# The New Republican Hypocrisy **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 24, 2005, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613 "2005-10-24T03:15:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/301 "2005-10-27T14:02:28Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > So Scaife paid her to file the lawsuit? Or Scaife helped pay her legal fees to keep it going? There is an enormous difference between the two. Paying someone to file a nuisance suit is lower than low. Paying the expenses to keep an otherwise valid lawsuit going is fairly reasonable. > > Evil Captor’s link shows how the settlement that Paula Jones wanted was scuttled by others. That happened well after the suit was filed, obviously. > > I was responding to Hentor’s claim that the suit itself was part of a smear fest. That the timing of Jones’ suit implied it was part of a conspiracy. It may have been used by Clinton’s enemies, but I don’t know that Jones filed the lawsuit with anything other than reasonably honest intentions. That’s so, if you believe Jones’ lawyers’ contention that, although they worked with partisans who wanted to bring Clinton down, their efforts were solely directed toward their clients’ interests and the lawsuit itself was not suggested by any of the conspirators. I don’t know that I would believe them all that wholeheartedly if I were you. They had every reason to publicly make such claims and many reasons not to , regardless of the truth of the matter. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/302 "2005-10-27T14:28:50Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > That’s so, if you believe Jones’ lawyers’ contention that, although they worked with partisans who wanted to bring Clinton down, their efforts were solely directed toward their clients’ interests and the lawsuit itself was not suggested by any of the conspirators. I don’t know that I would believe them all that wholeheartedly if I were you. They had every reason to publicly make such claims and many reasons not to , regardless of the truth of the matter. True. But plenty of claims are funded by outside parties with an axe to grind. Gun liability suits are helped along by Handgun Control Inc-type organizations. That doesn’t bear on the credibility of the plaintiff. Now, that said, there are reasons for doubting Ms. Jones’ good faith. But there’s no question that she had the right to sue Mr. Clinton, and he had the legal duty to respond truthfully to questioned proposed during the deposition arising from that suit. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/303 "2005-10-27T14:44:00Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > So Scaife paid her to file the lawsuit? Or Scaife helped pay her legal fees to keep it going? Scaife funded the entire operation, paid the costs of the lawyers he set out to find something to get Clinton for, took on the Jones case she’d already abandoned, filed all the paperwork, did all the arguing, etc. Her role was as someone to put up front of the mikes at the press conferences, and help disguise the operation as “poor Paula deserving her day in court”. The actual amount she was paid for her role is not public, but the visible signs of her lifestyle dramatically \*improved \* during the process. Look into Larry Klayman and Judicial Watch while you’re at it. > [@](#): > > Paying someone to file a nuisance suit is lower than low. Ain’t it, though. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/304 "2005-10-27T15:00:35Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I don’t actually work for a company that has a contract with the Department of Widgets. There really is no such agency. I suppose it was inevitable that this would come out. > > _sob_ > > Can anyone ever forgive me? And so begins Widgetgate. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/305 "2005-10-27T15:05:18Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > And so begins Widgetgate. I knew all along he that he really does work for the Department of Thingamajigs. It was a very poor coverup. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/306 "2005-10-27T15:24:02Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > I knew all along he that he really does work for the Department of Thingamajigs. It was a very poor coverup. I heard he was getting kickbacks from the Department of Kludges and Kruft. ---
**Author:** ![Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4af34b/32.png) [@Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bob_Loblaw_1)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/307 "2005-10-27T15:25:53Z")
Sorry guys, there is no difference here between Bricker’s “I am a lawyer” and Clinton’s “I did not have sex with that woman.” Both are technically correct, but both are lies. Now Bricker’s is a hilarious lie, Clinton’s kinda of pathetic. But in a way, they are both real cute, because they are both told by non-practicing lawyers trying to weasel around. And Bricker’s was so cute: I’m a lawyer, and we lawyers would all argree. Shit dude, I’ve never met lawyers who agree, they argue as a reflex. I know a guy, he claims to have a law degree, and might. He says he never took the bar, but claims that anyone who studies the law can call themselves a lawyer. I don’t call bullshit to his face, but go look it up. He’s right. But trust me, he ain’t a lawyer. (No, that’s just an expression, you don’t need to trust me, have your own opinion.) But what was really amusing about Bricker’s claim was that he threw out the “I am a lawyer” as though that was a certification that his opinions were correct, not merely that he had training in the law, looking things up and arguing. In the future Bricker, when whoosing newbies, you would be more accurate saying I’m a non-practicing lawyer. Bob Loblaw ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/308 "2005-10-27T15:29:55Z")
> [@Bob Loblaw](#): > > Sorry guys, there is no difference here between Bricker’s “I am a lawyer” and Clinton’s “I did not have sex with that woman.” Both are technically correct, but both are lies. > > Now Bricker’s is a hilarious lie, Clinton’s kinda of pathetic. But in a way, they are both real cute, because they are both told by non-practicing lawyers trying to weasel around. And Bricker’s was so cute: I’m a lawyer, and we lawyers would all argree. Shit dude, I’ve never met lawyers who agree, they argue as a reflex. > > I know a guy, he claims to have a law degree, and might. He says he never took the bar, but claims that anyone who studies the law can call themselves a lawyer. I don’t call bullshit to his face, but go look it up. He’s right. But trust me, he ain’t a lawyer. (No, that’s just an expression, you don’t need to trust me, have your own opinion.) > > But what was really amusing about Bricker’s claim was that he threw out the “I am a lawyer” as though that was a certification that his opinions were correct, not merely that he had training in the law, looking things up and arguing. > > In the future Bricker, when whoosing newbies, you would be more accurate saying I’m a non-practicing lawyer. > > Bob Loblaw what absolute bullshit. **Bricker’s** statement “I am a lawyer” is not just “technically true”, it’s also “actually true” and therefore, not in any way a lie. whether or not he’s practising law is irrelevant. now, if he’d been disbarred, for example, **then** I would agree that the statement of “I am a lawyer” would be a falsehood. If he’d studied law, never took the bar, never passed the bar, the statement of “I am a lawyer” would be a falsehood. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/309 "2005-10-27T15:30:10Z")
> [@Bob Loblaw](#): > > Now these questions show that “bought or sold” marijuana is not compound within the meaning of the law, and I agree with that. The standard is “a person” not the world class smartest person. A number of people here who do not agree with me in general have offered that the definition is less than artful use of the language. It is not just compound once, it is also complex. It consists of four major clauses, the first clause followed by three subparts, the second of those subparts containing an “or” relating it to the third, but not necessarily the first. Each of those subparts then contains a series of conjunctions. > > That is not reasonably understandable. Thats the best you can do? Reciting some 5th grade english class to try and support an untenable position? Next time, perhaps you could diagram a sentence, or get into the proper verb tenses. You gotta try harder than that next time. > [@Bricker](#): > > And the other questions he was asked? And the fact that his lawyer asked the question himself on cross, waiving any objection? Have you addressed that yet? No, he hasn’t. But maybe that’s cause the Department of Whatchamacallit has been surveilling him. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/310 "2005-10-27T15:46:46Z")
> [@Bob Loblaw](#): > > … I’ve never met lawyers who agree, they argue as a reflex. No they don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/311 "2005-10-27T15:58:18Z")
> [@Sevastopol](#): > > No they don’t. Yes they do. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/312 "2005-10-27T15:58:37Z")
> [@Bob Loblaw](#): > > Sorry guys, there is no difference here between Bricker’s “I am a lawyer” and Clinton’s “I did not have sex with that woman.” Both are technically correct, but both are lies. Like I said: your ignorance doesn’t make him a liar. You don’t know what “lawyer” means, and I guess your friend didn’t either. Or maybe he knows that you don’t know and is fucking with you. **Bricker** is a lawyer by virtue of passing the bar exam. About half the Senate is made up of non-practicing lawyers. > [@](#): > > I don’t call bullshit to his face, but go look it up. He’s right. But trust me, he ain’t a lawyer. Webster doesn’t agree. Lawyer _n_: One whose profession is to give legal advice and assistance to clients and represent them in court or in other legal matters. A professional person authorized to practice law; conducts lawsuits or gives legal advice. Wikipedia defines a lawyer, more precisely, as “[A] person licensed by the state to advise clients in legal matters and represent them in courts of law and in other forms of dispute resolution.” > [@Sevastopol](#): > > No they don’t. That’s not an argument, it’s just contradiction! ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/313 "2005-10-27T16:43:41Z")
> [@Bob Loblaw](#): > > Hey, Updike, you’re “I’ve noticed” is attached on the end in a fragment. It’s understood that “you’ve noticed”. You’re the only one posting. But even if you feel you need the clarification, it should be at the front of the sentence. Dick. I mean asshole. You mean _your_ “I’ve noticed”. “You’re” is a contraction of “you are”; “your” is the possessive form. If you want to play that game, it’s (contraction; “its” is possessive) always a good practice to make sure you understand grammar/spelling yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4af34b/32.png) [@Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bob_Loblaw_1)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/314 "2005-10-27T18:03:59Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > Yes they do. I’m laughing my ass off. If my lawyer friends and I get together (and I’m still not going to say what I do for a living, or what my legal training is, it’s none of anyone’s business) and we get together regularly, we will cheerfully admit that the guys who are “transactional” lawyers are really lawyers, but not in the same sense as litigators, civil and criminal. A guy who doesn’t practice is not referred to as a lawyer, and the retired guys always tell people they are retired, or no longer practicing, or inactive. I know a guy who is a mortgage broker with a license to practice and it’s active status. He holds himself out as a mortgage broker and says he no longer practices if asked if he is a lawyer. Geraldo Rivera fucking discloses that he is not a practicing lawyer if he mentions it on his show. Shit, by this standard, Howard Cosell could have gone around giving legal opinions saying “I am a lawyer.” Dabney Coleman is a lawyer. Tony LaRussa is a lawyer. No, none of those people in introducing themselves to others should withhold their real profession and say they are a lawyer, if they do, they are engaged in concealment, negligent and intentional misrepresentation. Anyone relying on their opinons would want to know that they don’t practice law, and Bricker was trying to get me to rely on his opinion. Now Steve Young, the former 49ers quarterback really is a lawyer. He practices law in a law firm. Presumably he is legally eligible to play football, and may on weekends. He is not a football player. He was a football player. Oh my God. I just realized that Bill Clinton has a government office and may occasionally take contract jobs for the government like the disaster relief stuff. Has anybody seen Bricker and Clinton in the same place at the same time!!!??? This is just so damn funny! ---
**Author:** ![Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4af34b/32.png) [@Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bob_Loblaw_1)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/315 "2005-10-27T18:06:12Z")
> [@woodstockbirdybird](#): > > You mean _your_ “I’ve noticed”. “You’re” is a contraction of “you are”; “your” is the possessive form. If you want to play that game, it’s (contraction; “its” is possessive) always a good practice to make sure you understand grammar/spelling yourself. The only time I’ve complained about grammar or spelling was when I was being sarcastic or retaliating for the same. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/316 "2005-10-27T18:31:50Z")
> [@Bob Loblaw](#): > > I’m laughing my ass off. If my lawyer friends and I get together (and I’m still not going to say what I do for a living, or what my legal training is, it’s none of anyone’s business) and we get together regularly, we will cheerfully admit that the guys who are “transactional” lawyers are really lawyers, but not in the same sense as litigators, civil and criminal. A guy who doesn’t practice is not referred to as a lawyer, and the retired guys always tell people they are retired, or no longer practicing, or inactive. I know a guy who is a mortgage broker with a license to practice and it’s active status. He holds himself out as a mortgage broker and says he no longer practices if asked if he is a lawyer. Interesting set of standards. I was a public defender. I’m just curious: did that make me more, or less, of the real “sense” of a lawyer when I was doing that job? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/317 "2005-10-27T18:35:37Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Interesting set of standards. > > I was a public defender. I’m just curious: did that make me more, or less, of the real “sense” of a lawyer when I was doing that job? Oh – and what do you and your lawyer friends say about judges? Are they lawyers? In what “sense”? ---
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/318 "2005-10-27T18:40:47Z")
> [@Bob Loblaw](#): > > I’m laughing my ass off. If my lawyer friends and I get together (and I’m still not going to say what I do for a living, or what my legal training is, it’s none of anyone’s business) and we get together regularly, we will cheerfully admit that the guys who are “transactional” lawyers are really lawyers, but not in the same sense as litigators, civil and criminal. A guy who doesn’t practice is not referred to as a lawyer, and the retired guys always tell people they are retired, or no longer practicing, or inactive. I know a guy who is a mortgage broker with a license to practice and it’s active status. He holds himself out as a mortgage broker and says he no longer practices if asked if he is a lawyer. > > Geraldo Rivera fucking discloses that he is not a practicing lawyer if he mentions it on his show. Shit, by this standard, Howard Cosell could have gone around giving legal opinions saying “I am a lawyer.” Dabney Coleman is a lawyer. Tony LaRussa is a lawyer. No, none of those people in introducing themselves to others should withhold their real profession and say they are a lawyer, if they do, they are engaged in concealment, negligent and intentional misrepresentation. Anyone relying on their opinons would want to know that they don’t practice law, and Bricker was trying to get me to rely on his opinion. > > Now Steve Young, the former 49ers quarterback really is a lawyer. He practices law in a law firm. Presumably he is legally eligible to play football, and may on weekends. He is not a football player. He was a football player. > > Oh my God. I just realized that Bill Clinton has a government office and may occasionally take contract jobs for the government like the disaster relief stuff. Has anybody seen Bricker and Clinton in the same place at the same time!!!??? > > This is just so damn funny! You are an ass and an idiot. Your imaginary friends may not consider someone with **Bricker** ’s qualifications and current job status a lawyer, but the state of Virginia damn well considers him one. If he has passed the bar and is licensed in Virginia, he can give legal advice and perform legal services and charge money for it, and that makes him a lawyer, and you an ass. ---
**Author:** ![Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4af34b/32.png) [@Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bob_Loblaw_1)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/319 "2005-10-27T18:42:44Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Oh – and what do you and your lawyer friends say about judges? Are they lawyers? In what “sense”? When you were a public defender, if you had said “I am a lawyer” it would have been more true than if you were to say that now. As for my friends and acquaintances. Active judges, retired judges, active lawyers (litigators, almost no transactional), retired and inactive lawyers, I even know a guy who is disbarred. Paralegals, secreataries, clerks (once dated one), law professors and writers of legal treatises, legal editors, etc. etc. And there is no subject that if you get a few lawyers together on that all will agree on: none. Absolutely none. At least one will start playing the devil’s advocate if you get half a dozen lawyers together and try to argue that “Hitler was evil”. At least one will start defining evil, point out the family name was Heidler at one point and argue about the appropriateness of past tense because his evil still is causing damage. ---
**Author:** ![Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4af34b/32.png) [@Bob\_Loblaw\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bob_Loblaw_1)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613/320 "2005-10-27T18:45:41Z")
> [@Crotalus](#): > > You are an ass and an idiot. Your imaginary friends may not consider someone with **Bricker** ’s qualifications and current job status a lawyer, but the state of Virginia damn well considers him one. If he has passed the bar and is licensed in Virginia, he can give legal advice and perform legal services and charge money for it, and that makes him a lawyer, and you an ass. Yep, I’m an ass. But Bill Clinton did not have sex with that woman. Bricker is a non-practicing lawyer. He is a government contractor. If he is giving legal advice, I damn well want to know that he is a non-practicing lawyer when he informs me that he is a lawyer. I suppose “it depends on what the meaning of is is”. Hahahahahahaha!!! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republican-hypocrisy/327613.md?page=17)