Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives, and I decline.

I've really gotten tired about this year's presidential election and have decided to stop paying such obsessive attention to it.

Don't get me wrong -- I still believe that this is perhaps the most important election of my lifetime, and that what is left of the American Dream is at stake. It's just that I am going to try to stop following the constant horse race aspects of it. There is just too much information, flowing too quickly, to absorb in a rational way. I'm not the first person to note that the internet, social media, and a gazillion cable and web shows have all combined to pump content out at a high rate and volume -- feeding us so much information at such a high speed that it's like trying to get a drink of water from a fire-hose.

As a practical matter, I'm not sure how this will work. Will I only read stories from print newspaper and magazines? Will I give up reading the Twitter feeds of Ana Marie Cox and Matt Taibbi and Maggie Haberman and Alex Pareene and Jim Roberts? I will try.

Speaking of elections, for a variety of reasons, I have been reading some old posts. Here's one from 2008:

This is the first election since 1992 where I was genuinely enthused about my choice -- I voted for That One -- and I am filled with hope and optimism about what will happen over the next four years if he wins. And, needless to say, I will be seriously disappointed if he loses.

I'm realistic, though. I know that (to paraphrase Hilary Clinton's memorable remarks during the primaries) if Obama wins, we won't have celestial choirs singing, telling everyone will that we should all do the right thing. And the VRWC has made it known that they plan to pick up right where they left off in January 2001, so any progress won't be made without battles on every front. But I think that we are a very different country now than we were in the late 1990s, and that voters will have less patience for smears. I think that the country will welcome legitimate policy debates over some of his plans (Joe the Plumber's original discussion with Obama before the debate, for example), but I don't think that we'll see much tolerance for things like an Obama Death List. (He said hopefully.)

In short, I am cautiously optimistic. But I don't want to jinx anything. Fingers crossed!

http://strangledcries.blogspot.com/2008/11/wishing-and-hoping-and-thinking-and.html (emphasis in bold added)

Yeah, that worked out well, right?

Richard Nixon back again.

I am in electoral mode today, as you can see. Misty water colored memories are seeping up, and I thought that I'd share a few.

The first election that I remember was 1972 -- Nixon versus McGovern. (By the way, the finest book on that election -- and my personal favorite book by Hunter S. Thompson -- is "Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail '72". Thompson's Rolling Stone colleague Timothy Crouse's "The Boys on the Bus" is also quite good -- his book covers the boys (and they were all boys then) who covered the campaign. Good stuff. But I digress.)

1972 was the year that Richard Nixon, filled with rage and paranoia and the blackest bile and resentment-filled gut that Washington has ever known (yes, even worse than Dick Cheney) laid the seeds of his own destruction. Watergate, baby. But all that came out later.

Anyway, 1972. The Democrats, torn apart by the war in Vietnam and social issues, have a long drawn out primary campaign. Over the course of it, Senators Ed Muskie, Hubert Humphrey, and George McGovern rip each other and the party to shreds. Muskie started the campaign as the presumptive nominee, but faltered early. Alabama Governor George Wallace killed Muskies chances when he won the Florida primary. In fact, Wallace could well have won the nomination with a combination of racial resentment and blue-collar angst (he also did well in Northern states), but he was put into a wheelchair in an assassination attempt. Humphrey tried to muscle his way into the nomination with support of the party's old guard and big labor, but was outfought by McGovern in several states -- most fatally in the huge winner take all state of California. McGovern and the liberal insurgents had seized the reins of the party, and McGovern became the nominee.

Then, after everyone from Ted Kennedy to Abe Ribbicoff turned him down, McGovern picked for his vice presidential nominee Thomas Eagleton, an unvetted alcoholic who had been in mental institutions for electro-shock therapy. When the news of Eagleton's mental issues came out, McGovern said that he supported him "1000%." At least until he didn't, and replaced him with Kennedy's brother in law Sargent Shriver. And the minuscule shot he had to beat Nixon was gone just like that.

But I didn't know any of that. My experience of the election that year was of GOP swag. For some reason, I was driving with my dad one Saturday in the fall, and we must have been talking about the election. (I do remember that at some point he explained to me that Sargent Shriver was not in the Army -- he just had a funny first name.) So, dad impulsively pulled his Galaxie 500 into the parking lot of the county Democratic Party office, and we discovered that the place was closed. (On a Saturday in October. In The Ancestral Homeland. Looking back, this makes it obvious that McGovern was so toast.) So, we went around the corner to the GOP county office and picked up all sorts of buttons and posters and bumper stickers. I have to admit that CREEP was pretty good at their design:


My father and my uncles were all union guys who hated Richard Nixon, but couldn't believe that the good old US of A was losing a war to a bunch of god-damned pinko gooks in pajamas. And who didn't understand why no one seemed to want to get a god-damned haircut anymore, or why their kids laughed at Glenn Miller. So when the Democrats put up a guy who was for "Acid Amnesty and Abortion," and who after seizing the nomination, seemed like he was stumbling around from mistake (the Eagleton pick and dump) to mistake (the guaranteed income pledge) like a drunk at closing time, they probably held their nose and voted for Dick.

But I never learned nothing from playing it safe; I say fate should not tempt me.

Alex Balk is not as pessimistic as I am. A snipppet:

What’s been astounding about the Republicans during this whole campaign is the ludicrous sense of entitlement they have toward the office of the presidency. It’s like they were born on third base and forgot that the Supreme Court waved them home. And I’m not just talking about the low and ugly tactics they brought to this race. I’m leaving out the astonishing nerviness it took for them to try and make a major issue of a few meaningless bogus registration forms while attempting to systematically purge the voter rolls of anyone who might vote for the other party. (I’m leaving it out, but think about it again: They’ve been bitching and moaning about Mickey Mouse, who I’m fairly sure will not actually show up, while deliberately attempting to prevent American citizens from exercising their Constitutional privilege to elect their representatives.) I’m not going to mention the disgusting attempts to preemptively delegitimize the next president (Barack Obama). No, what’s most offensive about the whole thing is the insistence that they deserve a third term. Look at the absolute disaster the last eight years of Republican rule—six of which, do not forget, have come with that party in control of all three branches of government; the next time I
hear some Republican talking head warn against the “lack of checks and balances” if the Democrats control both Congress and the presidency, I swear I’m going to throw my shoe at the screen. Are these people willfully stupid or deliberately duplicitous?—has been for this country. The fact that any Republican anywhere can show up with a straight face and argue for another four years at the helm is a tribute to the forgiving nature of our nation; they should all be walking around with paper bags on their heads, shoulders slumped in shame, carrying placards that read “Sorry for repeatedly raping you in the ass since 2000, America. This time we promise to use lube.” The Republican party’s only hope in the last three months has been that American voters might prove more racist than they are greedy. Thankfully, they will not.

Go read his cock's take (I forget why, but "Balk's Cock" occasionally posted on Gawker when Alex was a Gawker writer) on Obama from this dialog between man and member in July 2007:

BALK BTW: Hmmmm... I don't know, politics? Who do you like for president.

COCK BTW: Oh, I'm Obama all the way.

BALK BTW: Really? You don't worry about his lack of experience?

COCK BTW: He has as much experience as the current guy.

BALK BTW: Um, that's a terrible example. Also, Bush was governor of Texas for five years.

COCK BTW: GOVERNOR OF TEXAS? BFD. The job was DESIGNED so that an idiot could do it. All the power resides with the lieutenant governor. The governor is basically the schmuck in the hat who shows up to cut the ribbon at a hospital opening in Amarillo. My Taint could be governor of Texas.

BALK BTW: How do you know about Texas politics?

COCK BTW: Most of the southern states have weak governor systems. It's a legacy of reconstruction. Don't you fucking read?

BALK BTW: Mainly "Vanity Fair."

COCK BTW: Well, sometimes that's important. The Hollywood issue in particular. Good bonding time for us.

BALK BTW: Uh... yeah. Anyway, Obama. You really don't worry about how little executive experience he's had?

COCK BTW: No. Look, my feeling is that anyone's gonna be better than the dude we've got now. Plus, Obama is a transformative politician. I have never, in our lifetimes, seen someone who inspires so many different people from such a broad spectrum of the electorate. And beyond that: What's it going to say to the rest of the world when we're willing to elect a guy named Barack Obama who's half black, is familiar with both the Christian and Muslim faiths, and has the hottest First Lady since Rosalynn Carter?

BALK BTW: Again with Rosalynn Carter.

COCK BTW: Oh, please, like you haven't stroked me to a little "Rosalynn in tight sweater" fantasy.

BALK BTW: MOVING ON. What about Hillary? Are you unwilling to vote for Hillary because she's a woman? And you're a cock?

COCK BTW: Nah, it's got nothing to do with that. Any other year, sure. I mean, she's a tough, controlling bitch who's unable to admit any mistakes she's made and she's got a penchant for secrecy and paranoia that makes Nixon look stable, but whatever. There are plenty of women I'd vote for: Kathleen Sebelius, Napolitano,
heck, even Jodi Rell if I had to vote Republican. Also, that hottie from Michigan.

BALK BTW: Granholm.

COCK BTW: Yeah. Too bad she was born in Canada, I'd pull the lever for her in a second. You know, like YOU HAVE.

BALK BTW: I, uh, think we're done here.

COCK BTW: Good. Meet me in the bathroom in five. And bring the new Maxim that just came into the office.

Wishing and hoping and thinking and praying.

Wow. Hard to believe that election day is finally here. The missus and I went to the local polling place about 20 minutes before it opened and our timing was just about perfect. We weren't the first in line, but we were close enough that it took just a few moments to sign in and get into the booth once they opened. It seemed like everyone else arrived 5 minutes after us -- I took a brief stroll just before they opened the doors, and there must have been a hundred people waiting in line behind us.

This is the first election since 1992 where I was genuinely enthused about my choice -- I voted for That One -- and I am filled with hope and optimism about what will happen over the next four years if he wins. And, needless to say, I will be seriously disappointed if he loses.

I'm realistic, though. I know that (to paraphrase Hilary Clinton's memorable remarks during the primaries) if Obama wins, we won't have celestial choirs singing, telling everyone will that we should all do the right thing. And the VRWC has made it known that they plan to pick up right where they left off in January 2001, so any progress won't be made without battles on every front. But I think that we are a very different country now than we were in the late 1990s, and that voters will have less patience for smears. I think that the country will welcome legitimate policy debates over some of his plans (Joe the Plumber's original discussion with Obama before the debate, for example), but I don't think that we'll see much tolerance for things like an Obama Death List. (He said hopefully.)

In short, I am cautiously optimistic. But I don't want to jinx anything. Fingers crossed!

The minor fall, the major lift.

Ye gods, the world is truly spinning weirdly lately, no? I will (at a later time) sing the song -- a dirge, sadly -- of the once-mighty Merrill Lynch a/k/a "We, The People," the firm of Charlie Merrill, the man who saw 1929 coming; the firm of Irish Catholics -- Fordham boys and Marine Corps veterans, eager to show the WASPs on the Street a thing or two; the firm who epitomized the term "wire house" and brought capitalism from Wall Street to Main Street by opening branches in towns big and small; the firm of Don Regan and his "fuck you" money; the firm of Win Smith and Don Komansky and the culture of "Mother Merrill"; and, finally and sadly, the firm of Stan O'Neal and the quarterly profit numbers. Sic transit gloria mundi.

Uh, where was I? Ah, yes, weirdly spinning world. The biggest financial crisis in a long time. The political season, with the rise and fall and rise again of poll numbers -- like a high-scoring college football game, it seems like the candidate with the ball at the end will win in a squeaker. My case load, with the fierce urgency interspersed with slackness. My imaginary friend Philalawyer, and his book (Happy Hour is for Amateurs: A Lost Decade in the World's Worst Profession, coming soon to used bookstores and garage sales near you) coming closer and closer to actual release. (That fucker has a book deal? It is a weirdly spinning world, indeed.)

And, so, on this Friday afternoon, I plan to skip out a bit early, and slow things down a bit. Try to restore a bit of balance to the gyrations, and find some inner calm and sense. I think that some Bushmills is called for, maybe sipped in a comfortably quiet bar filled with dark woods and polished brass. The kind of place with the Easter Proclamation on the wall and old photographs, and a friendly yet reticent bartender who will pour it neat (without waiting to be told) into a heavy rocks glass.

Laying low at L'Ermitage, of course.

Like the late Mr. Zevon, I, too, sometimes feel like an imposter has been living my life for me. But I've just been a little busy with family visits and weddings, and filing four answers that were due on four consecutive days.

Anyhow, since I am not blogging to share my pearls of wisdom on affirmative defenses (ok, fine --here's one: waiver, ratification, and estoppel always go well together), you surely do not care about that. So, what has been going on that you might care about? Here are a few tidbits from my life the last couple of weeks:

1. Otherwise intelligent people (like opposing counsel on a mediation) really -- no, I am being deadly serious -- think that Barack Obama is an Al Qaeda plant. This gives me pause.

2. If you aren't watching Mad Men, you should be. Although I do miss Don Draper's Jewish mistress from last season -- lose the Beatnik chick, fine, sure, but please, Mister Weiner, bring back Rachel Menken!

3. Ahem. The owner of Menken's Department Store deserves two items on this list. (Complicated brunettes, remember?)

4. It is a true pleasure to be driving in the summer on a warm day when a Not Overplayed Jimmy Buffett song unexpectedly comes on the radio. Your pickup's washed and you just got paid, indeed. It's like Proust catching a whiff of that cookie.

5. The Mets are still in it.

Anyway, more to follow. Happy Friday!

Politics in the new century?

I have been pondering Hillary Clinton lately. Is she the wave of the future in primary contests? Or is her continued campaign a quirk? Unlike past primary campaigns, where people in her position dropped out or were marginalized/ignored/disregarded (hello, Jerry Brown and Jesse Jackson!), she continues on and, at least for now, is treated as a serious rival.

So, will the future reward candidates with the will and resources to gut it out? Or is she sui generis (as we lawyers like to say)? That is, is this year, because of some admixture of the zeitgeist, somehow unique? Whether it's the historical nature of her role as the first woman with a serious shot at the presidency, the Clinton brand name, her smarts, etc., why is she able to survive where Gary Hart or Al Gore or Paul Tsongas did not? Is she the wave of the future, and from now on -- at least on the Democratic side, with no winner-take-all states, and proportional allocation of delegates -- we will see these sorts of wars of attrition in the future?

It is an axiom that generals want to fight the last war. I think that that was what damaged Team Clinton this year. She and her campaign decided to go for a knock-out blow, just like the way that Kerry crushed Dean early, and Gore squashed Bradley even earlier. The Germans in the early 1900s recalled how their rapid thrust into France in 1870, and their overwhelming victory over MacMahon at Sedan, knocked poor Napoleon III off of his throne and ended the Franco-Prussian War tout suite. Their plan for war in 1914 was a reflection of the 1870 experience, and called for an end-run through Belgium and a turn towards Paris, with the idea of knocking the French out of the war quickly. They came close, but General Gamelin's Paris taxicabs saved the day, and four years of trench warfare followed. Then the Germans lost, and in another 20 years or so we had another example of generals fightling the last war.

Uh, where was I? Ah yes -- fighting the last war. Anyway, it seems that the Clinton campaign thought that she would be the crowned nominee in March, and were unprepared for any primaries following Super Tuesday. Their lack of knowledge regarding the system for awarding delegates in the Texas primary/caucus hybrid was sort of the symptom of the problem with this approach. And recent reports that chief campaign strategist Mark "You Owe Me Big Bucks" Penn reportedly said that Senator Clinton would clinch the nomination when she won California, apparently forgetting that it was not a winner take all state, reinforces this perception of, well, idiocy on the part of people running her campaign.

At any rate, it seems that she was effectively out of the race months ago -- at least by the standards of earlier years -- and yet she shouldered on. And, despite the delegate numbers, she was (and is, still) regarded as having a shot at the nomination. I just wonder, again, whether this is an anomaly or a harbinger of the future.