Live by the Sword/ Die by the Sword

One of the most entertaining things about being a lawyer is watching lawyers who discover in the middle of an argument that an opposing position would be better. Lawyers are clever folk. My favorite recent example was watching a lawyer for an entity that shall remain nameless. He went from claiming that the entity was not an insurance company to claiming that it really was just like an insurance company. The man gave a very moving speech about injustice and equity and all the rest of it--all on the subject of whether this particular thing was an insurance company or not.

I think this kind of thing is probably why the general public thinks that lawyers are intellectually dishonest. And it is a mean sort of entertainment to watch someone who has successfully convinced everyone of a particular proposition find out that he really needed to show the opposite thing is true. And most lawyers in this position do tend to squirm a bit.

Politicians and Journalists are probably the two professions that engage in "flip-flopping" the most. The charge against John Kerry was damning because someone who changes his mind and says "I really believed it all along" is being intellectually dishonest. Nevermind that there are worse forms of dishonesty. Giant bald faced lies don't make a person look as bad from a pure image perspective as wishy washy statements about "what I meant to say."

Because journalists police each other and aren't supposed to have opinions anyways, they're much harder to catch at it than politicians. Lately, there has been a lot of rah-rah cheering for the free market. Which is somewhat ironic considering that most journalists work for organizations that are getting closer and closer to monopolies. For example, Robert Samuelson's column this week for newsweek was on "Competition's Quiet Victory." It was a downright heartwarming ode to the free market while boosting a Clinton appointee's book (published by the American Enterprise Institute).

Unfortunately, journalists don't have judges other than their audience. So, we probably won't get the pleasure of watching Mr. Samuelson eat his words in the event that someone discovers those arcane antitrust laws and wants to enforce them to gin up some more competition.

As a side note, Is there just one phone company now? When I get crochety and old like Andy Rooney, can I actually slam down the phone and say "I'm not doing business with you anymore?"

Back on topic--There are a whole bunch of checks and balances in American democracy that are supposed to keep politicians, journalists, and lawyers intellectually honest or very uncomfortable when they're being dishonest. George W. Bush is an interesting phenomenon in that he doesn't appear to be ashamed of his lies, half-truths, and wrong assertions. We will never get to watch him tap dance the way John Kerry did. Maybe it's because the press is muzzled. Or maybe it's because we're being ruled by a tightly knit cabal of Republicans. I haven't been able to figure out what is wrong with the man. I think his appeal can be explained in part because he is a man who will live by the sword and die by the sword. He doesn't change. That is appealing after watching leader after leader from Nixon to Clinton squirm. For people who can't or don't think, it may appear that we finally have an honest leader.