. LaRose, aka, Jihad Jane. People like this make any sensible discussion of homeland security impossible. Conservative fear-mongers will use this arrest as proof that the Patriot Act and illegal wiretapping are noble and necessary. They will rail endlessly about evil subversives in our midst and how no one is safe from radical Islam. Borrowing a clinical term from the Kennedy School of International affairs...CRAP.
Jihad Jane is a dangerous, deluded misfit. In a country of 300 million I suspect she is not the only one. Had she chosen Christianity or Scientology as a cause and set out to assassinate Sean Penn or Arnold Schwarzenegger the arrest wouldn't have made page 10. The internet has given voice to every type of oddball and eccentric (including no-nothing bloggers). How many Nazi sympathizers might we have unearthed in 1942 if the world wide web were available? How many misguided souls, hungry for a little attention and frustrated by the lack of it, would have surfaced as "reds" during the commie-hunting days of the House Unamerican Activities Committee?
Ms. LaRose is a crazy person and a criminal. She should be prosecuted as such. (No star chamber military courts please.) She is not special or particularly sinister because her brand of lunatic affiliation is Middle Eastern. She is just another loner with a grudge. She is not the tip of some Jihadist wet dream. You have much more to fear from Tom Cruise recruiting your children than from Osama bin Laden. Really!
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
...or should the estate of Joe McCarthy sue for defamation after being compared to Liz Cheney?
Volume I
Item
Proving with absolute certainty that the medical condition known as asshat-itis is hereditary, Liz Cheney has embarked on a crusade worthy of her sneering, skulking old man. Liz sits on the Board of Directors of a vanity organization called Keep America Safe. She shares this dubious distinction with Debra Burlingame, noisiest of the 9-11 survivors (Ask yourself if the government ever asked the families of Pearl Harbor victims to participate in plans for post war Asia.) and William Kristol, spoilsport editor of The Weekly Standard and the only quasi-serious journalist-supporter of Sarah Palin's Presidential aspirations.
Apparently the goal of KAS is to rid the country of all those pesky Constitutional nuances that get in the way of American exceptionalism like: prohibition against torture, the rule of law and, most recently, the right to an attorney. Liz & Co. are in a snit over the U.S. Justice Dept. hiring lawyers who had, at one time, been advocates for Guantanamo inmates or other terror suspects. According to Ms. Cheney, if you defend a person accused of terrorism, you're a terrorist or at least a suspicious character. This novel theory came as troubling news to attorneys who were called upon to advocate for a pedophile or a serial killer.
It's possible that Lizzie was out sick the day they taught "Law" at the University of Chicago Law School. She also no doubt missed the miniseries about John Adams and his defense of the British soldiers accused of murder after the Boston Massacre. Not content to merely throw dirt on the reputations of attorneys doing their jobs, the Keep America Safe crowd has coined the name "Al qaeda Seven" to ensure that every lawyer attached to any terrorist trial will be tarred with the traitor's brush.
Andrew McCarthy in today's Wall Street Journal makes the case that the sort of client a lawyer choses speaks to his opinions and political leaning. This information must be made public if an attorney is to be involved in public policy. William Kunstler, defender of the Chicago Seven, was a longtime advocate for liberal causes. Nevertheless, if we assume that attorneys, journalists or judges cannot separate their professional obligations from their personal opinions or their prejudices, we are left in Limbaughland where any notion of impartiality is demeaned and ridiculed. It would be impossible for an educated person, having been exposed to a lifetime of media, not to have formed opinions on the issues of the day. (This hypothesis speaks to Sarah Palin as a possible choice for either Chief Justice or managing editor of the New York Times.)
No one reading this column needs a lesson from me on Constitutional law or the need for zealous representation of defendants. You may however, reflect upon what you thought of the Duke lacrosse team in 2006 when the scandal broke and, what you thought after the team's lawyers sorted through the facts. Presumably Liz Cheney also missed the class on "innocent until proven guilty" and how that applies to lawyers as well as defendants.
____________________________________________________________________
Item
Our Band of Brothers on the Supreme Court has been busy these last few years ensuring that any wingnut who can afford the cost, be allowed to own and carry a firearm. Their decision in Heller vs District of Columbia affirmed the right of every citizen to arm himself to the teeth on federal land including high-crime DC. Now they appear ready to extend that right to the population at large. In McDonald vs The City of Chicago the Supremes will affirm that no gun restriction is lawful and the Founding Fathers apparently would have endorsed the 30,000 or so gun deaths that occur in America each year. They certainly provided no redress short of a Constitutional Amendment. (Fat chance.)
The Scalia Court (if you think Justice Roberts is in charge you don't read much) believes that 283 million guns in private hands in America is just fine with them. So, how about we all pack up our Berettas and our Glocks; our Sigs and our S&Ws and parade them over to the Supreme Court building? Last time I looked, the Court was on federal property. If the boys in black are so fond of gun-toting Americans, let's show them a few. Guns are not permitted in the Court building (I can't imagine why) but we should be able to walk around outside.
You are not safe from gun owners in a bar, a church or a national park. Why should the people who decide these insane "rights" be excluded from sharing in the joy of armed neighbors? Why wouldn't the Supremes feel any less safe knowing that the lawyers, clerks and spectators in the High Court are all packing? How are you liking that Second Amendment now, Antonin?
____________________________________________________________________
Item
What are we to do with Dennis Kucinich? There was a time (mostly in romance novels of the nineteenth century) when families were permitted, nay encouraged, to lock such embarrassing relatives in the attic. They would be fed and cared for but never allowed out when guests were entertained because of their strange behavior. Alas, Dennis is everyone's Crazy Uncle Festus.
Congressman Kucinich is prepared to sink the healthcare bill because he feels it is insufficient. This a classic case of the perfect being the enemy of the good. Although I cannot speak for the good people of Ohio's tenth Congressional district, I suspect they did not send Dennis to Washington to play the obstructionist...Michigan's first district sent Bart Stupak to do that.
Mr. Kucinich should command the floor of the House as often as possible and rail at the weak, insufficient, watered-down legislation being presented to the American people as healthcare reform. He should then sit down and vote yay.
Item
Proving with absolute certainty that the medical condition known as asshat-itis is hereditary, Liz Cheney has embarked on a crusade worthy of her sneering, skulking old man. Liz sits on the Board of Directors of a vanity organization called Keep America Safe. She shares this dubious distinction with Debra Burlingame, noisiest of the 9-11 survivors (Ask yourself if the government ever asked the families of Pearl Harbor victims to participate in plans for post war Asia.) and William Kristol, spoilsport editor of The Weekly Standard and the only quasi-serious journalist-supporter of Sarah Palin's Presidential aspirations.
Apparently the goal of KAS is to rid the country of all those pesky Constitutional nuances that get in the way of American exceptionalism like: prohibition against torture, the rule of law and, most recently, the right to an attorney. Liz & Co. are in a snit over the U.S. Justice Dept. hiring lawyers who had, at one time, been advocates for Guantanamo inmates or other terror suspects. According to Ms. Cheney, if you defend a person accused of terrorism, you're a terrorist or at least a suspicious character. This novel theory came as troubling news to attorneys who were called upon to advocate for a pedophile or a serial killer.
It's possible that Lizzie was out sick the day they taught "Law" at the University of Chicago Law School. She also no doubt missed the miniseries about John Adams and his defense of the British soldiers accused of murder after the Boston Massacre. Not content to merely throw dirt on the reputations of attorneys doing their jobs, the Keep America Safe crowd has coined the name "Al qaeda Seven" to ensure that every lawyer attached to any terrorist trial will be tarred with the traitor's brush.
Andrew McCarthy in today's Wall Street Journal makes the case that the sort of client a lawyer choses speaks to his opinions and political leaning. This information must be made public if an attorney is to be involved in public policy. William Kunstler, defender of the Chicago Seven, was a longtime advocate for liberal causes. Nevertheless, if we assume that attorneys, journalists or judges cannot separate their professional obligations from their personal opinions or their prejudices, we are left in Limbaughland where any notion of impartiality is demeaned and ridiculed. It would be impossible for an educated person, having been exposed to a lifetime of media, not to have formed opinions on the issues of the day. (This hypothesis speaks to Sarah Palin as a possible choice for either Chief Justice or managing editor of the New York Times.)
No one reading this column needs a lesson from me on Constitutional law or the need for zealous representation of defendants. You may however, reflect upon what you thought of the Duke lacrosse team in 2006 when the scandal broke and, what you thought after the team's lawyers sorted through the facts. Presumably Liz Cheney also missed the class on "innocent until proven guilty" and how that applies to lawyers as well as defendants.
____________________________________________________________________
Item
Our Band of Brothers on the Supreme Court has been busy these last few years ensuring that any wingnut who can afford the cost, be allowed to own and carry a firearm. Their decision in Heller vs District of Columbia affirmed the right of every citizen to arm himself to the teeth on federal land including high-crime DC. Now they appear ready to extend that right to the population at large. In McDonald vs The City of Chicago the Supremes will affirm that no gun restriction is lawful and the Founding Fathers apparently would have endorsed the 30,000 or so gun deaths that occur in America each year. They certainly provided no redress short of a Constitutional Amendment. (Fat chance.)
The Scalia Court (if you think Justice Roberts is in charge you don't read much) believes that 283 million guns in private hands in America is just fine with them. So, how about we all pack up our Berettas and our Glocks; our Sigs and our S&Ws and parade them over to the Supreme Court building? Last time I looked, the Court was on federal property. If the boys in black are so fond of gun-toting Americans, let's show them a few. Guns are not permitted in the Court building (I can't imagine why) but we should be able to walk around outside.
You are not safe from gun owners in a bar, a church or a national park. Why should the people who decide these insane "rights" be excluded from sharing in the joy of armed neighbors? Why wouldn't the Supremes feel any less safe knowing that the lawyers, clerks and spectators in the High Court are all packing? How are you liking that Second Amendment now, Antonin?
____________________________________________________________________
Item
What are we to do with Dennis Kucinich? There was a time (mostly in romance novels of the nineteenth century) when families were permitted, nay encouraged, to lock such embarrassing relatives in the attic. They would be fed and cared for but never allowed out when guests were entertained because of their strange behavior. Alas, Dennis is everyone's Crazy Uncle Festus.
Congressman Kucinich is prepared to sink the healthcare bill because he feels it is insufficient. This a classic case of the perfect being the enemy of the good. Although I cannot speak for the good people of Ohio's tenth Congressional district, I suspect they did not send Dennis to Washington to play the obstructionist...Michigan's first district sent Bart Stupak to do that.
Mr. Kucinich should command the floor of the House as often as possible and rail at the weak, insufficient, watered-down legislation being presented to the American people as healthcare reform. He should then sit down and vote yay.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)