BiteSoundBite

You’ve heard them on CNN; you’ve seen them in your local paper. “He’s rich! He’s a trial lawyer (said with obligatory sneer). He’s a rich trial lawyer!” Even correspondents and pundits on NPR seem to be in a contest to see who can fit “rich” and “trial lawyer” the most times into each paragraph. Just this morning I heard a calm, all-knowing voice on NPR telling me that the same skills that made Edwards “rich” as a “trial lawyer” had benefited him in the Senate.

If you are a businessman going into politics, you are always touted for your skills that made you “successful”. I don’t recall one similar newscast in the run-up to the 2000 election reminding us that George Bush’s ability to capitalize off of his family connections not only made him very rich, but the same “skills” would also benefit him in Washington (although, boy did they ever!). What about Dick Cheney’s ability to exploit his contacts in the government in order to secure huge government contracts for his company? They certainly made him rich…er…I mean…successful!

It is assumed, of course that “trial lawyer” is the most despicable thing one can possibly be. Provided that it is said with enough of a sneer there is no reason to elaborate on why this is. It is just assumed that the title will conjure up images of Johnny Cochran and not Clarence Darrow or John Adams.

By yesterday afternoon, the smears that had rocketed out of the RNC moments after Kerry’s announcement had gained enough speed and force through the Republican echo chamber that it even reached the little company that I work for in Nowheresville, MN. The office dittoheads were gathered into a corner reading loudly and proudly the words of John Kerry during the primaries about Edwards’s inexperience. Never mind that the friends of our dear leader had said the exact same thing during his primary in 2000. My hope is that the technology will soon be available so that they can have Fox News channeled through their voice boxes (maybe Wi-Fi?) and save them the trouble of having to actually remember and repeat phrases such as “John Kerry speaks French!” themselves.

This is all, of course, great news. I voted for Edwards in the primaries and am thrilled to hear the panic and desperation in the voices of those that know what a great ticket this is. In November I shall shake their hands and drink their tears.

Update:
slacktivist adds Atticus Finch, Fiorello LaGuardia, Ralph Nader, Thurgood Marshall and Abraham Lincoln to the trial lawyer list. Trial lawyers: don't you just hate 'em?

4 Comments:

• We have apparantly misunderstood that there is a difference between "good" trial lawyers and "bad" trial lawyers. One of the "good" trial lawyers sets the record straight for us:
unfuckingbelievable:
"Dear Jonah - When you say "trial lawyers," I think you mean "plaintiffs' attorneys." Or more specifically, "contingent fee plaintiffs' attorneys." I'm a "trial lawyer," but I hardly think you'd object to what I do all day long — defend corporate clients from malicious and baseless lawsuits filed by overzealous plaintiffs' attorneys. So, when you say "trial lawyers," be careful — you may be alienating an innocent sector of your NRO readership."


I'm embarrased in a way of even having to write the above post. It could have been pages longer but it seems pointless. If I could sit down with every person in the country I am confident that I could get 95% of them to admit that "trial lawyers" are necessary and the vast majority to agree that they are a very good thing. That isn't the point of the RNC slander. The point is to get these negative images circulating. By the time they are thoroughly answered Rove and Co. will have the next one circulating. This is part of the reason why there are frequent anecdotes like the ones quoted here where people say they really don't like Kerry, but they have no idea why.

I know it is a cliche to say that we live in serious times. It is much like how politicians refer, every fourth year, to it being a "pivotal time in American history". But we do live in serious times. These are certainly very serious people in charge of the country, but the conversations that we have as a nation are never, ever serious (maybe they never are) and this is by design.

These charges always have to be answered, but in a very real way the debates that are being framed and the questions that they bring up are so beneath contempt of every thinking person in the country.

Bastards.

By  Jamison, at 11:41 PM  

• Sarcasm (angry sarcasm to be more precise)

By  Jamison, at 10:48 AM  

• Great post. Your sarcasm was so good I thought you were charlie until I got to the bottom. Kathy at Random Thoughts has an interesting list of Edwards' cases. Here's a couple of them:

#A five year old girl who sat on a defective drain in a wading pool. The suction was so powerful that most of her intestines were pulled outside her body.

#A child born with no hope of sitting, standing, walking, talking, or seeing due to an overdose of labor-inducing drugs, improper labor, and a missing pediatrician.

#A four year old boy with cerebral palsy who wasn't getting the therapies his doctor's thought he needed because his insurance company thought they weren't necessary and wouldn't cover them.Specifics are always helpful when answering idiots. Check out the post.

By  Mick, at 11:13 PM  

• As a non-trial lawyer, who knows a number of honest and prinicpled plaintiff's attorneys, I applaud your efforts to set the record straight here.

The obvious distinction is between unethical plaintiff's attorneys and those with integrity. Despite all the hype, in my experience the latter are much more the norm.

A little something the public might not understand: within our profession, reputation is everything. There is powerful peer pressure on lawyers to behave ethically and within the boundaries of decency, especially so for plaintiff's attorneys. The vast majority want to maintain the respect of their peers, and so most do not pursue baseless claims (they are also the hardest to win, and when you get paid on contingency, that risk is a big one, and because there is a plethora of justified claims, that risk is an unnecessary one).

Obviously there are unethical plaintiff's attorneys who game the system, but the same can be said for all professions and occupations. Unethical schemers are not particularly concentrated in the legal profession.

John Edwards, by the way, has always had the respect of the legal community, and a perusal of his case history only confirms the soundness of this praise.

By  Eric Martin, at 2:36 PM  

Post a Comment