About Me

Name: JimG
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 
Uncategorized

A Forced Vacation

 In case there is antone reading this who has been logging on daily to see what kind of witty tidbuits I would produce, I apologize to you for me absence. School graduation, relocating, and a new job have taken my attention.  That, and a lack of internet access at home. I hate cable companies.

Anyway, hope to make some valuable contributions in the near future. As a betting man (for entertainment purposes only), I would like to set the over/under for the length of the cease fire on the Israeli/Lebanon border. I open at 23 1/2 hours. And I'll take the under....any takers?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Leaky Lawyers

Former NYT Editor Howell Raines (who resigned in disgrace after the Jayson Blair scandal) has let loose a tidbit of information regarding leakers. The confession took place during a discussion of his forthcoming memoirs at the Aspen Institute. Article is located here: http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20060721/NEWS/107210065  (Registration may be required)

At the end of the article, the following exchange is memorialized:

"One audience member asked about the role of media leaks. Raines opted not to go in-depth since he no longer is a working journalist, but offered a bit of a leak of his own:

"Almost all leakers are lawyers. That's the bottom line.""

As a newly graduated attorney, this revelation weighs on me rather heavily. It is logical, as all agencies within the government employ attorneys, who may not play a direct operational role, but who have access to almost all information flowing through their employing agency. Furthermore, they are more likely to be career bureaucrats rather than transient political appointees.

The troubling aspect of this is that these attorneys are not bound only by National Security Acts, confidentiality clauses and the like. They are also subject to a strict code of ethics prohibiting disclosure of communications flowing through their clients; in this case, the clients are the government agencies involved. This prohibition applies whether or not the attorney agrees, for example, with the policies of the President, FBI, CIA, etc. There is no "glorified whistleblower" status to be earned by a loose-lipped attorney.

I would encourage any attorney who knows of a colleague who is disclosing client information to report the leaker to the appropriate state ethics board (which is your responsibility under the Rules of Ethics). Only by making an example of those who disgrace the legal profession in this manner, can the integrity of the profession be preserved, along with the client secrets that just may be protecting our citizens.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

...Shall Not be Infringed

Hat tip to AirMotor for bringing up the issue of Second Amendment rights, and the attempts to seize guns from citizens in a time of "emergency". His note can be found here: http://airmotor.townhall.com/Default.aspx?id=3&contentGuid=18d525fa-ebbe-4d66-8f83-1ee391c8607d

I was having a similar discussion with a colleague the other day, unrelated to this Senate bill. There has not been a significant Supreme Court decision involving the Second Amendment since 1939 (other than the peripheral issue of gun-free zones around schools). Further, the Second Amendment has never been explicitly applied to the states, as have the First, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments (These rulings were rationalized by stretching the verbage of the 14th Amendment, but that is an entirely separate debate).

If I had confidence in our Supreme Court, I would almost hope for a New Orleans-like case to be appealed to the Supreme Court so that we can have a firm ruling that the right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed."
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why Do We Fight?

 I am privileged to have a college classmate who is a Marine and has experience in the Iraq theater.  He recently sent me an email regarding the war strategy and where we are in the grand scheme. Given the flaming rhetoric that often accompanies this subject, I thought it relevant to convey the thoughts of someone better versed than I in military strategy and history:

"The gain is the opportunity to plant a stable, freely-elected Arab state in the Middle East. Not an American democracy, not even a liberal democracy, but a starting point that when their economy comes online will provide a long term, significant impact on other governments by beginning to eradicate the poverty and ideology that breeds future terrorists. What is frustrating is that we do not better articulate our vision (this is not about an"exit strategy"- maybe that is why), but it's hard to get it into a 10 second sound bite. (Also stating we want a free Iraq to incite a free Iran is also a tough diplomatic position to claim out loud). And candidly, most Americans can't see that far down the road. We live for 1-2 years and the problem is the Global War on Terror is correctly named and beyond the scope of the American instant gratification lens. It is a decade long war and will go places beyond Iraq and Afghanistan. Realize it (if only for future generation's sake). The alternative is disastrous. To leave too early will not only encourage future conflict but it sends the worst signal to those who would potentially be our allies in this fight that we will not be there for them. Unfortunately that signal already has precedent in the past."

Obviously, this letter pleads for patience. The real problem is that American's are impatient. We want what we want and we want it right now. If we have to wait in line, wait on hold, wait for service, or wait for results, we tend to decide it is not worth our time and walk away. The concept of delayed gratification is as foreign to Americans as living debt free.

However, if something is important enough (or we believe that something is important enough) we can wait, endure, and prevail. This is a goal that is crucial, and worth our patience and endurance.

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

~John Stewart Mill
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »