January 09, 2004
FUTURE LEGAL EXPERT
Law student Robert Corr, the face of intelligent young Australian leftism, asserts that which he cannot support. Read the comments for a feast of evasion, confusion, and denial.
Tim,
If you're sick of the "Methinks . . ." quote, here's another great one from the friggin' bard:
"Better thee than me." The trouble is, it only works when the other guy actually admits screwing up, so maybe it's not such a useful quote after all.
And, hey, Michael Moore IS fat. Just thought you'd appreciate the support.
Hey Tim, have you responded to the first point I raised yet -- you know, the one on which I based the accusation of hypocrisy? No, I thought not.
Posted by: Robert at January 9, 2004 at 01:27 AMRobert, Tim probably didn't bother to reply to your first point about hypocracy because, as we American lawyers say, it is a de minimus argument.
Are you seriously saying that anyone who argues against French and German contracting in Iraq therefore cannot argue, as a general proposition, that the best way out of poverty for developing nations is developing trade? What, is there some kind of rule of procedure that if one is for free trade in general one cannot oppose it in specific cases for rational, specific reasons of exception to the rule? You're a *law student* and you're telling me you don't know that *every* general rule of law has multiple exceptions? I guess the common law is hypocritical too then, eh?
This is the sort of teen-age charge of hypocracy that one sees in angry adolescents all the time; like when they notice that Mom says to be nice to everyone when I complain, but then she goes right ahead and bitches about Aunt Marge for 3 minutes to Dad at the dinner table. YOU'RE A STINKING HYPOCRITE MUM!!!
For God's sake, Robert, grow up. You'll be a lawyer soon and, trust me, unless our systems are radicallly different (and they are not) the first time you try that in a case you'll be laughed out of the courtroom. And, also, "leading student" means shit in the real world. You know what they will call the guy who graduates last in your class and passed the bar?
A "lawyer" just like you, and he may even be better at the practice of it, which is nothing like school.
Robert Corr claims that the "S factor" article about how stoopid Bush supporters are is really a "light-hearted piece." But is it? Hard to say since it sounds exactly like the normal rhetoric from the gang at the Democratic Underground who are deadly serious about believing that the only reason that far left "progressives" aren't in power is because the masses are stupid, brainwashed sheeple.
The problem the left has in attempting to write light-hearted satire (if that's what it was) is that it's almost impossible to make it ridiculous enough to distinguish it from the normal scribblings of the likes of Robert Fisk, John Pilger, Phillip Adams, or the ever nutty Margo Kingston.
Posted by: Randal Robinson at January 9, 2004 at 02:15 AMAm I mistaken in believing that Rob is trying to assert that a contract between the U.S. and Haliburton, to be performed in Iraq, somehow constitutes trade with Iraq, to the complete exclusion of any other coutries' trade with Iraq? Is contracts not a first year course in OZ?
Posted by: Scott at January 9, 2004 at 02:15 AMKevin, did you read the post? Tim complained about someone calling his opponents stupid, when he did the same thing by smearing his opponents as insane. That is hypocrisy.
Posted by: Robert at January 9, 2004 at 02:18 AMTim, you should get that looked at. It could turn septic.
Posted by: David Gillies at January 9, 2004 at 02:32 AMFloppy lumpenprole Kangol hat? Check.
Ill-fitting down-with-the-bruthas urban t-shirt? Check.
Menacing corporate edifice looming in background? Check.
Techno industrial remix on iPod? Check.
Clearasil globs on face? Check.
Posted by: iowahawk at January 9, 2004 at 03:31 AMI'm most amused at the notion that Tim's treatment of the Intelligenter piece was deadly serious.
Tim responded with his usual appropriate and unswerving mockery. Who peed in little Bobby's granola that morning that he would describe Tim's post in such portentous terms?
Posted by: Bovious at January 9, 2004 at 03:36 AMAgain, Robert, you are just repeating sloppy teen-age hypocracy charges. So now your position is if one ever complains about a political opponent branding all conservatives as essential "stupid" people, one loses any and all right to label insane behavior insane? So, if Tim sees a Western person rooting for Al-Queda he cannot label that person's position as suicide-inducing insanity? Really?
The two aren't even remotely connected. Hypocracy is saying one thing and doing another. In order for the charge to work, the "thing" must BE EXACTLY THE SAME. (Example: a Baptist preacher preaches against infedelity and is found in a hotel cheating on his wife with a prostitute.) And, in any case, as a budding lawyer you should know that degrees of hypocracy are critical to judging such behavior's seriousness or materiality anyway.
One other thing, Robert. I live in the Pacific Northwest. I come into contact with people like the author of the "you're all stupid stupid-heads" Seattle P-I article every day. Believe me, he was not kidding in the slightest.
Posted by: KevinV at January 9, 2004 at 05:22 AMI think you guys are missing the point. Robert has obviously successfully the first rule of trial lawyering: If the law is on your side, argue the law; if the facts are on your side, argue the facts; if both the law and the facts are against you, pound on the table and call the other guy names.
Posted by: JorgXMcKie at January 9, 2004 at 06:53 AMJorgXMcKie -
That is one of the few legal cliches that are *spot* on target! Very funny....
Posted by: KevinV at January 9, 2004 at 07:28 AM"Kevin, did you read the post? Tim complained about someone calling his opponents stupid, when he did the same thing by smearing his opponents as insane. That is hypocrisy."
Insanity and stupidity are *not* the same. After all, the mad, yet brilliant mind is a staple of popular culture...
Posted by: Döbeln at January 9, 2004 at 07:51 AMI'd pay to see Robert's first case in a real court. Go ahead, Robert, call the judge a hypoccrite when he fails to recognize your brilliance.
Posted by: Lee at January 9, 2004 at 08:32 AMSpeaking as a Sydney solicitor (we don't have 'lawyers' here really), I'd say that Rob is doing quite well, but I do have to say that his comprehension skills need honing up before I would offer him a job in my firm. Tim's argument had nothing to do with trade for poor countires. It has to do with what is to be done in a country that has been invadedand is now occupied by the victorious power. The proper analogy Robert is Japan or Germany after the Second World War, not modern African states. Debt forgiveness and aid for those states without free trade and rule of law is useless, as the money just flows into the pockets of corrupt regimes.
In Iraq's case debt forgiveness by Germany and France will actually help these countries realise that they too have a role to play in stabilising a region that has long since been a hotbed of violence that affects these European wimps as much if not more than the US.
Posted by: toryhere at January 9, 2004 at 09:15 AMWell said, toryhere..and sorry for calling you guys "lawyers"....I had forgotten the different usages.
Posted by: KevinV at January 9, 2004 at 10:10 AMHey lefties, George Bush is more compassionate and caring than your average Democrat.
How much do you love him now?
Posted by: ilibcc at January 9, 2004 at 10:12 AMBandwidth thief. Chortle. (Follow the links.)
Posted by: charles austin at January 9, 2004 at 10:18 AMI would imagine Rob is an intelligent man, educated, opinionated, as we all are. My own observation is that the Left suffers from the problem of never before really being called to account for their statements. They have always been accepted. One can declaim, make some high-handed statement, something that even sounds rather of the moral high ground, and no one has really challenged them before...they simply expect, because it is the usual mode in their own groups, to have whatever they say accepted.
They simply don't understand when they are challenged to back up their statements with facts, quotes.
Example: Two good friends of mine, liberals, were talking with me about John Ashcroft, tsk tsking, shaing their heads, smiling in that smarmy way, where you are supposed to agree that, obviously Ashcroft is just an awful man, why we would never invite him to dinner, ha ha...they were talking about how dangerous he was, etc...I interrupted at this point and asked, can you give examples of how John Ashcroft has compromised your liberties, or the liberties of anyone you know?...nothing...so I continued...How many Americans has John Ashcroft killed?...they looked at me, not quite understanding, so I continued...after all, Janet Reno authorized the murder of dozens of Americans simply because they may have bought some dubious firearms and were living off by themselves in remote grazing land, and they were, by common consensus, rather goofy. Certainly that was reason enough to kill them, right?
They looked at me for a few seconds...then...started shuffling off, saying...well, we're never going to convince each other...bla bla bla bla.
The Left does not like to be called on the carpet...after all...they are the smart ones.
Actually, my favorite overused quote by Shakespeare is "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." Now you know why it's such a popular quote. (Sits back, waits for shrieking posts from Robert Corr and/or his many fanboys about how I "threatened to kill Rob!" Or maybe, that I'm a hypocrite for not wanting to be killed by terrorists because of using this quote in a blog comment, or something.)
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 9, 2004 at 11:39 AM"first we kill all the lawyers"
is, I think, first attributed to the Roman satirist, Juvenal.
There is a Small Penis Support Group in the US. Should Robert be referred to that? It might help.
Posted by: sue at January 9, 2004 at 12:35 PMBest Shakespeare quote: "All the world's a stage".
Dumbest oft-repeated cliché: "the ends [don't] justify the means". Of course they do, you dolt!
Posted by: JustSomeGuy at January 9, 2004 at 12:41 PMandrea,
relax...I am not familiar with Henry VI...my point was simply that the idea has been around about as long as lawyers...
Posted by: ks at January 9, 2004 at 01:20 PMSpeaking as a Sydney solicitor (we don't have 'lawyers' here really)
Well, until December 2002 the Law Council of Australia published a national newsletter called "Australian Lawyer".
It now produces a periodic electronic bulletin , which provides "information to lawyers about issues of national importance."
My favorite lawyer comment is the one about how "not all lawyers are bad -- 99% of them ruin it for the rest."
Posted by: Jerry at January 9, 2004 at 03:36 PMQ: You’re trapped in a room with a tiger, a rattlesnake and a lawyer. Your gun has only two bullets. What should you do?
A: Shoot the lawyer. Twice.
Actually, direct aid and debt relief can help a country, if the country's in trouble because of a natural disaster or war or anything else that isn't the direct result of the people in charge. Debt relief for Iraq makes sense because Saddam is no longer running the country. Debt relief for Zimbabwe will simply prolong matters there.
Posted by: John Nowak at January 9, 2004 at 05:25 PMYo KevinV, Toryhere and the rest of youse,
I believe the brainless fruitgum who's been inflicted on us as Victorian Attorney-General (Rob Hulls for those who don't know) I believe now wishes us to stop referring to ouselves as solicitors and call ourselves lawyers. Happily most of us ignore him.
Regarding Robert Corr - I too have submitted an Honours thesis, in History. Got a first. Robert, put your posting up do. Actually, in my firm I tend to put submissions and letters together for the Partner in charge of my department which are as cnfused and rambling as any of Corr's postings; the difference is that I'm at least aware that as a lawyer I'm barely competent and can allow for it. Corr, by contrast, seems to revel in it. God help the useless little fuck when he tries to get Articles of Clerkship. Maybe he'll wind up and some fucked-up bleeding hearted outfit like the legal centre I volunteer at so I can mock it and its clients.
Oh, and JustSomeGuy: the version I've heard of that cliche is from Machiavelli. I believe the quotation is actually "the end excuses the means". Excusing is a different thing to justifying, and is probably more justifiable for we conservatives.
Posted by: National Party Headcase at January 9, 2004 at 07:00 PMSorry, I know my last posting is a bit scrambled. I've got a bad case of Friday-arvo braincells.
Christ, this should give you some idea what a fucking mess it is whenever I have to appear in court...
Posted by: National Party Headcase at January 9, 2004 at 07:03 PMTrade is too much like hard work, and aid is demeaning. The best way to get rich is to be born to rich parents. George Bush used that method to solve his own poverty problem very quickly.
Posted by: Jack Strocchi at January 9, 2004 at 07:26 PMRob Corr has an interesting essay, entitled The ballot and the bullet:civil rights and the Black Panthers posted on his site.
The essay has an interesting sub-title:
The Black Panthers were a logical and inevitable extension of the non-violent civil rights movement, ensuring the legislative gains made in the fifties and sixties were actually enforced in the community.
Rob, after having his bum bitten by Tim for pandering to urban terrorists, to his credit includes the following sensible disclaimer:
Update for the sake of Timmy's rabid readers. These essays are by no means good. Like every other undergraduate, my main goal was to finish them as quickly as possible and head to the pub. Yes, some Black Panthers were involved in extortion, robbery, prostitution and murder. So are some Republicans and some Democrats. Get over it.
Rob, you are young and deserve a third chance. Be advised, when Tim bites, it is best to quit whilst you are sorely behind (sic). Posted by: Jack Strocchi at January 9, 2004 at 07:41 PM