Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (82792)	11/2/2004 1:09:24 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793840

VOLOKH - Possible Trackbacks Law Schools and Democracy: University of Colorado law professor Robert Nagel has a provocative op-ed in today's Wall Street Journal titled "Law Schools Are Bad for Democracy." Nagel ponders the persistence of "myths" about the 2000 election, such as the claim that President Bush is an "illegitimate" President, and the "lawyering up" of the electoral process. The essay is only available on-line to subscribers, but here's a taste: "To understand the reckless willingness to put a crucial element of our constitutional system at risk, it is necessary to understand some of what goes on in our law schools -- and thus in the minds of members of America's most powerful profession. Consider one aspect of the Florida myth that has some basis in reality. It may well be that more people in Florida intended to vote Gore than Bush and that the Bush victory was based on mistakes in marking ballots. To the extent that this is the basis for Democratic outrage, the facts do not matter because the outrage is not based on how the marked ballots were counted but on the failure of the marked ballots to reflect true intentions. But to what kind of mind is it a profound injustice that some voters either did not have the intention that is now attributed to them by the Democrats or, if they did, failed to implement their intention?" The answer is that it is an injustice to those for whom abstractions matter more than actual behavior. And nowhere is that preference more ascendant than in the legal academy. I am not referring to small professional quirks, but to recurrent, fundamental instincts that shape the nature of acceptable argument and of American law. The essay closes: "Legal education shapes lawyers' thinking, and lawyers help to shape American culture -- particularly the political culture. Unfortunately, this education breeds and dignifies some dangerous inclinations. It encourages people to favor constructed idealizations over real life. And it confuses the skills of argumentation with morality. The legions of lawyers encamped across the country to litigate their way to political victory are the embodiment of a more insidious process -- the penetration of our society by a relentlessly adversarial mindset, one that is entirely ready to make our democracy unworkable." I think it's safe to say Professor Nagel already has tenure.

To: LindyBill who wrote (82792)	11/2/2004 1:22:18 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793840

I was just looking at another thread, and was surprised to read "Huge lines of Kerry voters in my precinct". How did he know? Were they singing Kerry fight songs? Do they have a secret handshake? A codeword? ("Hi there, I'm Reporting for Duty" -nudge, nudge) Everyone at my precinct was quiet, polite, and normal and if they were all rabid Bush-hating Kerry voters, they were very nice ones. It took me all of five minutes to vote. I will say that our small yuppie suburb always does things efficiently. They have a separate table where, if you are in the wrong precinct, they figure out where you should go, and show you on this big map where it is, and they write down the directions. They gave me a tiny American flag when I finished, which brought tears to my eyes.