Merry Generic Winter Day-Off With No Religious Content

[Anne Elk]

Don't you attorney folk have to submit resumes and transcripts and certified bar results and such before you can practice?

[Pretty Little Flower]

I know this should go on Politics (and Adder has posted articles about it there), but fuck that. Senior pentagon official "outing" firms that represent Gitmo detainees and suggesting that their corporate clients withdraw their business from those firms? What the fuck is going on?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/13/wa...rtner=homepage

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Pretty Little Flower
I know this should go on Politics (and Adder has posted articles about it there), but fuck that. Senior pentagon official "outing" firms that represent Gitmo detainees and suggesting that their corporate clients withdraw their business from those firms? What the fuck is going on?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/13/wa...rtner=homepage

fuck that. I hear you support Dead Prez. you know they advocate robbing white pizza delivery guys, right? I call on your clients (the white ones at least- 100%?) to boycott you.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
fuck that. I hear you support Dead Prez. you know they advocate robbing white pizza delivery guys, right? I call on your clients (the white ones at least- 100%?) to boycott you.

I'm confident all of your clients are fully on board with all of the political positions of all of the bands you have ever seen in concert.

My clients are NOT 100% white, jerk face. I did some pro bono landlord-tenant work back in '98 or '99. Representing a tenant! I am pretty sure that the client was latino. Or asian. Or something like that. It made me feel really good about myself. Especially after the case ended and I did not have to actually talk to her any more.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Pretty Little Flower
I know this should go on Politics (and Adder has posted articles about it there), but fuck that. Senior pentagon official "outing" firms that represent Gitmo detainees and suggesting that their corporate clients withdraw their business from those firms? What the fuck is going on?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/13/wa...rtner=homepage

At least our clients have higher priorities than toeing some stupid political line (like, you know, winning their cases and getting their deals done), so his protestations are meaningless. I hope.

[Fugee]

My cousin's oldest son (Nick) is transferring mid-year to a school in the Twin Cities and my cousin called to ask if I'd consider letting Nick live with me.

Housing is fairly tight near his college (especially mid-year), Nick's a good kid, and I have a guest bedroom.

But I'm pretty used to living alone and right now the guest bedroom is full of a lot of stuff I'd have to find other places for.

Would you do it and, if so, would you charge rent?

[Sparklehorse]

Originally posted by Fugee
My cousin's oldest son (Nick) is transferring mid-year to a school in the Twin Cities and my cousin called to ask if I'd consider letting Nick live with me.

Housing is fairly tight near his college (especially mid-year), Nick's a good kid, and I have a guest bedroom.

But I'm pretty used to living alone and right now the guest bedroom is full of a lot of stuff I'd have to find other places for.

Would you do it and, if so, would you charge rent?

My niece lived with me last summer. PM me if you want details. Your PM box is full.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Pretty Little Flower
I know this should go on Politics (and Adder has posted articles about it there), but fuck that. Senior pentagon official "outing" firms that represent Gitmo detainees and suggesting that their corporate clients withdraw their business from those firms? What the fuck is going on?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/13/wa...rtner=homepage

Weren't similar steps argued regarding firms who represented clients who opposed the affirmative action programs at Michigan before the Supreme Court?

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Weren't similar steps argued regarding firms who represented clients who opposed the affirmative action programs at Michigan before the Supreme Court?

While clients are free to make hiring decisions and whatever criteria they want, and while we can debate the wisdom of "punishing" a firm for taking on unpopular clients, particularly as a pro bono matter (it strikes me as unwise, whether it be firms that do death penalty work or firms that represent clients in affirmative action challenges), it seems a very different situation when senior government officials start telling our country's corporations not to patronize law firms that take positions in legal cases that are thought to be contrary to the official positions of the current administration. What next? Outing firms that do pro bono work for organizations that are deemed by the government to be pro-abortion?

[Tables R Us]

Originally posted by Pretty Little Flower
I know this should go on Politics (and Adder has posted articles about it there), but fuck that. Senior pentagon official "outing" firms that represent Gitmo detainees and suggesting that their corporate clients withdraw their business from those firms? What the fuck is going on?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/13/wa...rtner=homepage

I consider this good news. The more pro bono pinko lefty lawyers do for terrorists, the less time they have to spend pushing their agenda in areas that cost taxpayers real money.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Pretty Little Flower
While clients are free to make hiring decisions and whatever criteria they want, and while we can debate the wisdom of "punishing" a firm for taking on unpopular clients, particularly as a pro bono matter (it strikes me as unwise, whether it be firms that do death penalty work or firms that represent clients in affirmative action challenges), it seems a very different situation when senior government officials start telling our country's corporations not to patronize law firms that take positions in legal cases that are thought to be contrary to the official positions of the current administration. What next? Outing firms that do pro bono work for organizations that are deemed by the government to be pro-abortion?

this got me to thinking........ can Fugee's second cousin stay at your house for awhile? The kid is in college and I bet being around a real brain like you will up the old GPA.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Pretty Little Flower
While clients are free to make hiring decisions and whatever criteria they want, and while we can debate the wisdom of "punishing" a firm for taking on unpopular clients, particularly as a pro bono matter (it strikes me as unwise, whether it be firms that do death penalty work or firms that represent clients in affirmative action challenges), it seems a very different situation when senior government officials start telling our country's corporations not to patronize law firms that take positions in legal cases that are thought to be contrary to the official positions of the current administration. What next? Outing firms that do pro bono work for organizations that are deemed by the government to be pro-abortion?

Your point is completely valid and would seem self-evident to most. Ironically, however, it is often those who claim to be most ardently in favor of limiting government who have the least objection to government officials not acting as though they represent "the People" but instead pushing their own political agendas.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Pretty Little Flower
While clients are free to make hiring decisions and whatever criteria they want, and while we can debate the wisdom of "punishing" a firm for taking on unpopular clients, particularly as a pro bono matter (it strikes me as unwise, whether it be firms that do death penalty work or firms that represent clients in affirmative action challenges), it seems a very different situation when senior government officials start telling our country's corporations not to patronize law firms that take positions in legal cases that are thought to be contrary to the official positions of the current administration. What next? Outing firms that do pro bono work for organizations that are deemed by the government to be pro-abortion?

While I agree that there is something different about the government doing it, I'm not sure the difference is that significant. The power of the private sector, one way or the other, is often more substantial than the government (who's been more succesful censoring media--the government or advertisers who boycott certain shows?). Bear in mind that the list of firms became public because of a FOIA request (albeit from a conservative commentator), not because the government was "outing" these firms.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Your point is completely valid and would seem self-evident to most. Ironically, however, it is often those who claim to be most ardently in favor of limiting government who have the least objection to government officials not acting as though they represent "the People" but instead pushing their own political agendas.

You mean just as the people most ardently in favor of using government for the redistribution of wealth are often those least likely to be significantly affected by that redistribution?

[Sidd Finch]

The old San Francisco armory building has been bought by a web-based porn company specializing in S&M films.


I love this city.



http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...AG0INI8PD1.DTL