the archives of f/k/a . . .

In two astute posts today — The Stupid Party and More on the Stupid Party – Prof. Steven Bainbridge

has taken “his” Republican Party to task for arrogant and ham-headed behavior this past week in the

House of Representatives.  After reading Avi Schick’s column today from The New Republic on the

Kerry Campaign’s decision to hide John Kerry’s role as the leading sponsor (since 1997) of the Workplace

Religious Freedom Act, I can assure you that the Republicans have no monopoly on stupidity.

Please read the entire article.  Here are the opening paragraphs:

“On July 31, 1997, John Kerry took to the Senate floor to introduce legislation that, in his own

words, “would protect workers from on-the-job discrimination related to religious beliefs and

practices” by ensuring “that employers have a meaningful obligation to reasonably accommodate

their employees’ religious practices.” . . .

 

“If you’ve never heard of WRFA, you’re not alone. Despite having been the bill’s lead sponsor,

Kerry refused to mention WRFA, let alone take credit for it, once it became clear that he would be

the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee. In doing so, he passed up a trifecta of opportunities:

to connect with communities of faith; to challenge President Bush’s fealty to corporate interests;

and to present his Senate record as aggressive and idealistic. But WRFA also became wrapped up

in abortion politics, and so Kerry refused to speak about it for fear of offending liberal advocacy

groups. His campaign’s ham-handed approach to the bill points to everything that is wrong with

the Democratic Party’s current treatment of faith.”

  Click here for a rant from Change for America against Kerry’s support of WRFA; and here for the

ACLU’s case against the proposed Act.   [see our post towards a "democratic morality" ]

 

all sorts of fools
moon-gaze too…
winter prayers

                  Kobayashi ISSA

Ross Fishman of Red Jackal Ads has responded to the questions we raised about his services

creating glossy-magazine-style Yellow Pages ads for lawyers, in a Comment that deserves to be 

read in full. ( Ernie touted the “tasteful” ads earlier this month.)  I’d like to highlight two issues: 

 

   Ross Fishman says:  “[Y]ou comment skeptically that this will inevitably lead to”…

higher profits for some lawyers, without an increase in the quality of legal services”? Well, yes,

that’s our goal.  We’re an ad agency, not Legal Aid; we can’t practice law or control the quality

of the legal services of our clients. Our specific goal is to generate significantly higher profits for

some lawyers — our clients — just as mega-ad agency Leo Burnett’s goal has long been to generate

more sales and higher profits for Pillsbury using the Dough Boy. Hey, it’s the American way.”

   winter nears –
   in the dog’s eyes
   the wolf

                         Billie Wilson

Your Editor’s Reply:   An ad agency may not have a special duty toward the legal client, but lawyers

certainly do.   Consumers can readily tell whether Pillsbury biscuits are worth their premium price, and lose

little giving it a try.   But, the average consumer of legal services cannot readily judge quality or price, which

is one reason why clients are given fiduciary protection.  A lawyer’s using PR image-making (and faux empathy)

to create a platform for higher fees, unrelated to the quality of services, does not jibe with my concept of

fiduciary responsibility.  Unlike the legal profession, Pillsbury has never claimed to put its customers’ interests first and has never sworn to do so. 

 

  Ross notes that Lawyers Weekly, despite its excellent work, may not always “get every single

fact correct,” but confirms that “Lorne [MacLean, the ad client in the story] had just spun off his divorce

practice from his partner.”

the wolf too
peeks out his hole…
autumn dusk

 

Issa, translated by D. G. Lanoue

 

Your Editor’s Reply: This still leaves unanswered whether the LW USA article was correct in stating that

MacLean, who had so recently started his own firm, had ”increased his firm’s already significant profits by

more than 200 percent” and did so “By simply changing the design of his Yellow Pages ad.”  Whether

used by a lawyer or an ad agency, if the quote is misleading, it should not figure so prominently on Red

Jackal’s website. 

 

    in the dark

the trap snaps shut

    silent dawn

 

                            Jim Kacian

 

 

p.s.  My family name starts with ”jackal,” but I’m not sure I’d want that scavenger-predator as

my logo or corporate identity.   The image of the famous movie-character killer for hire doesn’t

inspire me, either.  Guess I’ve gone soft with all this haiku around.

 

   

There are quite a few meaty topics to masticate at my favorite weblogs:     

                                                                                                                                       

 

Eschewing Obfuscation 

 

  Multi-linking Networkian extraordinaire J. Craig Williams scolds judges for using

arcane and darnright obscurant language in their opinions.  Craig’s research diligence

reaches supernumerary levels in this posting. [Harvey Keitel and Abe Vigoda learn the

meaning of supernumerary in their super-silly-ously entertaining film Crime Spree.]

 

Plain-speaking Jerry Lawson joins in the plea of James Robertson and Cindy Chick

that KM jargon be avoided when “pitching KM implementation.”  Jerry earned our gratitude last

year by observing that “the word blog makes this powerful new form of Internet communication

seem trivial.” Jargonophobes of the world unite!

 

Eschewing Expert Deception

 

LegalReader points to a new case out of Massachusetts that should delight Ted and        

Walter, while pleasing ethicalEsq, too (from LexisOne): –

Court Issues $20,000 Judgment Against Expert Witness; Neurologist Misled Jurors
A Massachusetts General Hospital neurologist has been ordered to pay more than $20,000

in legal fees after a judge in Lawence ruled this week that he deliberately misled a jury in a

malpractice case, forcing her to order a new trial.
by Scott Allen, The Boston Globe

 

Eschewing Weblog Sell-Outs

 

I f you missed Billmon’s LA Times op/ed piece on Sept. 26, 2004, Blogging Sells, and Sells Out, you can

find excerpts at netlawblog, decrying “glorified billboards” and “sponsored blogs.”  Jerry Lawson asks: 

“Does the future really look as bleak as this? Sellouts will always be with us, but one of the beauties of

blogging is that it gives the authentic, honest voices, who will also always be with us, a chance to be heard.”  

 

  Not Eschewing Enough 

 

1). Malaprops and Misnomers:   Today, Bill Gratsch at Blawg.org mentions the new Law.com weblog network

and says “it appears they have randomly selected seven blawgs covering a fairly wide range of subjects.”  Since

Bill has seen close-up the varying quality among weblawgs, he surely must know that Law.com could not have

possibly chosen these eight quality weblogs randomly  — they are the wheat, not the chaff.    Dictionaries: use ‘em,

don’t abuse ‘em!

 

2) Self-flaggelation based on megablogimania:  The admirable Jim Moore ruminates today on the lack

of blog success in achieving political and social-humanitarian goals.  I want to humbly suggest that Jim expects

far too much from weblog technology.  It is merely a means of communication.  Having this technology has not

changed human nature, increased altruism, nor alterred significantly the sources of power on this planet.  (see our post)

 

 

first frost

only a dead fly

in the mailbox

 

 

abandoned factory

a cloud rests

on the smokestack

George Swede from Almost Unseen: Selected Haiku of George Swede 

(Brooks Books, 2000) 

 

 

by dagosan:

faithful husband

enjoying egg salad –

every day

                                    [Nov 22, 2004] 

 

                                                             – you can find the eschew obfuscation bumper sticker here at cafepress.com–

  In Paper bag politics Vincent Fiore says:

If the stunning election victories of the Republican Party are to mean anything, they must continue

to dance with what “brung’em to the dance,” and that is the moral and ethical concerns that created

the majority they now enjoy, without the arrogance and abuse of power that was so completely

abandoned by their Democratic Party colleagues in the early 1990’s.

first snow falling
I trust in his hand…
bridge by the gate

entrusting it to young folk
I sleep…
cozy wood fire

 

trusting its fate
to the autumn wind…
duckweed

. . . . . for more poems on trust by Issa, click here; translated by David G. Lanoue . . . . . . . . .