Liberty News Forum
Political News Forum - Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics. Not for wimps!
Political Opinion Page - Recent Posts - LNF Forums LNF in the Age of Empowerment!
Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Entertainment - Sports Forum
Military - A1 News Page - Computers Tech - Financial News - Bunker - Presidential Tracking Poll
The House - Off the Wall News - Page 2 - Rasmussen Reports Polls - Chat Room
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HereLNF Rules and Information › A Conversation with LadyLawyer
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 4 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) A Conversation with LadyLawyer (Read 10,558 times)
forgotten centrist
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

bring back the middle
class!

Posts: 10,585
Joined: Sep 29th, 2004
A Conversation with LadyLawyer
Dec 19th, 2007 at 12:59pm
Print Post  
A Conversation with LadyLawyer


This is the fourth in our series, following Jasmine, Mojo-jojo, and CoolRam.  LadyLawyer is one of the most prolific posters on LNF, and with her powerful debating ability has earned the respect of many worthy adversaries here.  She was reluctant to take me up on my request for an interview, concerned that it might lead to further divisiveness, but I have always thought that the more we know about each other and where we come from, the easier it becomes to reach each other (if that makes sense?)  I am particularly happy with how this interview went, and I think most of you will agree that she has given us a great perspective on where she's coming from...


When did you first start posting on LNF?  What drew you in, and what was it like back then?

I'll be celebrating my 5th anniversary at LNF in about 3 months.  I joined on February 24, 2003 (one day before FreedomLover - great minds think alike  Wink ). 

When the Space Shuttle crashed the New York Times re-printed a thread from Free Republic.  The thread was basically a discussion between members as the space shuttle crashed.  It was incredible reading this moment by moment conversation between members while the shuttle was initially delayed and then they realized it crashed.  Participating in such conversations sounded like a neat idea (for lack of a better phrase). I like the idea of talking to people from all over the country (or world) with different backgrounds, education, cultural backgrounds, etc. So, I signed up for Free Republic.  How bad could it be?  After all, they said they were conservative and my first vote was for Reagan, so, perfect fit, right??



Surprisingly, I did not get called troll or any other evil name; but, needless to say I was not a welcome guest at Free Republic.  I kept getting accused of being an LNFer lurking on Free Republic.  After hearing this about a million times (okay, a slight exaggeration) I decided to check out Liberty News Forum.  And I loved it.  The snide commentary from Free Republic was great advertisement.  BTW, there is NO comparison between debating on LNF and debating on Free Republic.  We would win, hands down!!

Everyone remembers the dreaded WeaselTeeth (he has probably renamed himself and is laughing at this comment) and Justice For All.  I think there are always characters that don't really add much to the conversation, except shock value.  Just like school yard's have bullies or the loud crowd, so does a forum; and, WT and JFA were the ringleaders when I started here. 

The guys I really loved to be around were American Patriot, Darwinist and Judemeyer.  I miss Beer God incredibly.  I think his "where would you shoot a child soldier" was worth a Pulitzer. 

At the time, I was most concerned about the war in Iraq.  I was still working as an attorney then, so I didn't participate as much with the forum. There were probably a lot of arguments going on in religion and other forums, but I honestly didn't even know they existed.  So, my memories are mainly of the Poli Board.

My clearest memory from this time period is Rabbit announcing he was activated and going to Iraq.  My own stepson had already been to Afghanistan; but, Rabbit was the first person I "knew" going to war.  It came as a surprise because he had not told the forum that he was in the military subject to activation.  He was activated with another poster named Obie Trice. 

As to the general tenor of the Forum - I think it reflects the times.  I know my own temper is shorter.  That I have become more partisan and more willing to go into attack mode to protect my ideas.  I think I have come to the conclusion that speaking up is as important as voting.  So, I no longer defer if someone who has an outrageous (to me) idea.  I also decided that I would no longer be quiet if someone accuses me of being unpatriotic, racist, whatever.  Both sides use the tactic, and it is simply a means to control the argument. But, I'll still get my point out.
  

Nominated for 2016...
- Liberal of the Year
- Conservative of the Year
- Centrist of the Year
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
forgotten centrist
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

bring back the middle
class!

Posts: 10,585
Joined: Sep 29th, 2004
Re: A Conversation with LadyLawyer
Reply #1 - Dec 19th, 2007 at 1:02pm
Print Post  
So you are more willing to engage in some of the more contentious threads (notably the middle east, but I've seen you chime in on many other issues), knowing that your message is getting out.  Do you think you have won over anyone you've actually debated with, or are you mainly hoping that your peers and other observers who are observing a given thread on the sidelines are picking up on your ideas?

For that matter, has anyone on LNF managed to sway you on any issue, after thorough debate?


I don't believe that being quiet in the face of what you truly believe to be wrong is patriotic.  Lafayette McLaws (General, CSA) has an interesting quote on his tomb.  It states, "He did not fight for what he believed to be right, he fought for what was right."  I think you have to have some moral certainty in your beliefs.  And if you do have that moral certainty, then you should fight regardless of the naysayers.  That is why so often on the "contentious" threads, I will continue to speak my mind.

I don't think I have ever changed any minds on the forum.  But, I do think exposure to different ideas is important.  I'm sure that there are things I have documented on the forum that other members were not aware of before reading it here.  In that way, yes, I do hope to influence members who may not be as vocal.  But, I have no delusions.  Most adults have already formed their opinions. 

I'm not sure anyone has ever swayed me on a position.  I would say that people have had a moderating influence, like yourself, Queshank, Maestro and Bdubya.  I've certainly been taught a lot, by people like Moishe, Doc Hallownight and FreedomLover.  But, I don't think anyone has actually changed my mind on an issue. 

If there has been anything which has changed over my years with the forum, it is the need for those who think differently to not be quiet.   Otherwise, the noisy among us will always win the point, because they don't have someone arguing a counterpoint.  There was a line in a Steve McQueen movie that said:  "the majority is always 50 years behind the times, and when they catch up, they will still be behind the times."  I think of the Japanese concentration camps, and it was about 50 years before they were compensated because the majority acted out of fear.  I think the Iraq War was a mistake, and there were not enough people who stood up and said "No."



So you don't see this forum as a place to sway the minds of the people you're debating, but perhaps more as a bully pulpit from which to develop your position and perhaps expose the larger community to your ideas?  I found it interesting to learn recently that there is a surprisingly large number of lurkers on LNF -- silently browsing the threads.  LNF appears quite high in google searches for things like "political discussion forum", so I think we'll see a huge surge in both lurkers and posters as the presidential campaign starts to heat up.

Back to those people you often square off against in debate.  Some of the most famous rivalries on LNF involve you.  You are also widely respected as a senior member of the forum, consistently winning some of the "poster of the year" awards.  Do you have a sense of personal respect for your opponents, after having spent years now locked in deep debate?  Also, many of your positions are staunchly conservative, and yet you are viewed by some as a radical liberal.  How does that make you feel, and what do you think the LNF community at large should know about you to get a better sense of what you stand for?


There are quite a few "lurkers" who do develop opinions about posters before they ever "surface" on the board.  I was exposed to this by She-ra.  Quite suddenly after she came on the board she sent me a private message where she took me to task over what appeared to be an inconsistent position I had taken.  She was VERY aware of my positions and the positions of others.  She was correct; the post appeared inconsistent, but I was being sarcastic.  Once it was explained, she understood, but it shows that sometimes the lurkers are taking our measure, whether we know it or not. 

As far as being "conservative":  Unfortunately, I think today that most people consider "conservative" to simply mean are you "pro-war"  and that means any war recommended by the government which is as offensive to me as being "pro-abortion" and that means abortion at any time.  I don't personally think I fit any particular label - as you suggest.  I am a strong believer in the 2d amendment which is a conservative value; but, I believe it is integral to ALL the amendments.  I think to invoke the 2d is pretty useless if you have been clapped into a Navy brig because the government has named you an enemy combatant and taken away your 4th, 5th and 6th amendment rights.


  

Nominated for 2016...
- Liberal of the Year
- Conservative of the Year
- Centrist of the Year
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
forgotten centrist
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

bring back the middle
class!

Posts: 10,585
Joined: Sep 29th, 2004
Re: A Conversation with LadyLawyer
Reply #2 - Dec 19th, 2007 at 1:05pm
Print Post  
For those who routinely accuse me of Bush Derangement Syndrome, or the "You hate Bush" syndrome, I would like to review the 2000 election to clarify my position, since I'm sure there are few who remember my position and it may clarify my ideas.  I did not vote for Bush or Gore.  I was a citizen of Florida and working as an attorney at the time.  I thought Barry Richard, Bush's attorney, ran rings around Gore's attorneys.  I thought the Florida Supreme Court made very poor decisions.  I do not think that Bush was handed the Presidency by the Supreme Court.  I thought the Supreme Court was absolutely correct in every decision and the Florida Supreme Court was wrong in every decision.  I voted for Jeb Bush for Governor twice.  I voted GHW Bush twice.  Anything I dislike about GW Bush has been earned fair and square.   

But, I am not offended by being called a "radical liberal" either.  That is a label people feel they must apply to others as some sort of epithet.  Thomas Paine was a radical liberal.  He helped free the American people.  Of course, I am not in his league, but he was a "radical liberal".   Wink

As to your second question: I respect the vast majority of people on the forum.  I'm sure it's fairly obvious who I don't respect on the forum.  I think the tenor of politics in general has deteriorated in the country.  There are some people that I previously debated that I no longer debate at all, and sometimes I pick and choose and try to debate again, until it degenerates.  And there are some people, such as Moishe and JDD who I continually disagree with, but we manage to usually maintain cordial relations and usually mutual respect. 

As far as understanding my positions, there are central core beliefs, and I reference an old Armed Service slogan:  Be the best you can be.  This would be my country, my family, my person.  The West Point code:  Duty, honor, Country.  Shakespeare:  I could not love thee so much, had I not loved honor more.  Voltaire:  I disagree with what you say, but defend to my death your right to say it.  Robert E. Lee:  I'm afraid one day they will get someone I don't understand.  And Richard Corey, one calm summer night went home and put a bullet through his head.

Okay, my favorite quotes which I believe show my general view on life.  I love to learn.  I could get a degree every 10 years in a different field.  My ideas on the "war on terror" come from my idea of honor.  I think sticking with the Geneva Convention allows us to keep our honor.  That doesn't mean I am unaware of the "fog of war".  But, I know that we give prosecutors and judges discretion for that reason, and we hope they have honor toward their fellow soldiers to make good judgments.  Honor feeds on honor.  If we don't instill it in our children, men to women, and women to themselves, then we lose as a society.  The Lee quote reminds me that knowledge is key to the enemy.  That is why I don't buy into the idea that we should be ignorant of the Arab/Persian/Afghan/Russian people, or that learning about them is to be a terrorist sympathizer or somehow Anti-American.  I think that is simply short-sighted because they are certainly learning about us. 



Off the top of my head, I can't remember who wrote the poem, Richard Corey(it was Edwin Arlington Robinson, pictured. --FC)  My father was marvelous.  He used to read to poems to me to put me to bed.  When I was older and competing in speech/debate, he helped coach me.  I won a trophy with Richard Corey.  It is a story of jealousy:

Quote:
And he was rich, yes, richer than a King,
And admirably schooled in every grace,
In fine, he was everything,
To make us wish we were in his place.


But the end of the poem has Richard Corey killing himself because he is actually miserable.  "And Richard Corey, one calm summer night, went home and put a bullet through his head". 

My father gave me the grace of literature and poetry.  It made quite an impact on me.  I can't remember the whole poem, but it often comes to me when I think of him.  It is a very old poem:  Out of the night that covers me, black as the pit from pole to pole, I thank whatever gods there be for my unconquerable soul.
« Last Edit: Dec 19th, 2007 at 1:26pm by forgotten centrist »  

Nominated for 2016...
- Liberal of the Year
- Conservative of the Year
- Centrist of the Year
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
forgotten centrist
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

bring back the middle
class!

Posts: 10,585
Joined: Sep 29th, 2004
Re: A Conversation with LadyLawyer
Reply #3 - Dec 19th, 2007 at 1:08pm
Print Post  
Okay, let's talk about your background.  You are a lawyer, yet you say you would love to enter a new field of study every decade.  What would you major in if you entered college today?  How has your legal training shaped your world view?  And I'd like to throw in that I am impressed that a lawyer so freely refrains from speaking legalese, and opens her mind regularly in plain English with bold statements on a wide range of topics.  Do you think your fellow lawyers should emulate you more often?

If I went back to school today, I would probably like to have a degree in International Relations/Business.  I enjoy learning new languages and new cultures.  I also think because of my own cultural background, a large part of the world is familiar to me already. 

The soft power of America is tremendous.  Max Boot, the military historian, and surprisingly (for me) has a wonderful idea for 4th generation warfare.  I say, surprisingly, because Mr. Boot is an unabashed neocon.  He believes that there should be a concomitant build up of specialists in nation building along with the military -- people who know the languages, culture, history of a specific area.  These people will also be specialists in knowing how to be project managers.  In that way, the soft power of the United States will actually be formative.  The military is not formed to project such power.  NGO's are, but they are not under the control of the govt.  I would learn to do something like this.

My legal training has probably exacerbated an innate cynicism.  Qui Bono? (who benefits?) is probably my outlook on the world.  I started as a Prosecutor, and while you never HAVE to prove motive in a case; the idea of motive often solved a case.  By the same token, justice might be best served by Qui Bono.  Why should I prosecute a person who stopped paying on a contract at a Rent A Center when they have paid for the TV about 3 times over?  The taxpayer isn't benefitting; the Rent A Center is.  So, I constantly played this theme in my mind over and over.

And I extrapolate it to the outside world.  Sometimes I get accused of being a conspiracy theorist because I ask the question of who benefits.  But, I do believe everything done by man, benefits someone.  Nothing is done in a vacuum, and I don't believe anything is done for sheer altruism.  Historically, we find too many examples of Wars fought for allegedly "good causes" that were actually not fought for such good causes.  And many buried facts of history are lost that place such a different facet on what we believe. 

One of my favorite things to do is to collect old books.  These books often have facts that are completely gone from mainstream history -- facts that would change how people reflect upon an event.  We see this happen on the internet, when you go back to a webpage and the webpage is no longer there.  Books, as long as they are in print, will keep facts.  There is a great Star Trek episode when Captain Kirk is on trial for murder and his lawyer travels the universe with his books rather than using the computer.  That is me.  I have six bookshelves, six feet tall, often with books doubled on the shelves.  Many are now out of print.  But, the knowledge in them will never go away.



As far as using legalese, I take it as a compliment, that I don't "talk" like a lawyer.  But, I think most Trial Lawyers don't use legalese.  My first week out of Law School, I had 3 trials.  Lawyers do not have internships like Doctors.  It is either sink or swim.  Justice Black never picked a Jury.  He simply stood up and said I'll take the first 6 jurors, I'm sure they'll do fine.  I was never quite that comfortable with jurors.  But, one thing I always believed in was the idea that you should use the easiest word possible to express yourself.  And that is not legalese.  The classic line used by Lawyers is "Did you have occasion to"  and I would say "Did you happen to see"  or "Objection:Relevance" and I would say, "Judge, what does this have to do with anything?", unless a Judge stopped me and required me to say Relevance.  But, by then the jury would know exactly what I meant by relevance or any other objection.  The jury wants to know everything, and if you use legalese, they think you are hiding behind the law.  If a Judge forces you to use legalese, then that is the Judge's problem, not yours.  So, legalese isn't effective with juries, and I just got out of the habit.  I think attorneys are far more persuasive using a very normal vocabulary. 
« Last Edit: Dec 19th, 2007 at 1:13pm by forgotten centrist »  

Nominated for 2016...
- Liberal of the Year
- Conservative of the Year
- Centrist of the Year
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
forgotten centrist
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

bring back the middle
class!

Posts: 10,585
Joined: Sep 29th, 2004
Re: A Conversation with LadyLawyer
Reply #4 - Dec 19th, 2007 at 1:15pm
Print Post  
I have to say I used to wince when my partners in trial would use really big words with a Jury.  I think people are somewhat offended by it.  It is not that they can't understand the words, but that they might have to think for a second, and it breaks up their train of thought.  Contrary to popular thought, Defense attorney's WANT smart people on their juries.  Usually you have to appeal to their logic.  If you are on a jury, and you think you are smart, it is because the Defense Attorney kept you on.  The Defense is looking for that smart person that is going to have the ability to stand up for their beliefs. 

My last few years working in criminal court was almost exclusively in Child Sex Abuse.  Not a pretty place to find yourself.  But, it is as much a specialty as murder.  In some ways, it is actually harder to defend.  I had a string of wins with no jury out for more than an hour.  Then in my last case, I had a knock down drag out.  I probably had the smartest jury I ever had because it was finally to the Prosecution's benefit to have a smart jury.  It was an 8 hour deliberation.  And it was a guilty.  I was devastated.  I really thought she was innocent.  I still believe she was innocent.  But, there is no way to prove it because there is no DNA evidence.  You didn't ask me the question.  I added this paragraph, because it was my biggest disappointment as an attorney.


I seem to remember you mentioning that you were working on a book or scholarly paper of some sort.  Something historical?  Can you tell us anything about it?  How would you rank yourself as an amateur historian?

What a memory for details!!  Yes.  A little known fact is that the United States passed its own mini version of the Balfour Declaration in 1922 concerning Palestine.  In light of what happened during the Holocaust and the Nuremberg Trials, and the flight of the Palestinians in 1948, the remarks of Congress at this time are astonishing.  Congress essentially advocates ethnic cleansing if the Arab majority will not agree to Jewish minority control.   But, this is a long, slow slog to borrow some famous words.  Even the New York Times barely covered it.  I hope it turns out to be a paper.  Technically, I have a Ph.d.  A J.D. (Juris Doctor) is a Doctorate, because you write a thesis. It is a sort of weird hybrid.  My thesis was on the First Amendment and War Reporting.  I actually had help from one of the greats:  Anthony Lewis who wrote Gideon's Trumpet (I think, its been almost 25 years), and wrote for the New York Times.  My professor got me in touch with him because I believe he had covered Vietnam.  I'm hoping if I get published that I might be able to teach at a Junior College at least, if I'm able to go back to work.



I am a better historian now then when I first graduated from College.  I loved research as a Lawyer.  If there was a case in the United States, I would find it, in order to win a case.  I'm the same way now chasing an historical perspective. 

I don't mix religion with history, and I don't mix secularism (and that would include a love of America) with history.  Everyone is going to have a certain perspective that they bring to the table.  That is why we have different history books and different ideas about history.  I think that the greatest group of people came together to make the Constitution and to form this experiment called the United States; however, my love for that does not absolve the government of the United States of all historical mistakes. 

But, the writing that you see on the forum is very different from my formal writing.  This is very stream of conscience.  I type as fast I think for the most part.  I became used to it when I worked for the state and first starting out on my own.  It was faster than a dictaphone and I controlled my pleadings easier.  My own writing is far less harsh.
  

Nominated for 2016...
- Liberal of the Year
- Conservative of the Year
- Centrist of the Year
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
forgotten centrist
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

bring back the middle
class!

Posts: 10,585
Joined: Sep 29th, 2004
Re: A Conversation with LadyLawyer
Reply #5 - Dec 19th, 2007 at 1:17pm
Print Post  
A paper -- do you have a publisher in mind?  A magazine or something?  And considering the prolific post-count you have on LNF, have you thought about writing a book? 

I'll expand the question into an area I am especially interested in.  Have you thought of blogging?  Contributing to wikipedia and its cousins?  Does it bother you that most of your posts on LNF end up scrolling off into cyberspace?


I have two magazines in mind that write exclusively about Middle Eastern topics and have shown that they are not afraid to publish out of the mainstream thought.  This is unfortunately, a reality in dealing with Middle East scholarship.  It makes the "fairness doctrine" look like child's play. 

I really don't even know how the blogosphere works.  I've often said that the computer is simply a word processor to me.  Only disability made me look at the computer as a research tool.  If I had ever wanted a blog, it would have been when people were comparing bringing democracy to Iraq and the end of WWII and defeated Germany.  A good blogger could have easily set up the parallels not to Germany but to Lebanon, 1982.  Israel sliced through Lebanon easily and then promptly set up its 18 year quagmire, followed by its alternating hot and cold war on its border with Hizbollah guerrillas (that did not exist until after the 1982 invasion).  Post WWII Germany and Japan were, IMO, completely erroneous examples, especially when we had this HUGE example of failure right there in the area with our own ally!! 

As far as most of my thoughts going into cyberspace....better there, then the NSA!!! just kidding.  I think the board attracts tremendously expressive and bright people.  Every so often, I get someone who gets irritated by the fact that my sig name includes the word "Lawyer" so they have to throw a few rounds in; but, I believe everyone brings their best game here.  Now think about that, some people don't have much of a game.  HAHA.  So, no, it doesn't bother me.  It keeps me thinking, because the people on this forum are some of the brightest I have been around.



I believe you have a stepson who is a soldier -- is that right?  Would you care to talk about that?  How has that changed your world view?  Having a family member serve during wartime can be heart-wrenching -- has this experience changed you?  Has it changed him?  What would you say to parents of those who are now entering the service?

Yes, my stepson is a career soldier, or at least so far.  He is now married, so I don't know if that will impact his career decisions differently.  I don't even know how we ended up with a career soldier in the family.  I can say from both my side, my husband's side and his mother's side, there were soldiers in every war experienced by the United States.  His grandfather was a double amputee from WWII and his father's brother died in Vietnam.  I have an interview from a War between the States ancestor.  His interview consisted of two words:  "I survived."  While I think he heard that the Service is an honorable profession, I don't think he heard from us to join the Service as a career.  What he DID hear from us was the absolute duty one has to the country, if the country is attacked.  And he did not get the politically correct version of history, so he got to hear about Sam Davis dying for his country (the Confederacy), or the inept schoolteacher Nathan Hale who became a hero, and we read The 900 Days:  The Siege of Leningrad.  I'm a big believer that children need to know heroism, something bigger than themselves.  My father used to tell me before a big trial, "Come back with your shield, or on it".  It was a joke between us.  I do the same thing now.  It makes everyone feel like they have some control over situations, even if they ultimately don't.

It is a very tough situation for families.  I think it is harder for families who don't believe in the cause.  I can honestly say that I believe he was there for his friends and the Armed Services and because he was doing his job.  I don't believe he was/is there for any noble cause.  And unfortunately, his father doesn't believe it either. 

There is a book called War Letters.  In it, a French mother in WWI writes her youngest son after his 3 oldest brothers have died at the front saying it is time for him to go to the front now as she won't have a son at home while France is in danger.  I can understand that sentiment.  In my own family, during the War between the States, there was only one man home out of 25, and he was 70.  The rest were at the front or Prisoners of War (The South didn't have many men).  Again, I can understand the sentiment.  But, I don't believe in wars of choice or preventive wars. 
  

Nominated for 2016...
- Liberal of the Year
- Conservative of the Year
- Centrist of the Year
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
forgotten centrist
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

bring back the middle
class!

Posts: 10,585
Joined: Sep 29th, 2004
Re: A Conversation with LadyLawyer
Reply #6 - Dec 19th, 2007 at 1:19pm
Print Post  
And that is how my world view has changed.  Yes, our military is made of volunteers, but they are citizens also.  Their deaths are not cheaper because they volunteered for hazardous duty.  I find myself very annoyed when people say, "well, they knew what they were getting into, they volunteered".  They volunteered to defend the United States.  They didn't volunteer to go adventuring like the French Foreign Legion.  I believe they are still owed prudence in judgment.  I don't believe they are owed a cavalier attitude by the government or a taunting of the enemy by the President with "Bring em on". 

I couldn't talk to parents of someone wanting to volunteer.  I don't think it would be fair.  On this point, people need to make their own decisions.  The only thing I would say is if they said they had to do this due to college, I would suggest other ways to get money.   



You've mentioned books, poems, periodicals -- you're obviously a highly literate person.  Are there any books you think everyone here on LNF should read?  And can you comment on your sig line -- "Beware the people weeping"?  Do you have any favorite movies, music, or other sources of inspiration?

This might also be a good point to ask the standard closing question.  Name a couple of thread topics you tend to read, and a couple that you tend to ignore.




I'm not sure I would call myself a literate person in the classic sense of the word.  I have read some of the classic philosophical texts such as The Prince, etc.  But, those were essentially forced upon me in college, and while I might retain the major points, I could not argue the finer points of the text or the philosophy.  And while we have great debates on the forum about natural law, and the philosophy of law, in real life, lawyers deal with "black letter law" or the holdings of cases, so even the philosophy behind the law, for me, is a forgotten subject from 20 years ago. That doesn't mean that what the Founders thought might not be argued in front of the Supreme Court; but, since I don't even have privileges to argue before the Supreme Court (one has to apply to argue before the Court) it would not be something that would come up in my everyday life. 

There are three authors that I think everyone should read, and just see if they can actually legitimately refute what they say with actual facts, rather than attacking the messenger.  Those authors would be Ralph Nader, Noam Chomsky and William Greider.  Nader for corporations and the tax code; Chomsky for our foreign policy and Greider for the Federal Reserve and the consolidation of information.  I think these three are usually dismissed because people don't want to believe the message or dislike the message rather than actually disproving the message.
  

Nominated for 2016...
- Liberal of the Year
- Conservative of the Year
- Centrist of the Year
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
forgotten centrist
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

bring back the middle
class!

Posts: 10,585
Joined: Sep 29th, 2004
Re: A Conversation with LadyLawyer
Reply #7 - Dec 19th, 2007 at 1:20pm
Print Post  
My sig line- "Beware the people weeping" comes from a Northern newspaper printed after Lincoln's death in 1865.  Many people are unaware of the thousands who were rounded up after the President's death on little or no evidence. People were killed for daring to speak ill of the President (even though there were many at the time who were not friendly toward President Lincoln; we see him through rose colored glasses) or even killed for laughing as his funeral train went by.  Draconian measures were talked about being introduced in Congress and of course, they were introduced in the South.  Essentially, it was mass hysteria, and SOMEONE was going to pay.  Now, of course, this cataclysmic event followed the euphoria of the end of the War Between the States.  So, this magnified everything and people were in fear.  Fear causes irrationality; thus, the idea of "beware the people weeping"  because people are not rational. 

One of my favorite books is Gone With the Wind.  Now, many people write this off as a fluff book.  It is actually a great character book.  There have been many times, even on this forum, when I have quoted from the book, and no one has caught me on it.  One of my best friends growing up wrote the book Because of Winn Dixie (if you have kids, you probably know the book or movie).  We used to try to outdo each other in remembering quotes from the book.  I tried to get her to go to Law School with me.  I'm glad she didn't because we would have lost a wonderful childrens author. 



Books that changed how I essentially thought was An American Tragedy by Theodore Dreiser and Johnny Got his Gun by Dalton Trumbo.  An American Tragedy changed how I thought about the death penalty.  One of the standard questions you are asked as a prosecutor is whether or not you believe in the death penalty.  I said no, which is usually the kiss of death.  I was lucky, because the office that hired me, allowed another lawyer to do the "penalty phase" of the trial.  Johnny Got His Gun is an extreme Anti-war book, or at least it is against wars overseas or for "causes".  I am not that extreme.  For instance, no one has ever heard me mention Afghanistan as a bad cause.  They have heard me talk about Iraq as a bad cause. 

One of the best movies that impacted me, and made me really want to be a great trial lawyer was Breaker Morant.  A little known Australian film about a courts martial during the Boer War.  If you have never seen it, go out and rent it.  It was just listed as one of the top 100 war films of all time.  In the end, the main character quotes Matthew:  For a man's enemies shall be they of his own household.  It is a tremendous story about the sacrifice of the little guy for global politics.  Unfortunately, it is an absolutely true story. 

I read most of the threads, although I don't participate very often in the global warming threads or the evolution threads except for maybe a post or two.  Just way out of my league.  Almost anything scientific is out of my league. 

I usually will look at the Middle East threads or threads involving American politics that I enjoy such as the amendments.  Obviously, I like the legal threads.  I know it annoys some people, but I find that most people truly have no concept of the criminal system because, thank goodness, they have never been remotely involved in the criminal world (it is not pleasant).  And that is not just lay persons.  When Raz was here, he threw out a term to me that stopped me completely.  He used the term "JNOV" with a criminal case.  (Judgment notwithstanding the verdict).  For a second, I was absolutely confused and could not figure out what he was talking about.  I had to go look it up.  Then I realized he was used to dealing with civil cases, and JNOV is the equivalent civil term for the criminal term of JOA.  So, its confusing to everybody with parallel systems, and state and federal systems, etc.
  

Nominated for 2016...
- Liberal of the Year
- Conservative of the Year
- Centrist of the Year
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Shooterman
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

Constipation in Chinese
is Hung Chow!

Posts: 24,542
Joined: May 20th, 2006
Re: A Conversation with LadyLawyer
Reply #8 - Dec 19th, 2007 at 1:23pm
Print Post  
Damme, F_C, you've outdone yourself with this one.

Miss LL, my congratulations on your candor and presentation. It was a pleasure, I assure you.
  

We have computers and Boeing 747s because the North won the Civil War- Thomas Paine December 2010&&&&&&&&We should not fall into the trap of taking ourselves too seriously.  Shooterman 1935-  &&&&The United States is entirely [354 U.S. 1, 6] a creature of the Constitution.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
forgotten centrist
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

bring back the middle
class!

Posts: 10,585
Joined: Sep 29th, 2004
Re: A Conversation with LadyLawyer
Reply #9 - Dec 19th, 2007 at 1:23pm
Print Post  
That's it for this one.  Thanks to everyone for reading, thanks to whoever nominated this series for Thread/Theme of the year, and a very big thanks to LadyLawyer for a great conversation!

The thread is now open for follow-up questions and discussion...
  

Nominated for 2016...
- Liberal of the Year
- Conservative of the Year
- Centrist of the Year
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Send TopicPrint
 
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HereLNF Rules and Information › A Conversation with LadyLawyer

LNF Home - Political Opinion Page
LNF Forums

Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Sports Forum - Entertainment - House
Military, History - Cooking and Crafts - Creative Writing
Off the Wall News - Science Forum - Tech Gadgets - Financial News - Humor
Bunker - Page 2 - Page 3 - Page 4 - Chat Room





Drudge Report - News Max - Rush Limbaugh - FrontpageMag
Advertise on the LNF - Twitter LNF - LNF Archive - LNF News
LNF Blog
News and Political Links
Political Blogs
Add your website or blog
Political Columnists
Political Humor
News forum posting, privacy policy and member rules