>A very small percentage of us are corporate piranas. I
>am one. Of course I also defend poor clients in
>criminal cases. Most lawyers are snmall businesspeople
>do low lervel transactional work (writing contracts
>and the like). Of course we are all scum who lie for
>money. Ah well. Maybe one of my brethern/sistern took
>R to the cleaners in a divorce.
are my ears burning or what. and i almost missed this reference to my humble self when i started to skip AN's uninteresting, thankfully brief, autobiographical statement.
i enjoyed reading the customary maladroit attempt at misdirection found in the fatuous statement "of course we [lawyers] are all scum who lie for money." AN you do this silly stuff all the time. a lame attempt to take attention from those lawyers who do lie for money by implying anyone who mentions such malfeasance exists in the legal profession (and who isn't a lawyer) is falsely characterizing the entire legal profession. this technique is called "splitting" in psychiatric circles: one element is all good [usually the person doing the splitting], the other all bad, when the truth, as always, lies somewhere between.
those critical of the extensive abuses perpetrated by the legal profession, chronically unable to police itself, are not monolithic. are not all lawyer haters. and are not all stupid. but that's the way AN characterizes them in his self-serving, illogical, unreasonable, redundant way.
as everyone knows, in california where i live it's very easy to do one's own divorce. this drives the lawyers crazy -- all that easy money walking out the window, or better yet, never arriving. the only time lawyers are used is when there's a very vindictive party, or parties, involved -- when much of the quibbling centers on such legally significant issues as who gets what towels, who's the evil one in the relationship, how much punishment the evil one should suffer, who pays the legal fees, etc. lawyers, generally, flock to such adversarial and money making opportunities like flies to shit. but usually prefer doing so only when one or both of the parties is well healed, or business is slow; it's the old legal deep pockets theory in action. since i'm not well healed, and am bless with positive relationships with women, i've never attracted such attention from the flies.
but more importantly, i've been married to the same lovely lady for over 34 years. no divorce lies in our future. her first husband was lawyer, though. an innocuous, overworked pencil pusher, with big dreams in his younger days. a drunk, too, although the two -- lawyer and drunk -- aren't always related, anymore than is the now and then mistaken belief that all lawyers are trying to be reformed cocaine addicts; or that they're all in psychotherapy because they can't stand themselves or their profession but lack the character and courage to try something else.
AN, i'm glad you qualified your bogus statement about me with "maybe." otherwise you'd look an even bigger dissembler than you are. i love it when you talk dirty.
R
>I don't do family law,
>myself. I prefer defending nice quiet aggravated
>murderers. It's a more peaceful practice. jks
--- Jon Johanning <jjohanning at igc.org> wrote:
> On Saturday, August 16, 2003, at 09:21 PM, R wrote:
>
> > which 1/2 do you prefer? there are several
> statistical sampling
> > procedures
> > we could use. we could start with the
> lawyer/politicians ....
>
> If this discussion is going to get anywhere, we need
> to disaggregate (as
> I believe the economists say) the category
> "lawyers."
>
> Presumably, lawyers who defend poor clients in
> criminal cases would be
> allowed to keep working. (Or do you expect them to
> defend themselves?)
> On the other hand, lawyers working to save scumbag
> multi-zillion-buck
> corporations a few million will walk the plank.
> "Lawyer/politicians"?
> Depends on their politics, I would say.
>
> If you continue this exercise for a while, you will
> probably come to the
> conclusion that the lawyers are not responsible for
> the social evils you
> are trying to combat -- it's (guess what?) the
> economic and class
> structure of the society.
>
> Oh well, one more over-simple strategy bites the
> dust.
>
> Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org
> ________________________________
> How good bad music and bad reasons sound when we
> march against an
> enemy. -- Nietzsche
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk