Political Hay
Birds of a Feather
What does the Blago flap have to do with Thomas Perrelli’s presence on the Obama team?
As the year 2008 winds down and President Bush’s days in office draw to a close, liberals all over the world are celebrating the Iraq shoe-throwing incident. But this only illustrates that the Bush’s efforts in Iraq have proved a tremendous success, given that a member of the Iraqi press has managed to outdo even Western media types who, despite their best efforts, have never laid a glove on W.
However, just in time for the holidays, the liberal media have received a Fitzmas present, though not of the sort for which they wished. No, after years of beating the Bushes for a chance to take down the 43rd president of the United States, they find themselves in the position of having to defend one of their own, via the Blagojevich pay-for-play scandal and the incoming Obama administration’s alleged involvement therein.
And in a seemingly unrelated matter, we have learned that the “office” of President-elect has swelled its crimson tide by tapping Harvard chum Thomas Perrelli for its Justice Department transition team. Now, what does the Blago flap have to do with Perrelli’s presence on the Obama team?
For those who remember the Terri Schiavo case, Mr. Perrelli was one of a team of lawyers representing Michael Schiavo’s efforts to end the life of that defenseless woman. Mr. Perrelli’s firm, Jenner & Block, honored him for his work which allowed the state of Florida to take the life of an innocent woman whose official cause of death was tragicomically listed as “undetermined.”
Also lauded by his firm were those lawyers who made “exceptional pro bono contributions on behalf of Death Row prisoners.” Yes, such is the state of the legal profession in this country that supporters of innocent life have reason to fear it, while convicted killers can depend on it for a rigorous defense.
We know what Shakespeare said about lawyers; it only seems more appropriate when applied to recent presidents. Is it any coincidence that neither Ronald Reagan nor the Bushes had law degrees and managed for the most part to elude liberal prosecution? Or that the last elected Republican president who was a lawyer was also “a crook”?
Yet Richard Nixon’s sins seem penny-ante in comparison to the goings on of our most recent lawyerly president; but not to hear the media tell it. A two-bit burglary by the Watergate bunglers was treated as a capital crime, while the reprehensible offenses — both illegal and immoral — committed by Bill Clinton were pooh-poohed as mere randy behavior by the Teflon one.
The sad part of all of this is that we have a right to expect that a United States president — the chief executor of the law of the land as laid out in our Constitution — should have at least a working grasp of those laws and the moral strictures behind them. And this should be even more true of those who are lawyers; which brings us back to Obama and his advisors. In a presidential debate in February, he was asked about his part in the congressional intervention to save the life of Terri Schiavo; a life Perrelli fought so hard to snuff. The Big O’s answer was most illuminating:
It’s hard to say what’s more disturbing here: knowing that the next leader of the free world is so wedded to popular opinion that he will ignore what he perceives to be the law, or that he was allowed to pass his ignorance of the U.S. Constitution on to others in the guise of teaching.
Either way, it appears that the makeup of his administration and the way in which it seeks to suppress information before it is even installed recalls that of his fellow law professor from Arkansas. And both of these legal scholars would be better served had they sought to know better the wording of U.S. Code Title 18, Section 4, which reads:
Now maybe Mr. Perrelli, a former counsel to Janet Reno — whose rein of terror included the Waco Massacre and the midnight raid on Elian Gonzalez — together with Greg Craig, Clinton’s Impeachment trial mouthpiece and brave defender of John Hinckley, Jr. and Fidel Castro’s interests in the Gonzalez case, can help Obama out with the legal and ethical implications of all of this. After all, these are the legal eagles who gave us the most ethical administration in history, right?
Letter to the Editor View all comments (15) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by Lisa Fabrizio
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2008/12/17/birds-of-a-feather
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Jason | 12.17.08 @ 7:12AM
Worse than ignorance, Obama has contempt for the Constitution.
http://rightklik.blogspot.com/
Don Lydey| 12.17.08 @ 8:39AM
Your use of the term Big "O" for our President elect casts an unfavorable light upon the only real Big "O", Oscar Robertson of University of Cinncinati fame. I would certainly hate to see the Big "O" saddled with such a burden.
Tim| 12.17.08 @ 11:06AM
I had the opportunity to chat with some college kids that are home for the Holidays.
These six fine young folks are only somewhat socially conservative and well adjusted good old fashion college kids mixing fun and education with dreams of a better future for themselves and society at large.
Only one of the six knew what Obama's middle name was while the other five laughed and thought I was joking but then became reflective when they were assured that I wasn't joking.
My hunch is that millions of Americans will give Obama their middle finger when they hear his middle name announced to the world on a cold wintery January 20th 2009.
They will do so not because they are anti muslim but rather because they were dupped and will feel betrayed.
Most folks like straight and honest talk and are tired of the old smoke and mirror politics.
Blago, the Christmas gift that keeps on giving may even give illinois a Republican Senator if a special election is held and wouldn't that be a hoot?
Obama's seat no less........You can't make this stuff up if you try.
Dai Alanye | 12.17.08 @ 12:29PM
Comically, BO's Arabic names mean "Blessing Handsome" according to behindthenames.com.
Talk about masculine monikers! I can hardly wait to learn the meaning of "Obama" in whatever language it came from.
But the true significance is that the essentially non-religious Obama has been saddled with (and boasted about) having names we associate with terrorists. It's a bit like giving a child the names Adolph (noble wolf) or Benito (blessed) and expecting him to be unaffected by them.
We may contrast these with the respectable Timothy (honoring God) and Robert (blockhead [by analogy]). Dai, unsurprisingly, means brilliant one.
dnha14| 12.17.08 @ 12:31PM
I basically agree with the article, but I do take exception to the Shakespeare/Lawyer thing. In the article and everywhere else the comment is taken out of context to demean lawyers. In fact, the opposite is true.
The author got the "kill the lawyers" thing all wrong. It’s well to remember that the speaker of the lawyer line, the unsavory Dick the Butcher (his occupation as well as an apt descriptor of his character) was part of a mob planning to overthrow the government. Rather than an indictment of lawyers, the quote in context shows Shakespeare himself to be favorable to lawyers: if the lawyers are dead, who will stand in the way of the plotters? Who would prosecute them? Now, if you're on the side of the plotters, that's another story.
(ok, that's enough for British Lit 201)
Bob| 12.17.08 @ 12:56PM
Did you ask the college kids about McCain's middle name? Did they know it was the significantly un-masculine "Sidney"? Would they have felt "duped"?
Since Obama did not have a choice about his middle name, why should it make a difference? If it does, it is YOUR problem, not his. You should try to get the bigotry out of your heart.
Tim| 12.17.08 @ 1:48PM
Bob,
Bigotory has got nothing to do with it.
All Obama had to do was instruct his campaign to promote his middle name during the campaign and not run away from it.
So it is he and not anyone else that has a problem with his middle name.
But the fact that he tried to conceal his middle name during the campaign is why I refer to it as people being duped.
Of Course, had he been straight and upfront about it he may have fallen just shy of the 270 Electoral votes needed nothwithstanding the historic help from Acorn in some very key states.
But I do agree with you that Obama can't be held accountable to what his middle name is or where he was born. After all, that was some one else's call.
But I think we all would agree that if the main street press had called him by his full name on a regular basis during the entire campaign he would still be Senator Obama and not President elect Obama.
They avoided using Obama's middle name knowing that it may have cost him the election not to do so.
My point is that had they just used it and had he still won the issue would be dead but they didn't and it isn't. Bigotry or not it is a problem of his creation not anyone else's and could have been avoided.
Bob| 12.17.08 @ 1:57PM
Tim, if you don't think it is bigotry, why not hold McCain to the same standard? Why not write that he should not have run away from his middle name? The fact that you highlighted "Hussein" and did not also highlight "Sidney", is certainly bigotry. Why is it even an issue? Using your middle name at a presidential inauguration is, after all, one of our traditions.
Tim| 12.17.08 @ 2:28PM
Bob,
Obama should use his middle name on January 2oth 2009. It is a tradition. You are absolutely right. In fact he should use it as often as possible,
I am simply saying that he should of had the guts to use his middle name during the campaign.
Unless of course he is not proud or afraid of it.
If I were him I would have proudly used my full name regardless of what it was.
He didn't use it because he knows that the name reminds people of the Dictator that used to be in charge of Iraq. He also knew he would have probably lost the election.
But even so, why not proudly use it, after all, he proudly was against the Iraq War as he himself stated over and over.
I am just saying that had he been candid with people and still won that would have been truly the historic win,
But if you win an election by deception and later the truth comes out then things are worse off than before. That is why in the long run Acorn has not helped matters in the long run.
If you go to a car dealer and buy a certain make and model and then after signing the paper work you get your car but it is a totally different make and model wouldn't you feel a little betrayed?
It is the old bait and switch game.
You choose to focus on Bigotry which is your right to do so and I am focusing on the right and wrong aspect of this name issue.
Obviousely, some people would not have voted for Obama because of his middle name but how many or if it would have actually altered the race no one will ever know.
Todd| 12.17.08 @ 5:11PM
I have to agree with Bob on this, anyone who would make up their mind on who to vote for based on a middle name should not bother voting. There were many reasons not to vote for Obama due to his Marxist leanings and his numerous dirty Chicago associates but his middle name being Hussein is not one of them. The cover-up of his Chicago dealings and associates is what we should be upset about and not his middle name.
You might want to discuss something from the article Tim and Bob as there are some interesting points made. Anyone connected with Janet Reno's disgraceful reign as GA is automatically suspect in my book, the fiasco's of Waco and Elian Gonzalez are some of the darkest moments in our country's law enforcement history. Bob will undoubtedly like him since he is a Harvard man so that automatically makes his qualified.
Mary| 12.17.08 @ 5:57PM
Yet Richard Nixon's sins seem penny-ante in comparison to the goings on of our most recent lawyerly president; but not to hear the media tell it. A two-bit burglary by the Watergate bunglers was treated as a capital crime, while the reprehensible offenses -- both illegal and immoral -- committed by Bill Clinton were pooh-poohed as mere randy behavior by the Teflon one.
The difference between Nixon and Clinton is best illustrated by the speech that Nixon gave before he left the White House for good.
In that speech he tried to exculpate his parents from any of his wrong doing.
According to what I've read, his parents were good and God-fearing people. I think they were Quakers, but I could be mistaken.
He probably recognized what an inequity he had saddled them with.
Nixon may have been brooding and beady-eyed, but his family was a sweet slice of Americana. His wife and his kids conducted themselves with a lot of class.
I really enjoyed G. Gordon Liddy's biography. Great courage, great defects. Ayers can only wish he was in Liddy's league. What a pusillanimous punk.
As to the Hussein thing. If it means anything, and I don't know that it does, its meaning lies in what Tim has stated: why not have used it freely before, if you're going to use it as a sort of testimonial now?
The danger for Obama is that this steady drip upon his vague, detached persona will begin to fill in some of that blank slate before he can even take office.
It's probably already begun to scratch the patina a bit.
What he has going for him is a comparative analysis with an outgoing president who is so little liked or respected, along with the sizeable good-will of the electorate relative to his race and to his win.
Mary| 12.17.08 @ 6:26PM
I meant iniquity instead of inequity.
links of london jewellery | 9.10.09 @ 10:39PM
Thanks for your information, i have read it, very good！