Voice of another liberal whose moved right
- Thread starter TheGunner
- Start date
She is an intelligent person who is a great communicator. Very upset about the Jewish hate on today's University Campuses.
Would not call her a conservative, but at the same time, realises the left is no longer her home.
Good for her to wake up and smell the bacon. It's a good write up.
I disagree though that she is intelligent. She wouldn't have been a lefty-anti Trump person to begin with if she was.
She admits now that so much of T policy was correct.
I think she added the message was good, but killed the messenger. It wouldn't hurt to have more business backgrounds rather than attorneys calling more shots, but that different outlook would get poor media support because it would be different. Somewhat simple, but the general direction has some merit.
I assume people have seen this or elements of it before?
"As an attorney, I hesitated to forward this as it can be considered to be an indictment against my profession. But I believe there is much truth to the article below.
Very thought provoking.
Lawyers are adversarial and are trained to try to win at all costs. It may work in litigation but does not work well when governing our nation.
Trying to win at any costs creates the polarization and hatred that now fills our country and leaves no room for common sense or legitimate debate.
Every Democrat presidential nominee since 1984 went to law school, although Gore did not graduate. Joe Biden (no surprise) was at the bottom of his class.
Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school.
Barack Obama was a lawyer Michelle Obama was a lawyer. Hillary Clinton was a lawyer Bill Clinton was a lawyer. John Edwards is a lawyer. Elizabeth Edwards was a lawyer. Look at leaders of the Democrat Party in Congress: Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer is a lawyer. Former Senator Harry Reid was a lawyer.
The Republican Party is different. President Trump was a businessman. Presidents Bush 1 and 2 were businessmen. Vice President Cheney was a businessman. President Eisenhower was a 5 star General.
The leaders of the Republican Revolution: Newt Gingrich was a history professor. Tom Delay was an exterminator. Dick Armey was an economist. Ex-House Minority Leader John Boehner was a plastics manufacturer. The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.
Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against actor Ronald Reagan in 1976.
The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work, who are often the targets of lawyers. This is very interesting. I had never thought about it this way before.
The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Trump, Bush, and Cheney, or who heal the sick like Frist, or who immerse themselves in history like Gingrich.
The Lawyers Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America. And so, in the eyes of the Lawyers Party, we have seen the procession of official enemies grow. Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail?
Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.
This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, which, in this case should be the American people.
Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side. Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an awful way to govern a great nation.
When politicians, as lawyers, begin to view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the role of the legal system in our life becomes all-consuming.
Some Americans become adverse parties of our very government. We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.
Today, we are drowning in laws. We are contorted by judicial decisions. We are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives.
America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked.
When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big.
When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.
Perhaps Americans should understand that change cannot be brought to our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work.
Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.
The United States has 5% of the world's population and 66% of the world's lawyers!
Tort or legal reform legislation has been introduced in congress several times in the last several years to limit punitive damages in ridiculous lawsuits such as spilling hot coffee on yourself and suing the establishment that sold it to you and also to limit punitive damages in huge medical malpractice lawsuits. This legislation has been blocked from even being voted on by the Democrat Party.
When you see that 97% of the political contributions from the American Trial Lawyers Association go to the Democrat Party, then you realize who is responsible for our medical and product costs being so high!"
I've often contemplated that we should have some limitations for those that enter public office. I'd love to make it that if you're a lawyer, then you cannot serve. That would never work, but would be nice. The other idea would be that in order to serve, you must spend X amount of years in the private sector. In other words, get a real job and see how things actually work. Many in Congress on the D side have never held a real job (or had one for a very short period of time). Thus they don't understand how this country actually works.
A constitutional attorney seems better and even then it would be best if not too many. We have met the enemy and it is us...asleep at the wheel.
Similar threads
