December 29, 2007
Thoughts On Lawyers
Attorneys are an integral part of our Constitutional legal system. That is, they are as necessary under our form of government as are litter boxes to cat owners, composters to serious gardeners, carpet stain removers to hotel housekeeping departments or grease traps to restaurant kitchens.
There are a lot of honest, hard-working lawyers out there, but there seem to be an equal or greater number who are parasites that prey on any situation they can in as despicable, sleazy and dishonorable a fashion as they need to in order to milk the most money possible out of said situations.
These latter include liberal trial lawyers whose victimization of defendants via manipulation of the legal system has created a litigious atmosphere (and cottage industry) in this country that has businesses and individuals investing large sums of money and man hours in protecting themselves from frivolous lawsuits. One biproduct of this is a lot more work for lawyers who enjoy large retainers on the defensive side of the equation.
One thing I don’t miss, spending a paucity of time nowadays in front of the television, is all those commercials you see for law firms that specialize in sueing companies. You know, “if you’ve ever worked for a company that employed (name the chemical or compound) in their manufacturing process, you may be entitled to a significant cash award. Call Joe Schmoe Law Associates at 1-800… Now!”, or that tele-ambulance chaser’s ad a few years back that ended with an obvious welfare case bragging that “Ah got five thousand!”
These unscrupulous toilet cakes have corrupted our courts, severely damaging and making a mockery of our legal system for the sole motive of making money for themselves. Now don’t get me wrong, greed is good in its own arena, but these people are “officers of the court”. They are licensed to practice law, not to twist it and bend it according to their financial desires, nor to make victims of law abiding individuals, hospitals or business firms for the purpose of personal gain.
Also of the same low degree are attorneys found at such political institutions as CAIR and the ACLU. The former use the threat of lawsuits whose legal costs alone would bankrupt the average citizen as a way of stifling freedom of speech, the latter use lawsuits against all levels of government in order to stifle religious expression.
I won’t even go into the prophalactics who make careers of specialization in defending sexual predators, celebrity murderers, terrorists or drug traffickers.
But the sleaze doesn’t end at private sector level. It also seeps into the courts themselves, in the form of activist judges who legislate from the bench by way of decisions that reflect their own political agendas rather than the letter of the Constitution or even the will of The People. Remember, also, that these judges are lawyers, and if the “loser” in one of those politically motivated decisions needs to appeal to a higher court, such as SCOTUS, one or more lawyers will make a lot of money representing him/her/them on the appeal.
Moving right along, we go upstairs to the attorneys who become politicians and find their respective ways into lawmaking capacities.
The Senate. State or U.S., take your pick.
Think about that — lawyers making the laws.
Hmmmmm……
While it makes sense (musicians make music, engineers engineer, artists create art, writers write, designers design, etc)… I mean, pornographers create pornography, so why shouldn’t lawyers be allowed to create laws?…
Sidebar, as they call a conference at the bench between opposing lawyers and a judge: I am reminded of the term nepotism, only changed to replace family members with colleagues.
Back from sidebar: The more laws these lawyers in elected office enact and the more technically complicated they make them, the more work they generate for fellow lawyers and for themselves as well, in the event that they lose an election and have to go back into private practice.
We have are a society ruled not by government, per se, but by lawyers.
With that thought in mind, I need a good, stiff drink….
http://hardastarboard.mu.nu/wp-trackback.php?p=773
December 29th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
Alas, it’s true. Surprisingly, at http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Attorney_%2f_Lawyer/Salary/by_Practice_Area ..we find that the
‘ambulance chasers’ don’t sit especially high in the genre, the top earners being corporate stoog..er business counsel. It seems to be the nature of this
species to align their abilities with their client’s interests, be it GM or the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Imagine the $$ amd frustration of being general counsel for this outfit: http://www.milwaukeemagazine.com/CurrentIssue/full_feature_story.asp?NewMessageID=13642 ..and of course the old joke was the Japan had 1000 engineers per lawyer, while in the ol USA the reverse was true. IMHO, at least some of the $$ could be better spent elsewhere, (at least since I am not currently seeking divorce, driving a lemon, sickened by tainted hamburger or libeling anyone..er, did I go to far above?
December 29th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
“Henry VI” by William Shakespeare:
“The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers”. - (Act IV, Scene II).
December 29th, 2007 at 8:59 pm
And by becoming legislators and making laws more complicated, they create job security.
December 30th, 2007 at 5:38 am
BB –
Most of the lawyers I know from professional acquaintance seem to be doing better than the averages listed in your first link, but at least two of them come from wealthy families, so…
I see what you mean about the probable tribulations of any lawyers representing Menard’s interests, LOL. I imagine they do a lot more negotiating out of court than going to trial.
The way the company is described in the article, it doesn’t sound like anyplace I would want to work, though I wouldn’t begrudge anyone else’s desire to earn a living therein. If promotable employees are desperate enough to sign legally binding agreements authorizing the company to screw them out of money for picayune reasons, take relocation along with pay cuts for infractions and accept the company’s authority to forbid them making improvements on or building their own homes, they deserve whatever they get. If a good manager can tolerate being micromanaged from upstairs, by all means let him stick around.
But as it is John Menard’s company, he can run it as he sees fit. If a bunch of idiots want to work for him and know what to expect in terms of getting screwed without the benefit of dinner or a kiss, they shouldn’t cry when it happens.
There were some comments posted, purportedly by Menard employees, that disputed the article and claimed Menard’s is a good firm to work for. Who’s to say? One man’s meat is another man’s poison.
However, recalling all the totally bogus articles I’ve read in the course of the Democrats’ war on Wal-Mart, I have to wonder at the sum total of the accuracy of the Menard’s article. Perhaps the author has a brother-in-law who’s an executive at Home Depot or Lowe’s.
BTW, I was expecting my Moose Drool delivery by Friday. I guess it won’t be here until Monday. Just in time for New Year’s Eve…
Mike –
Bill Shakespeare had a good idea, if only they’d run with it.
Shoprat –
We are no longer a nation of laws, we are a nation of lawyers. They’ve definitely created a civilization in which they will forever enjoy job security, no matter what happens to everyone else.
December 30th, 2007 at 8:35 am
It sometimes pays to have a scum-sucking bottom feeder, aka lawyer, on one’s side. I found that out when I hired a good real-estate attorney.
Now I’ve got a personal-injury lawyer. He came highly recommended. But despite my permanent injury from that car accident back in 2005, he’s not driving a hard enough bargain. Now he wants to settle the case ASAP–and to hell with my disability.
I have no use for politicians who are lawyers. Yes, Thomas Jefferson was a lawyer, as were others of our Founders, but they were lawyers with principles.
SCOTUS legislates from the bench, instead of interpreting the Constitution, as is their duty. IMO, SCOTUS has done a great deal of damage to what our Founders intended for our republic.
December 30th, 2007 at 11:17 am
AOW –
SCOTUS has well exceeded their brief. Good examples are the Kelo affair and their unconstitutionally involving themselves in what is not theirs, but the President’s and, sadly to say given the state of the Houses on the Hill, Congress’ authority re the War On Terror.
December 30th, 2007 at 2:06 pm
Seth, regarding the Menard’s article, my original interest was that John was a contemporary, and I had his professor/diaryfarmer father for calculus (shortly after calculus was invented) all back when I was a badger from the badger state. Also had a nephew that
worked a few years in one of the outlets. Also two
brother-in-law building contractors that switched their business elsewhere over lumber quality issues.
That, and John and I share a passion for that ultimate
paradise of control-freaks…the model railroad. That said, IMHO the article was a little edgy both pro and con, as regards the company. On the subject of MooseDrool, I often suppliment my private stock *heh*
by indulging here http://www.happydaycorp.com/html/zany_s.html while fattening my constitution with the local ‘bitesize
steak’*. A widow friend insults both beverages by cutting her MooseDrool with tomato juice (I think she is a right-winger)
*one assessment of this stuff is “Of course, we are the only ones inside sans a few “locals”. Our waiter we deem is in detox for drug overdose. Very strange fellow. I order the special which is called “Bite Size Steak’– deep fried meat–which is really not too bad, once you figure out what you are eating. Our waiter informs us that we can only pay in cash, but the GOOD NEWS is he isn’t charging us for the beers. Hmmm….where are we?? We pay him in cash…which goes into his pockets. The entire story of this acerbic
biker’s opinion of my locale is here http://www.sv-portal.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15196. Hmm, I failed to mention ‘lawyers’ once….
December 30th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
Whenever I think of lawyers and doctors one thing always comes to mind which adds to my frustration with both. They are the only profession who describe their business as a practice. Which means , “practice, ” on clients and patients is pretty much what they do. If they screw up the term , “practice, ” also helps to protect them from liability.
Yet as you mentioned many in both Federal and State legislatures are lawyers who now practice at making laws that we the people are ecpected to abide by. This Congress especially is practicing a great deal and failing in the same process. But they do not see themselves as accountable for their actions because they are practicing at what they do.
If I were to tell a customer of mine that I am practicing on them how long do you think they would remain a customer. Or even one of my employees. They would quit in a heatbeat!
December 30th, 2007 at 7:22 pm
I couldnt agree more.
Now I need a drink after thinking about this one
Happy New Year Seth!
December 31st, 2007 at 1:51 am
BB –
On reading Zany’s menu, I espied a 16oz prime rib dinner for a mere $17.99. That in itself makes me want to jump on the next plane.
I was talking to a friend here in Chicago who spent some time in Lewiston a few years ago and he said the area was majorly beautiful. Had his then girlfriend not decided she wanted to move to Reno*, he said he would have been happy to make a home there.
*Of course, in Reno, you can get an even larger prime rib dinner for $10.00 or less.
Ken –
Speaking of “practice”, I’m reminded of an experience I had when I lived in SF. I went to a big university hospital in the upper Haight to address a sinus infection. A resident there tried to keep me for a weekend and a day to run “tests”. An older doctor rescued me by writing prescriptions for an anti-inflammatory and an antibiotic, and cutting me loose despite a Filipina who was standing by with a wheelchair, all set to take me to some upper floor for a CT scan(!). The meds worked both quickly and fine.
About a year later, I met a doctor from the same hospital who explained things by saying, “We’re a teaching hospital, and since it’s illegal to simply drag homeless people in off the streets for use as teaching subjects, we have to get the most out of our legitimate patients.”
“But then you bill my insurance.” I pointed out.
“Somebody has to pay.” He replied, shrugging.
I must admit, I was kind of sorry there was no nearby flight of stairs to throw him down.
Marie –
A toast, then!
And Happy New Year to you!
December 31st, 2007 at 6:27 am
In other woirds you have the same problem we have. You are no longer a democracy but an oligarchy ruled by self interested groups who have entrenched themselves in positions of power.
Democracy is now officially dead, only the image remains ….
December 31st, 2007 at 2:05 pm
Gray Monk –
That seems to be the size of it.
We can look into pretty much any encroachment on our freedom or an “officially sanctioned” decrease in our collective morality and unfailingly discover lawyers with political and/or personal monetary agendas somewhere in the wood work.
Lawmaking has gotten ‘way out of hand as attorneys-cum-politicians churn out laws, in all too many cases “for our protection”, that our Constitution does not authorize them to make, or allow activist attorneys and their colleagues on the bench to set self-serving precedents that also go counter to the framework established by our founding documents.
The farther we, as a free society, allow them to go, the more difficult it will be to extricate ourselves from the tragic results once (if) we come, again collectively, to our senses.