Paris

Still trying to come to grips with that events in Paris over the past twenty four hours. What does seem clear, inevitable and, I think, unavoidable is the response to the attacks that is likely to come...a broader military response by members of the European Union in concert with the United States which will certainly involve a stepped up air campaign and possibly the deployment of military units on the ground. Unfortunately it is precisely that response that ISIS has been trying to provoke and, with the latest attack, has likely succeeded in provoking. At its core ISIS has always viewed its campaign as intending to once and for all confront the west and its secular way of life and rid the world of any person, government or state that does not adhere to its extreme fundamentalist views. The realization of this "end of days" vision can only come to be if the west and any nation state that opposes ISIS' fundamentalist vision (including Arab states opposed to ISIS) is drawn into a broad conflict. It appears that we may very well be at that point as it no longer seems possible to confront ISIS on a limited basis. They have shown its willingness and now its capacity to carry the fight beyond the Middle East with horrific consequences. The world, already a very dangerous place, is about to get much more so. I fear that ISIS is building toward something even bigger and more deadly in the United States; that as horrific as the events in Beirut and Paris have been they are but practice runs for a much larger attack. Regrettably I see no alternative but to confront ISIS now and end this before it gets worse.

Anti-Intellectuals and the Politics of Fact

The question is often asked why the claims politicians make about themselves or the positions they take are based in whole or in part on either a misrepresentation of the underlying facts or an outright lie. To be clear politicians lying in this fashion is nothing new but also to be fair the current crop of candidates running for the Republican nomination seem to have a particular predilection for lying. The latest two examples include Ben Carson who appears, at least to me, to be genuinely insane and is now receiving a heightened level of scrutiny because repeated statements in his autobiographies are proving to be, shall we say, "misleading", and Carly Fiorina who has been exposed for lying about her business  chops and about a Planned Parenthood video. All of this brings us back to the question, “why”.  

The answer, to some degree, can be found in the angry response of both candidates to the questions now being posed by the media; to the anger at the audacity of the media to ask difficult questions  and, in effect, do its job. Their anger at the media is actually appropriate. Indeed, we should all be furious with the media though perhaps for different reasons. Those reasons are many but at their core is a seemingly successful attempt by the increasingly powerful right flank of the Republican party to inject into our national consciousness the notion that intellectual success or curiosity or a professional ethos that focuses on facts and the methods by which those facts are revealed is to be ridiculed as elitist and part of some sort of some liberal bias. Gone, or at least at risk of disappearing, is an acceptance that facts are not some inconvenient truth to be ignored but the basis for critical discussions about those facts and how to either develop strategies for altering the outcomes that those facts represent or developing strategies to live with an understanding of what those facts represent. 

The consequence of this de-evolution of critical thinking in this country is most readily revealed by the preferences now being expressed by a Republican electorate that has been conditioned to question any fact not on an intellectual basis but simply as worthy of suspicion because it runs contrary to a narrative that they have been programmed to accept. That narrative invites the likes of a Ben Carson and any of his co-candidates to say and do anything that plays to the underlying narrative and to challenge with real anger any attempt by the media to raise questions that run contrary to that narrative. Their anger and utter surprise at being challenged itself should not come as a surprise as it is the challengers...the mainstream med now raising those challenges which,  in no small measure, is responsible for promoting that narrative and  its attack upon any facts which are inconsistent with that narrative and thus allowing  this anti-intellectual narrative to become so much a part of the current discourse. The reasons for this failure are many and something to be addressed in a separate posting  but it is certain that we find ourselves pushing back against a narrative that exists, in large part, independent from factual basis because the media ceased to serve its function as the so-called, Fourth Estate, maintaining vigilance over the political process. 

There is, of course, real danger for all of us, not simply those who will be voting to select among the various candidates for the Republican nomination. The more facts and critical thinking are attacked as elitist and liberal the more vulnerable we become to surrendering ourselves to those who have created a narrative of an America based on intolerance, fear and isolation. While the Ben Carsons of the world must be confronted it is what his anger at being challenged represents and says about ourselves that must be confronted. 

Facts matter. Laws matter. Rules matter. The very fabric of our society…the grand experiment that this democracy still embodies…depends upon those very fundamental truths. They cannot be surrendered. Professionalism and intellectualism must prevail and stand as a stalwart against a creeping narrative that puts us all at risk. 

Fear and Loathing in Nassau County

The views expressed in this post are my own and

are in no way reflective of the opinions of my law firm or my partners. It is, because of that association, that I have been unable to express, with more freedom my thoughts concerning the race for District Attorney in Nassau County. That race pits a life long prosecutor, Madeline Singas against a life long politician, Kate Murray. The race, as of this writing, remains “too close to call” though I fully anticipate that given the direction that this county has been trending over the past ten to fifteen years I fully expect that Ms Murray will be elected. That that is the likely outcome of this race should outrage every resident of Nassau County.

Ms Murray is a career politician with the strong support of the County’s Republican Party. It is with great confidence that I suggest that Ms Murray is being “parked” in that position by the Republican Party in anticipation of her seeking either countywide office (when the County Executive is either forced to not seek re-election or makes that decision on his own) or higher office (i.e. Congress) following the path recently pursued by Kathleen Rice. The big difference between Ms Rice and Ms Murray is that while Ms Rice was a highly experienced prosecutor, Ms Murray has absolutely no experience in criminal law and, in fact, has not engaged in any type of law practice for more than twenty years and, even then, it was within the confines of the attorney general’s office where I suspect she first honed her skills as an administrator and not as a practicing attorney. Given the number of Republican politicians under investigation by Ms Singas' office there should be concern that one of the GOP's priorities in running a politician rather than an experienced prosecutor for this critical office is to put an end to those investigations.

Ms Singas, on the other hand, was a very highly regarded prosecutor in Queens County when she was enticed to come to Nassau County about ten years ago to head the County’s special victim’s unit under Kathleen Rice. She is very experienced and highly regarded not only by the legal community but by the ADAs working on her staff. That the County is at risk of electing someone who knows nothing about criminal law or criminal prosecutions at a time that it faces rampant corruption, gang violence and a drug epidemic should be a concern to everyone who lives in this county.

The question to be put to Ms Murray is a simply one: were she accused of a crime and in need of legal counsel, would she hire someone who is an attorney in name only but has not practiced for twenty years and simply works in a government office or would she hire a skilled and experienced criminal defense attorney. The answer, it would seem, is a simply one, and easily answerable even for a professional politician. It should also be a simple answer to be reached by the residents of this county. Sadly, I fear the tide of Republicanism in Nassau County will blind its residents to so simple an answer.

Addendum: I am pleased to report that despite my worst fears the residents of Nassau County did fully appreciate the need for electing a DA who actually knows what it takes to prosecute a criminal complaint by electing Ms Singas and in a landslide. Quite remarkable when one considers that the County has been leaning so heavily Republican over the past ten to fifteen years. While Ms Murray is the big loser in all this (she has never lost an election and rarely won with less than a 3-1 margin of victory) the Republican party lost as well. The degree of hubris it took to offer up Ms Murray for an office for which she had no qualification and expect that simply because of the strength of its machine the GOP would be able to dictate terms is astonishing but not surprising. I cannot be happier for this outcome...for the small sense of satisfaction that the County voters saw the election for what it was and voted...at least once...for some semblance of sanity and in their self-interests.