NewspaperAlum

Syria Crisis: Former U.S. Presidents Offer Sage Advice to Obama

As President Barack Obama, our 44^th U.S. president confronts severe challenges with Syria in ensuring chemical weapons are indeed destroyed, while remaining vigilant in monitoring the danger of radical elements taking root in this tumultuous Arab republic -I often wonder how many of the former U.S. presidents (if living today) would have handled the challenges the president is facing?

As luck would have it,  Chicago historian Pierce Word, has just come out with a timely new book: ``Wisdom From the Oval Office’’, a compilation of presidential quotes organized under a wide range of subjects from democracy, education, and happiness to life, liberty, trust, truth, and yes, even war.

Based on Word’s superb research in hunting down the origin of these timely quotes, let’s pretend, for a moment, that in light of the crisis in Syria, many of the former U.S. presidents (including one living president) gathered around a campfire in Washington, where they have agreed to field questions from the press corp.

Perhaps, such a press conference would have unfolded in the following manner:

Q. Was President Obama correct in asking for congressional approval before launching a strike against the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria?

A. ``The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress.’’

-George Washington, (letter to William Moultrie, August 28, 1793).

 

Q. If you were in President Obama’s shoes, how would you have handled the Syrian crisis?

A. ``Gallows ought to be the fate of all such ambitions men who would involve their country in civil wars.’’

-Andrew Jackson (letter to Rev. A.J. Crawford. May 1, 1883).

A. ``I have never advocated war except as a means of peace.’’

-Ulysses Grant (Speech in London, June 15, 1887).

A. ``War should never be entered upon until every agency of peace has failed.’’

-William McKinley Jr., (Inaugural Address, March 4, 1897).

A. ``More than an end to war, we want an end to the beginning of all wars-yes, an end to this brutal, inhuman thoroughly impractical method of settling the differences between governments.’’

-Franklin Roosevelt (Undelivered Address, Prepared for Jefferson Day, April 13, 1945).

A. ``We cannot be both the world’s leading champion of peace and the world’s leading supplier of weapons of war.’’

-Jimmy Carter, Statement to Arms Control Association during the 1976 Presidential Campaign.

 

Q. Why do you think President Obama faced such passionate criticism at home over launching an attack against Syria, even if it were ``unbelievably small’’ to use Secretary of State John Kerry’s words? Most public opinion polls were overwhelming against the United States striking Syria.

A. ``There is a power in public opinion in this country-and I thank God for it.’’

-Martin Van Buren, (Speech at the U.S. Senate, December 5, 1837).

A. ``Public opinion in this country is all-powerful.’’

-James Buchanan (Speech to Congress; January 8, 1861).

A. ``I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis.’’

-Abraham Lincoln (speech to the House of Representative, January 12, 1848). 

A. ``The ultimate rulers of our democracy are not a President and senators and congressman and government officials, but the voters of this country.’’

-Franklin Roosevelt, Address at Marietta, Ohio, July 8, 1938

 

Q. Many are of the strong belief that if President Obama had not threatened to strike Syria and asked for a congressional authority for such an act, it would not have resulted in a non-aggression peace agreement like the one that was hammered out between  Russia, the United States and the Assad regime in Geneva. Do you agree with that argument?

A. ``It is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war.’’

-John F. Kennedy, (Speech Civic Auditorium, Seattle Washington, September 6, 1960).

 

Q.  With a military strike against Syria having been abated, at least for the time being, and the American public’s distaste for war having reached a fever pitch, are we entering a new phase of American diplomacy in which peaceful solutions, if given enough time to develop, will take center stage?

A. ``Time and the world do not stand still.’’

-John F. Kennedy (Speech in the Assembly Hall at Paulskirche in Frankfurt, Germany, June 25, 1963).

A. ``No one need think that the world can be ruled without blood. The civil sword must be red and bloody.’’

-Andrew Jackson, statement during tenure as Florida’s Military Governor, circa 1821.

A. ``We Americans have no commission from God to police the world.’’

-Benjamin Harrison, (Statement to Congress, 1888).

A. ``If civilization is to survive, we must cultivate the science of human relationships-the ability of all peoples, of all kinds, to live together, in the same world at peace.”

-Franklin Roosevelt, (Undelivered Jefferson Day Address, April 13, 1945).

 

Q. What would you say to those who argue the United States has overextended itself abroad (consider Iraq, Afghanistan, and now potentially Syria), and should therefore devote more of its attention and financial resources to domestic needs, such as education, unemployment, and taking a hard look at the plight of America’s inner cities? Our military engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan, after all, hasn’t exactly earned us many friends around the world.

A. ``Let every nation know whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and success of liberty.’’

-John F. Kennedy, (Inaugural Address, January 20, 1961).

A. ``The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea.’’

-John Adams, (In his ``Defense of Constitutions of Government’’ (1787).

A. ``Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.’’

-Thomas Jefferson, (Letter to Isaac Tiffany, April 4, 1819).

A. ``The only sure way of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protects the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over the government.

-Franklin Roosevelt (Fireside Chat, April 14, 1938).

A. ``We have entered an age in which education is not just a luxury permitting some men an advantage over others.  It has become a necessity without which a person is defenseless in this complex, industrialized society.’’

-Lyndon Johnson (Remarks at the dedication at the Crossland Vocational Center in Camp Springs, Maryland, April 27, 1967).

 

Q. Why has President Obama received such heavy criticism, not only with in his initial threats of striking Syria, but even with his stewardship of the economy?

A. ``I report to you that our country is challenged at home and abroad.’’

-Lyndon Johnson, (State of the Union Address, January 17, 1968).

``He has a right to criticize, who has a heart to help.’’

-Abraham Lincoln (As quoted in Forbes Magazine, 1960).

 

Q. What type of counsel would you give President Obama on the agreement that was reached between Russia and the United States in which Syria will allow its stockpile of chemical weapons to be removed or destroyed by next year?

A. ``Trust, but verify.’’

-Ronald Reagan, (remark at the signing of the INF treaty, Washington D.C., December 8, 1987).

A. ``Actions, not words, are the true criterion.’’

-George Washington, (letter to Major-General Sullivan, December 15, 1779).

 

Q. Do you have any sage words of advice for President Obama as he confronts many domestic and foreign policy challenges in the coming months and years ahead?

A. ``Wisdom consists not so much in knowing what to do in the ultimate as knowing what to do next.’’

-Herbert Hoover (as quoted in Forbes Magazine, 1923).

A. ``Nine-tenths of wisdom is being wise in time.’’

-Theodore Roosevelt, (Speech delivered in Lincoln, Nebraska, June 14, 1917).

A. ``Man cannot live by bread alone; he must have peanut butter.’’

-James Garfield, (as quoted in The Lutheran Standard, 1969).

 

-Bill Lucey

WPLucey@gmail.com

September 17, 2013

  

Washington Swarming with Nattering Nabobs of Narcissism

Mark Leibovich

***

Six weeks on the New York Times’ Best Seller’s list and still going strong.

``This Town’’ Mark Leibovich’s brilliantly written poke-in-the-eye treatise, concerning the shameless sect of self-promoters and nattering nabobs of narcissism that inhabit the nation’s capital is arguably the best read of the summer.

And for those Beltway narcissists, hoping to pick up the best-seller for no other reason than to see IF and WHERE they were referred to in the 368 pages of text-they’ll be sorely disappointed to learn-there’s no index. Imagine, having to read the entire book to discover if you were mentioned, whether you sustained heavy damage, or were thankfully spared the ravages of Hurricane Leibovich.  Come to think of it, maybe this prize-winning American journalist and author is on to something that others will duplicate.

Mr. Leibovich, chief national correspondent for The New York Times’ Magazine, based in Washington, D.C., isn’t shy about skewering the high and mighty in his broad sweep of the nation’s capital: not the host of NBC’s Meet the Press, David Gregory, as his ratings continue to plunge, not Chris Matthews, host of MSNBC’s Hardball, who Leibovich describes as a representative of a`` loosely credentialed self-interested performers whose primary job is remaining on TV’’;  and certainly not Arianna Huffington, co-founder of the Huffington Post and empress of the blogosphere (and screaming headlines) who launched an online bellum sacrum (Holy War!) against Tim Russert before his untimely death in June, 2008. Not even the invincible Clinton’s were spared. ``The Clinton’s are pros at death and sickness’’ Leibovich writes, implying, of course, that Bill and Hill have a Ph.D. in death and dying, especially when they’re under the klieg lights.

The only time Leibovich seems to pull his punches is when it comes to his own employer, The New York Times; as if somehow they're above it all. Aren’t they schmoozing with Obama‘s power brokers like the rest of the ``media industrial complex’’ he scorns? Why is it that a vast majority of Times’ staffers somehow only land on round table discussions when they have something to promote; how about the self-aggrandizing tweets (informing their followers when they’re about to appear on a news cable program), along with Times blatant smugness in being above having to display reporters company emails to its over 20 million loyal online readers?

Wasting little time, Leibovich discharges a spray of bullets in the Prologue, when discussing the funeral of the mayor of D.C.’s power elite, Tim Russert, the rosy-cheeked leprechaun and host of the number one rated Sunday news program, Meet the Press, who died from a sudden cardiac arrest on June 13, 2008. He was 58.

The funeral for the wildly popular and titular head of ``The Club’’ was attended by anyone who was anybody in Washington: from the titans of Capitol Hill to seemingly any political reporter with a Twitter account. Leibovich describes in shocking detail how mourners stormed Washington's National Cathedral not so much to grieve the heartbreaking loss of  Washington’s most esteemed journalist; but to hobnob with the powerful, jockeying to ``outgrieve each other’’, while others shamelessly stuffed business cards into the hands of Joe Scarborough, host of the influential weekday morning talk show, ``Morning Joe’’ on MSNBC.

Such a revolting backdrop encapsulated Washington at its very worst; and set the tone for what was to come.

Raging like a wildfire through ``This Town’’ is the clubbiness, celebritizing, and narcissistic culture of the entrenched beltway social order; what’s most important is getting your name mentioned on Politico Mike Allen’s  daily ``Playbook’’ , either by acknowledging your birthday or reporting who was spotted at some frivolous wine and cheese party among the chattering classes of Washington’s elite.  Only the most privileged club members are worthy of a complimentary hat tip (h/t) by Allen when alerting him of a notable birthday.

Leibovich chronicles just how little regard editors of Politico have for those outside the beltway or restricted members to ``The Club’’, as was the case when Alexander Burns (at the urging of editor John Harris) wrote a piece (March 13, 2012) about voters being stupid. Implicit in the item: you have to be a member of ``The Club’’ in order to understand the most compelling issues facing the country.  With such unabashed bluster and contempt for the average voter by a mostly white, male, 40-something news organization-one wonders if Groucho Marx were around today as a credentialed White House correspondent, if he would have told John Harris in a webcast of his own: ``Thanks! but I do not care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members.’’

Though Leibovich’s frequent rants against Washington’s media elite is fun and highly entertaining, (definitely a must read for anyone who hasn’t yet cracked its covers), there’s a much larger and sharper component of ``This Town’’ which concerns how people used to come to Washington to serve in the public interest-and after their tour of duty was completed-they would simply recede deep into the night, rarely to be heard from again.

Not so anymore.

Over the last decade, maybe longer, Washington has manufactured a cottage industry of shrewd political consultants, political media analysts, highly paid lobbyists, a magical mystery tour of speaking engagements (charging astronomical fees), and inking lucrative book deals, mostly by former members of Congress or members of past administrations.  Remaining in Washington to shop your wares to the highest bidder seems to be the only game in town these days.  As Leibovich aptly puts it: `` Washington-like high school-used to be a transient culture. People would expect to graduate eventually or drop out. But almost no one leaves here anymore.''

Robert Gibbs, the former press secretary to President Obama, having accumulated about $2 million in speaking fees since leaving his post in 2011, and former Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott who has amassed a handsome fortune of his own as a Washington-based lobbyist, are just two prime examples of how greed and glitz are the new norm for former public servants.

The most stinging indictment, persuasively advanced by Leibovich, of the corrupting influence of the Washington elite on its inhabitants surrounds the disappointing transformation of Barack Obama, who came to the White House, after all, promoting himself as an agent of change (Recall: ``Change we can believe in" and the chant "Yes We Can!’’)  but in the end, as Gibbs once said in a White House staff meeting: ``Somehow we have all changed….or maybe Washington just changed us.’’

***

With my curiosity piqued over just how well Leibovich’s best-seller is being received among his Washington contemporaries, I thought I would reach out to see if any would like to offer their reactions to the book.

Here, then, are some responses which came back:

• ``I read it, found it largely accurate but too snarky for my tastes, in fact tasteless in a few places.  I wondered what party did he not get invited to that made him this angry.''
-Charlie Cook, political analyst for the National Journal who additionally writes election forecasts and rankings in The Cook Political Report.

• ``I thought it was very good and did capture Washington perfectly.''
-Sally Quinn, American author and journalist, who writes about religion for a blog at The Washington Post. Quinn is married to Ben Bradlee, former executive editor of the Post from 1968 to 1991 and currently its vice president at-large.

• ``I'm only halfway through, but so far it's delightful. It's well reported. His observations are largely spot on. And his writing is fiendishly clever.''
-Steve Thomma, politics editor for McClatchy Newspapers.

• ``I thought it was an entertaining read ... although I have a less-cynical view of Washington generally.''
-Jonathan Karl, Chief White House Correspondent for ABC News.

***

Bill Lucey
WPLucey@gmail.com
September 2, 2013

The Legacy of The March on Washington: 50 Years Later

 

On Aug. 28, 1963, President John F. Kennedy in the White House with leaders of the civil rights "March on Washington." From left: Whitney Young; Dr. Martin Luther King; Rabbi Joachim Prinz; A. Philip Randolph; President Kennedy; Walter Reuther; and Roy Wilkins. Behind Reuther is Vice-President Lyndon Johnson. (Photo by Three Lions/Getty Images)

***

Wednesday marks the 50 year anniversary when more than 200,000 demonstrators took part in the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in the nation’s capital. The event featured the sweet folksy sounds of Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Peter Paul and Mary,  along with a galaxy of prominent speakers in front of the Lincoln Memorial, including: Bayard Rustin, Roy Wilkins, and John Lewis before Martin Luther King, Jr., stole the show with his gripping "I Have a Dream Speech."

The reason for the March was painfully obvious: In 1963, on the centennial of the Emancipation Proclamation, most of the goals of earlier protests voiced by members of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the National Urban League, the National Catholic Conference for Interracial Justice, the National Council of the Churches of Christ in America, the United Auto Workers (UAW), and many others, still had not been realized with high levels of discrimination in employment, disenfranchisement of blacks from voting (most prominently in the South) and widespread discrimination in housing practices from coast-to-coast.

After the March, King and a host of Civil Rights leaders met with President Kennedy and Vice President Lyndon Johnson at the White House to discuss the need for swift legislative action in order to put their dream into action. Many attribute the March and Dr. King’s speech as being the seminal moment in propelling many of the Civil Rights acts that were passed later in the decade.

Not to steal Dr. King’s thunder, but not everyone agrees with that assessment.

Gary Orfield, professor of education, law, political science and urban planning at the UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies and co-founder of The Civil Rights Project, (now called The Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles) , believes President Kennedy’s Civil Rights speech (delivered on June 11, 1963  ) and the shocking violence (in front of a national television audience) ruthlesslymeted out by police during the Birmingham Demonstrations earlier that year were decidedly more significant than the March on Washington in terms of Civil Rights legislation. Orfield also believes the grass roots campaigns howled in churches along the highways and byways held more sway than the March on Washington.

Professor Orfield reminds me that the real breakthrough in Civil Rights wouldn’t be realized until the Lyndon Johnson Administration and his explosive influence in pushing through Congress, The Civil Rights Act (CRA) of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. In fact, Orfield argues, LBJ was the last U.S. president to champion an aggressive urban policy to address many of the tenets Dr. King and his followers risked their lives for 50 years ago.  

Even President Barack Obama’s cautious agenda in addressing the plight of Urban America has disappointed many who considered themselves among the neglected, marginalized and left out.  All he [Obama] seems to talk about’’, Orfield says, is the middle class.’’

Professor Orfield, who was a student intern for the State Department (based in Washington D.C.) at the time of the March, didn’t think the stirring speeches and call for action on that momentous day were all that inspirational in person. In fact, he left before King’s speech to watch it on television. ``The speech’’, Orfield recalls, `` was much more impressive on television than was in person, especially since at the packed Memorial, it was hard to see anything, it was hot, unpleasant, and the sound system was not that perfect.’’

In other words, Orfield believes, King’s ``I Had a Dream’’ speech packed more of a punch with those who watched it in their own living rooms than those who actually made the long trek to Washington. Another overlooked aspect was that King was the last speaker of the day; it was late in the day and most reporters were already writing their stories for their fast approaching deadlines. Small wonder, then, that the``I Had a Dream’’ refrain or even a reference to Dr. King himself was not splashed across the front pages of many U.S. dailies, including The Washington Post.

Unlike other observers, the most powerful memory Orfield takes away from August 28, 1963, was that ``most people in Washington had tremendous fear that mobs of violence was sure to break out. Most of the streets were deserted (except for the Lincoln Memorial), the National Guard was everywhere.  People were ready for something awful, but it just became a joyful celebration.’’

One factor that can’t be disputed: though many of the protests and pleas of many African-Americans remain unfilled 50 years after the March on Washington, the legacy and profound impact of Dr. King on American political culture is stronger than ever.  According to Derek H. Alderman, Professor  & Head of the Department of Geography at the University of Tennessee, as of 2010, there were 893 places in the United States with a street named for Dr. King, while the number of roads is believed to be well above 900.

The progress that blacks have made since Dr. King delivered his rousing speech on a blistering summer day under the Lincoln Memorial remains momentous. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the number of black elected officials in 1970 stood at 1,469; by 2011 it had leaped to 10,500. Additionally, the number of blacks with a bachelor's degree in 1964 was 365,000; in 2012, 5.1 million blacks held a college degree, while the poverty rate for blacks in 1966 was 41.8 percent, compared with 14.7 percent nationally; in 2011, the poverty rate for blacks stood at 27.6 percent compared with 15 percent, the national poverty rate for all races.

But clearly the most significant legacy of Dr. King and the March on Washington was the succession of Civil Rights legislation that would be passed in the halls of Congress, beginning in 1964.

What follows, then, is a summary of some of the most significant legislation.

• The Civil Rights Act (CRA) of 1964, enacted on July 2, 1964 outlawed major forms of discrimination against racial, ethnic, national and religious minorities, and women. Specifically, Title VII of the CRA prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, while Title VI of the CRA prohibits discrimination in federally funded programs or activities on the basis of race, color, or national origin.; Title II of the CRA prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin in public accommodations.

• The Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson on August 6, 1965, was designed to prevent the disenfranchisement of black voters in the South by prohibiting voting practices that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in a language minority group. Section 2 of the Act, applied a nationwide prohibition against the denial or abridgment of the right to vote on the literacy tests on a nationwide basis.

• Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, specifically enacted to promote the hiring of older workers based on their ability rather than their age, protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older from employment discrimination based on age. The protection extends to both employees and job applicants. It is additionally unlawful to retaliate against an individual for opposing employment practices that discriminate based on age or for filing an age discrimination charge, testifying, or participating in any way in an investigation, proceeding, or litigation under the ADEA.

• The Fair Housing Act (FHA), which was passed by Congress in April, 1968 (after some prodding by LBJ) prohibits discrimination in the sale or rental of housing on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability, or familial status. The statute applies to both public and private housing and may be enforced by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), DOJ, and individuals who file suit in federal court.

• The Education Amendments of 1972 was passed by Congress on June 8, 1972. President Nixon subsequently signed it into law on June 23rd. Among the Amendments most prominent provisions, Title IX prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in federally funded education programs or activities, including a wide range of educational programs or activities, student admissions, scholarships, access to courses, along with the prohibition of sex discrimination in intercollegiate athletics.

• The Rehabilitation Act, enacted September 26, 1973, prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in federally conducted and federally funded programs or activities, as well as in employment by the federal government and by federal contractors.

• The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), which was enacted in 1974, prohibits creditors from discriminating against credit applicants on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, because an applicant receives income from a public assistance program, or because an applicant has in good faith exercised any right under the Consumer Credit Protection Act.

• The Equal Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA) of 1974 prohibits discrimination in educational opportunities on the basis of race, color, sex, or national origin. Specifically, the statute prohibits school segregation, as well as the failure of a school to take appropriate action to overcome students’ language barriers. The statute is enforced by the Department of Justice (DOJ).

• The Age Discrimination Act of 1975 prohibits discrimination on the basis of age in federally funded programs or activities, such as financial assistance to schools and colleges, provided by U.S. Department of Education.

• The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA) applies to labor organizations which represents employees in most agencies of the executive branch of the Federal Government. It prohibits discrimination in federal employment on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, disability, marital status, or political affiliation. Specifically, the statute prohibits discrimination in certain personnel practices, including, but not limited to, hiring, promotion, transfers, and pay and benefits. In addition, the statute prohibits discrimination on the basis of conduct that does not adversely affect the performance of an employee or job applicant. This provision has been interpreted to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

• The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) of 1986 prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of national origin or citizenship status. The Act, which prohibits discrimination against U.S. citizens and legal immigrants but not unauthorized aliens, also protects individuals from unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The statute is enforced by DOJ.

• Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) prohibits discrimination based on disability in employment, public services, public accommodations, transportation, and telecommunications.

• The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) protects service members' reemployment rights when returning from a period of service in the uniformed services, including those called up from the reserves or National Guard, and prohibits employer discrimination based on military service or obligation. The U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Veterans’ Employment and Training Service (VETS) administers USERRA.
 
• The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), enacted May 21, 2008, prohibits discrimination in group health plan coverage based on genetic information. The Act prohibits group health plans and health insurers from denying coverage to a healthy individual or charging that person higher premiums based solely on a genetic predisposition to developing a disease in the future. The Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) enforces the provisions relating to health insurers, while the remedies and enforcement mechanisms for the employment provisions are generally patterned on Title VII of the CRA.

Source: Congressional Research Service, U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Department of Justice.

-Bill Lucey

WPLucey@gmail.com

August 26, 2013

  

Some ``Inside Baseball'' with The Plain Dealer's Paul Hoynes

Plain Dealer reporter Paul Hoynes walking his beat at Progressive Field.

Photo Credit: Chuck Crow/The Plain Dealer

***

After a highly disturbing round of editorial layoffs recently, sinking morale to new lows-including home delivery having been slashed to three days a week-there’s finally some good news to report from the newsroom of The Plain Dealer in Cleveland, Ohio.

It was announced this week that Cleveland Indians’ beat reporter Paul Hoynes, who has covered the Tribe for 30 years (28 with the PD) has been selected by the Press Club of Cleveland for induction into its Cleveland Journalism Hall of Fame. The induction will be held Nov. 14 at Cleveland Marriott Downtown at Key Center.

Hoynes, who most just affectionately refer to as ``Hoynsie’’ has been chronicling the ups and downs (until 1994, mostly downs) of Tribe baseball since 1982, which includes two World Series appearances (1995 and 1997) and the infamous ``Bat Gate’’ incident of July 15, 1994, when a corked bat used by Albert Belle (and confiscated by umpire Dave Phillips and placed in the umpires room) was later reclaimed by Cleveland relief pitcher Jason Grimsley after surreptitiously crawling across the ceiling with a flashlight in his mouth at Comiskey Park in Chicago.

Perhaps Stats Inc. can crunch some numbers to determine exactly how many reporter notebooks and scorecards Hoynes has ripped through over the last three decades. Since he’s easily covered more than 5,000 games, I bet it’s a bunch.

So now that it has clearly been determined by the selection committee that ``Hoynsie’’ didn’t have any ``performance enhancing’’ reporting tools in his background, which might have blemished his induction, the path is now clear to the Hall without an asterisk next to his name.

The integrity of the game, thank goodness, remains intact.

After hearing the great news of Hoynes selection to the Journalism Hall of Fame, I immediately fired off some questions (not all softball questions) in hopes he might reflect on different slices of his distinguished journalism career. To my surprise, the Indians’ beat writer was more than game by returning some revealing ``inside baseball’’ responses.

What follows, then, is my Q & A with the person everyone likes to call``Hoynsie.’’

Q. How successful were you as a baseball player in your youth: little leagues, high school, college?

 A. "I was a terrible baseball player. I played in fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth grade, but got cut from my high school team. Played in a 30-and-over Sunday morning softball league for a couple of years and it was a blast. But I was still terrible."   

Q.  I hope it’s not anytime soon, but when close your reporters’ notebook for good and hang up your spikes, do you plan to chronicle your years covering the Cleveland Indians in a book?

 A. "I write so much every day during the season that when I think about sitting down and writing a book, it terrifies me. When the season stops, I just want to shut it down and not think or write about anything. When I retire, maybe that will change. I'm not sure."  

 Q.   Do you find yourself longing for the good old days in print reporting before the Internet, smartphones and Twitter; or have you welcomed these innovations, having made your job a little easier?

 A. "I've tried to embrace all the technological changes that I can. It hasn't always been pretty, but to stay competitive and relevant, you have to do it. I don't think the changes have made the job easier; they have made it more immediate. The news cycle never stops. You can write a story at anytime and have it posted within minutes. The biggest difference is that there are no more scoops. You used to own a story for at least a day. You'd write it and go to bed hoping no one else had it. Today you own a story for about two seconds before you post it or Tweet it.’

 Q.  I believe many years ago you were involved in a locker room scuffle with Mel Hall, the former Indians’ outfielder (1984-1988). What were the circumstances for the altercation; and have you faced similar confrontations with any other players?

 A. That's when I was young and dumb. I had written a story about Mel being sued for child support by I believe a former girlfriend. Another part of the story had him suing a club employee with whom he'd been involved in a car wreck during a road trip. It was a double whammy and Mel was not happy.

 Walked into the clubhouse on Sunday morning and manager Pat Corrales told me, "You better get out of here because there's a bounty out for you." I turned around to leave and there was Mel. One thing led to another and I ended up at the bottom of Carmen Castillo's locker with Mel on top of me. Otis Nixon was one of the guys that pulled him off me. Saved my life.

 After that Mel and me were great friends. . .strange.

 "I've had other arguments with players, but nothing physical. John Rocker invited me into the weight room once and shut the door. He was not happy with something I wrote. Rocker scared me a lot more than Mel.’’

 Q. How challenging it is to maintain a personal life and successful marriage by traveling six months every year? Does your wife often travel with you? During the season, do you still watch the Tribe on TV/Radio on your off days, as rare as they are?

 A. I have a great wife, who is strong and independent. She earned her master’s, PHD and raised two kids while I was chasing the ballclub around the country. When our boys were young, they used to come to spring training for several days with my wife or father-in-law. That's when the Indians trained in Tucson.

 My wife is in education and is very busy. She also earns a lot more money than me. But she knows I love this job and that it makes he happy. She does come on a couple of trips a year with me. She likes the beach so Florida is a good trip for her.

 The boys are gown now and I think I missed a lot because it seemed like they grew up and were gone in flash. They both still live near us and they are big Tribe fans. They've also given us four grandchildren, which is a blast.

 When I don't cover a game, I'll almost always watch it on TV. I drive my wife crazy. She thinks I'm nuts. If I'm driving on an off-day, I listen to the game on the radio. I guess I'm addicted.

 Q. Is there a particular city you love to visit every year on the Tribe’s schedule-or at this point in your career-do all the city landscapes and hotel rooms begin to look alike?

 A.`` I love walking around Seattle. I love taking the subway from Grand Central Station to Yankee Stadium. I love coming out of that tunnel on the subway into the sunlight and seeing Yankee Stadium right there on the 161st street stop. I like walking to the ballpark in Boston and Toronto. You can walk along the water in Toronto and that's cool.

 Chicago is a great city to visit. When I go to Detroit, I like to stay downtown near Greektown. There's always a lot of action in Detroit. I like Greek food and they have a great bakery there.’’

 Q.  As a beat reporter, what was your most memorable game covering the Indians; also, were there any particular players (not necessarily Indians) who had profound impact on you or earned your respect and admiration?

 A. "The thing I remember most in regard to games was the whole 1995 season. So many come back. So many late home runs.

 I think the game where Paul Sorrento hit a homer late to beat Toronto was in June, 1995. The Blue Jays had David Cone pitching and were up 8-0 and the Tribe came back and won the game on Sorrento's two-out, two-run home run to cap a three run ninth in a thrilling 9-8 win.  To me that was a signal that something special was happening. ‘’

 "I've like almost all the guys I've covered. A few stick out to me: Brook Jacoby, Kenny Lofton, Julio Franco, Mike Hargrove, Omar Vizquel, Sandy Alomar Jr. Jacoby was a grinder who never complained and just played the game. Kenny Lofton was prickly as a player, but I loved his talent and I loved the way he played at a high level for so long. Wherever he went, he helped his team win. I think he's a Hall of Famer. Liked Julio just because he was so much fun to cover. One of the best pure hitters I've ever seen. Covered Grover as a player, coach and manager. Always the same, always dead honest. He'd get mad at you one day, but the next day it was forgotten. Never held a grudge. Vizquel was just a joy to cover and watch. Stand-up guy. Never ducked a tough question. Alomar is a solid guy. Really like him.

 Q. Are you a strong supporter of MLB introducing instant replay? Does such a change run the risk of extending games to as long as four and a half hours? Are there any other changes you’d like to see in the game?

 A. ``For me, the more replay the better. It drives me crazy when people talk about the "human element' being a part of the game they want to retain. So that means you want to continue having a game where mistakes are made that cost team's games when the means are available to make the right call? Amazing.’’

 Q. What is the most difficult part of covering a baseball game, which most readers might not fully appreciate: deadline pressures, getting players to talk with you, writing a lead that grabs readers’ attention, concern for accuracy, beating your competitors to the punch, etc?

 A. Two big hurdles for me: deadlines and access. The clock is always ticking. With the Internet, we're sending game stories as soon as the game ends. Last out, you hit the send button, even in spring training games. Then you have to rewrite.

 The volume of work has increased as well. You write an early post, a notebook, a running gamer and then a rewrite of the gamer. On the Internet every story can get a headline, so there are times when you can write four to six stories a day. Not to mention Tweeting.

 Access has been a reporter's problem for ages. But now, with how fast the news moves, if you don't have access to general managers, agents or players, you're sunk as far as covering a breaking story. So it's critical that you have sources who will help you.’’

 Q. With so many newspapers, including the Plain Dealer, having slashed editorial positions, including the shrinking of news space at an alarming rate, how concerned are you for younger reporters trying to get into sports reporting; and how concerned are you for the future of print journalism in general?

 A. ``Somebody is always going to have to tell the story whether it's about a fire, public corruption, car crash or a game-winning home run. What vehicle they use to tell it and to send it to their readers is evolving every day.’’

 ``We just went to three days home delivery at the PD. They are still publishing a printed paper seven days a week, but for four days it's available only on the street.’’

 ``I just took a job with the Northeast Ohio Media Group, the digital arm of The Plain Dealer, and will continue to cover the Indians, but everything I deal with now is online. Things are changing so fast. But the job is still the same. At least for now.''

****

 -Bill Lucey

WPLucey@gmail.com

August 15, 2013

 

As the Trade Deadline Looms, Look No Further Than MLB Trade Rumors

As the Major League Baseball deadline approaches, baseball fans, especially those with their favorite team in the playoff hunt, are usually scouring the web, following their favorite beat writer on Twitter and staying glued to ESPN for the latest news of possible trades before the clock strikes midnight on July 31st. The non-waiver Major League trading deadline has been July 31st since the 1986 season.

For the most rabid fans, however, who want to catch wind of trades in the works, there’s really only one source: MLB Trade Rumors , an indispensable site that reports on trades and free agent signings 365 days a year with extensive coverage of all 30 teams. Reports or rumors of trades are conveniently linked to original online stories or reported by their own team of writers. Much like retailers during Black Friday (the day after Thanksgiving, the biggest shopping day of the Christmas season), Christmas comes in July for MLB Trade Rumors, especially the last week of July, when a majority of 11th hour trades are finalized.

Tim Dierkes, the creator of MLB Trade Rumors and a writer and contributor to the site, informs me his site averaged about 600,000 pageviews every day from July 1 through July 21st of this year; and for the last 10 days of this month, leading up the trade deadline, he expects to receive approximately 1.5 million page views per day, with almost six million coming in the last two days.

Last year, MLB Trade Rumors registered 3,485,401 page views on July 31st, baseball's trade deadline. Dierkes, a long-suffering Chicago Cubs fan, who used to work in the search engine marketing field before taking the website full-time in January of 2008, currently lives with his wife and three children in Glen Ellyn, IL..

With practically every baseball beat writer from coast-to-coast live tweeting about anything and everything these days, even if a manager blows his nose, I asked Dierkes if he felt the explosion of Twitter has diverted traffic away from his site?  Dierkes said: ``Beat writers being on Twitter has not hurt traffic...I think a lot of people would like to avoid having to be on Twitter to catch up on the news, so they're happy to have us act as a filter.’’

In addition to a daily feed of trade rumors and transactions, MLB Trade Rumors features a user friendly pull down menu of ``Tools’’, including a ``2013 MLB Free Agent Tracker’’, ``2013 MLB Free Agent List’’, a ``Transaction Tracker’’, and updated database of which agency a major league baseball player is associated with. And for active users accustomed to getting their news on their mobile devices, the site makes available apps for iPhone, iPad, and Android.

Baseball fans are all too well aware that the fast approaching trading deadline can be a wildly exciting time, with a buzz of trade rumors filling the air.

It wasn’t until July 31st, 2007, for example, the last day of the trading deadline, when fans learned that the Atlanta Braves acquired infielder Mark Teixeira and left-handed pitcher Ron Mahay from the Texas Rangers for catcher/1st baseman Jarrod Saltalamacchia, infielder Elvis Andrus, left-handed pitcher Matt Harrison, left-handed pitcher Beau Jones and right-handed pitcher Neftali Feliz. And it was July 31st , 2008,  when the Boston Red Sox unloaded their disgruntled cleanup hitter Manny Ramirez in a three-way deal in exchange for Jason Bay from the Pittsburgh Pirates , while the Red Sox paid $ 7 million left on Ramirez's contract, along with sending reliever Craig Hansen and infielder Brandon Moss to Pittsburgh.

Other notable trades on July 31st have included: The Seattle Mariners trading their staff ace Randy Johnson to the Houston Astros in 1998 for left-fielder Carlos Guillen, pitcher Freddy Garcia and a player to be named; the New York Yankees trading outfielder Ruben Sierra and pitcher Matt Drews to the Detroit Tigers in 1996 for 1st baseman/DH Cecil Fielder; and the Oakland Athletics shipping their star slugger, 1st baseman  Mark McGwire, to the St. Cardinals in 1997 for pitcher T.J. Mathews, pitcher Eric Ludwick and pitcher Blake Stein.

From July 2000-2013, based on statistics compiled by Major League Baseball, the Pittsburgh Pirates have made a total of 39 trades during the month of July, the most of any major league club, while the club with the least amount of trades during the same time period are the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim with only 12.

According to Major League Baseball, a trade deadline in the Major Leagues was first established by the National League on August 20th, 1917. After that date, a player had to clear N.L. waivers before being traded. The American League followed suit in 1920, but with a deadline of July 1st. The following year, both the A.L. and N.L. agreed on a deadline of August 1st.   Subsequently, on December 14, 1922, the deadline was changed again to June 15th after securing approval at the Joint Major League meetings held at the Hotel Commodore in New York and it would remain that way until after the 1985 season.

-Bill Lucey
WPLucey@gmail.com
July 25, 2013

Number of Trades in July by Club: 2000-2013:
Pittsburgh: 39
San Diego: 38
Boston: 36
Los Angeles Dodgers: 34
Chicago Clubs: 34
New York Yankees: 30
Colorado: 29
Cleveland: 28
Chicago White Sox: 27
Cincinnati: 27
Kansas City: 27
San Francisco: 26
Texas: 26
Baltimore: 25
New York Mets: 25
Philadelphia: 25
Seattle: 24
Arizona: 22
Atlanta: 22
Miami: 21
Milwaukee: 21
St. Louis: 20
Washington/Montreal: 20
Toronto: 17
Oakland: 16
Detroit: 15
Tampa Bay: 15
Minnesota: 14
L.A. Angels of Anaheim: 12

Source: Major League Baseball

 

Miami Herald Employees Warming Up To New Digs

Many thanks to the Miami Herald  for passing along photos of their new 150,000-square-foot home in Doral, in the 3300 block of Northwest 91st Avenue, a small city on the west side of Miami-Dade County. The new facility is perfectly tailored for the new media as reporters and  photographers more and more rely on modern technology (smart phones, digital cameras, etc) to better and more efficiently cover breaking news, politics and sports for their 1.5 million readers.
 
While admittedly it’s taking Herald employees a little time getting comfortable with their new headquarters, away from One Herald Plaza with its spectacular view of Biscayne Bay, their new home, which once housed the U.S. Southern Command, comes equipped with a fully-stocked workout room (something they didn’t have at their previous home) and a more expansive newsroom with an interlocking grid of desks and offices, creating a sharp and modern synergistic flow from department to department, where even editors are now more accessible.

-Bill Lucey

WPLucey@gmail.com

July 23, 2013

 A peek inside the CND (Continuous News Desk), the heart of the Herald's news operation. Editors at the table are holding the daily afternoon news planning meeting. Photo Credit: Courtesy / Miami Herald.

 A large group of MHMC (Miami Herald Media Company) employees poses outside the company's new building in Doral shortly after the move from downtown Miami, Photo Credit: Courtesy / Miami Herald.

-- MHMC executives, including Publisher David Landsberg, cut the symbolic ribbon designated the opening of the new facility. Photo Credit: Courtesy / Miami Herald.

 

Settling on Just the Right Title For a Book-Never an Easy Chore

Margaret Mitchell considered the title ``Tomorrow is Another Day'' among others,  before settling  on ``Gone With the Wind.''

****

So you if you can’t judge a book by its cover, can you judge it by its title?

If the early rumbling is any indication, a volcano has erupted over Mark Leibovich’s  new book ``This Town’’ , which takes a hard look inside the nation’s capital, where the streets are paved with gold; assuming, of course, you’re on the right talk shows, rub the right elbows, and dance in the most powerful circles D.C. has to offer. Such blatant cynicism extends to reporters, bloggers, cable shows and members of the new media, who rather than representing dispassionate observers have become co-opted into the celebrity culture or carnival atmosphere that has become so endemic in Washington these days.

Since the book was released, the chief national correspondent for The New York Times’ Magazine has faced heaps of biting criticism from his contemporaries and members of the Washington elite, questioning his audacity for exposing the unwritten rules or codes of Washington reporting when he’s a member of the club himself.

``Washington has been transformed by wealth and the new media more than any other city in the world’’, Leibovich recently told Charlie Rose. As long as you gain a reputation for being a Washington insider, Leibovich reasons, you can hawk your services to any lobbying firm or media outlet for a pretty penny.  Such a culture perpetuates a sense of mediocrity.

``This Town’’ doesn’t merely focus on reporters and the media but includes tough love critiques of the entire Washington elite, including the politicians themselves.

Washington is increasingly become a town where you come to get rich rather than devote yourself to a life of public service. This wasn’t true 20 or 30 years ago, Leibovich observed.  Citing one example to the PBS host, Leibovich offers up Robert Gibbs, the former press secretary to President Obama, who since leaving his post in 2011, has racked up about $2 million in speaking fees.

Explaining just how corrupted the culture of Washington can be for any new arrivals, Leibovitch points out that Barack Obama, the junior senator from Illinois, who came to Washington as the 44^th president of the United States, hoping to be an ``agent of change’’-in the end-fell victim to Washington changing him, more, much more, than Obama changed Washington.  An extremely poignant commentary on the crippling culture in the nation’s capital. And many wonder why voters have become so cynical of Washington.

``Washington has become extremely self-satisfied at a time when the country has become increasingly dissatisfied’’ Leibovich informed Rose.

During his Charlie Rose interview, Leibovich said he thought about a number of titles for the book before settling on ``This Town.’’ Curious what other titles he considered, I immediately shot off an email to the Times’ national correspondent. He replied, writing that he kicked around a few titles: ``One was “Suck Up City” “You’ll Always Eat Lunch in this Town Again” was another. And also “The Club.”

This got me to thinking of other famous books whose authors pondered several titles before deciding on that one magical title that eventually propelled them into national and international best sellers.

Here, then, are some of my favorites:

 

Original Title: ``At This Point in Time''

Published Title: ``All The President's Men’’ (1974)

Authors: Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein

 

Original Title: ``Tomorrow is Another Day''; also ``Tote the Weary Load'', ``Milestones’’, ``Jettison’’, ``Ba! Ba! Black Sheep’’, ``None so Blind’’, ``Not in Our Stars'' and ``Bugles Sang True''

Published Title: ``Gone with the Wind (1936)

Author: Margaret Mitchell

 

Original Title: ``Before This Anger''

Published Title: ``Roots’’ (1976)

Author: Alex Haley

 

Original Title: ``Great White, ``The Shark’’, ``Leviathan Rising’’, ``The Jaws of Death.’’

Published Title: ``Jaws’’ (1974)

Author: Peter Benchley

 

Original Title: ``Catch-18’’

Published Title: ``Catch-22’’ (1961)

Author: Joseph Heller

 

Original Title: ``Four-and-a Half Years of Struggle against Lies, Stupidity, and Cowardice.’’

Published Title: ``Mein Kampf’’ (My Struggle)-1925

Author: Adolf Hitler.

 

Original Title: "Beyond the Birds and Bees"

Published Title: "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex’’ (But Were Afraid to Ask) -1969

Author:  Dr. David Reuben.

 

Original Title: ``All’s Well That Ends Well''

Published Title: ``War and Peace’’ (1866)

Author: Leo Tolstoy

 

Original Title: ``Incident at West Egg''; also ``Among Ash Heaps and Millionaires'', ``Trimalchio in West Egg'', ```On the Road to West Egg'', ``Gold-Hatted Gatsby'' and ``The High-Bounding Lover''

Published Titles: ``The Great Gatsby’’ (1925)

Author: F. Scott Fitzgerald

 

Original Title: ``First Impressions’’

Published Title: ``Pride and Prejudice’’ (1813)

Author: Jane Austen

 

Original Title of Play: ``The Moth’’ and ``The Poker Night’’

Published Title: ``A Streetcar Named Desire’’ (1947)

Author Tennessee Williams

 

Original Title: ``Mag's Diversion’’; also ``The Copperfield Disclosures’’, ``The Copperfield Records’’, ``The Copperfield Survey of the World as It Rolled’’ and ``Copperfield Complete’’

Published Title: David Copperfield (1849)

Author: Charles Dickens

 

Original Title: ``Alice's Adventures Underground’’

Published Title: ``Alice's Adventures in Wonderland’’ (1865)

Author: Lewis Carroll

 

Original Title: ``Paul Morel’’

Published Title: ``Sons and Lovers’’ (1913)

Author: D.H. Lawrence

 

Original Title: ``The Romantic Egotist’’

Published Title: ``This Side of Paradise’’ (1920)

Author: F. Scott Fitzgerald

 

Original Title: ``Fiesta''; also ``The Lost Generation'', ``River to the Sea'', `` Two Lie Together'', and ``The Old Leaven''

Published Title: ``The Sun Also Rises’’ (1926).

Author: Ernest Hemingway

 

Original Title: ``Salinas Valley’’

Published Title: `` East of Eden’’ (1952)

Author: John Steinbeck

 

Original Title: ``Proud Flesh’’

Published Title: ``All the King's Men'' (1946)

Author: Robert Penn Warren

 

Original Title: ``Something That Happened’’

Published Title: ``Of Mice and Men (1937)

Author: John Steinbeck

 

Original Title:  ``They Don't Build Statues to Businessmen’’

Published Title: ``Valley of the Dolls’’ (1966)

Author: Jacqueline Susann

 

Original Title of Poem: ``He Do The Police in Different Voices.’’

Published Title: ``The Waste Land’’ (1922)

Author: T.S. Eliot

 

Original Title: ``If Wishes Were Horses’’

Published Title: ``From Here to Eternity’’ (1951)

Author: James Jones

 

Original Title: ``Bar-B-Q?!’’

Final Title: The Postman Always Rings Twice (1934)

Author: James M. Cain

 

-Bill Lucey

July 18, 2013

WPLucey@gmail.com

 

July 4th Holds a Very Special Place in Carl Bernstein's Heart

Carl Bernstein and Christine Kuehbec. Source: Michael Loccisano/Getty Images North America

****

Before firing up the grills,  briskly raising ``Old Glory'' or dashing  off to a parade, it's worth pointing out that July 4th is a memorable day for more than the Second Continental Congress (meeting in the Pennsylvania State House) approving the Declaration of Independence on July 4^th, 1776.

Among other significant events, July 4th, 1827, was the day slavery was abolished in New York; on July 4th, 1831 ``America (My Country `Tis of Thee)'' was first sung in Boston at the Park Street Church; on July 4, 1855, Walt Whitman's first edition of ``Leaves of Grass’’ was published in Brooklyn; on July 4th, 1863, Confederate Gen. John Pemberton surrendered to Union forces at Vicksburg, Miss.,; and on July 4th, 1884, France presented the United States with a statue called ``Liberty Enlightening the World’’, which became known as the Statue of Liberty.

And…Oh yeah!...July 4th is remembered as a truly special day, if not for all Americans, than at least for investigative reporter and author Carl Bernstein.

It was on July 4th, 2003, when the world-renowned journalist was married in Reykjavik, Iceland, of all places, to Christine Kuehbeck.  ``As a wonderful a day as I can conjure as our tenth wedding anniversary approaches'' Bernstein tells me.    ``No, not an Icelandic bride'' he says, [a former model] ``from California.''

July 4th, 2003 was Bernstein's third marriage. He was previously married to former Washington Post reporter Carol Honsa and writer and director Nora Ephron.

-Bill Lucey

WPLucey@gmail.com

July 3, 2013

 

Which Justices' Prose Reigns Supreme?

For passionate U.S. Supreme Court watchers, the last couple of weeks must have felt like Christmas came early; what with momentous decisions handed down on key social issues, including same- sex marriage, affirmative action and the highly explosive decision which struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Overall, in the latest U.S. Supreme Court term, which began on October 1, 2012 (and ends on Sunday, October 6, 2013), the justices have signed 73 opinions after oral arguments, according to the ScotusBlog, a private blog devoted to comprehensively covering the Supreme Court of the United States.

To get a sense just how much reading U.S. Supreme Court analysts and correspondents have had to wade through over the past several months, just consider there have been 169 opinions issued by the 9 justices, including 78 majority opinions, 39 concurring opinions, and 52 dissenting opinions.

All this adds up to a boatload of reading for the few, those lucky few, who are responsible for covering the U.S. Supreme Court and sifting through the thicket of opinions.

As you can imagine just by the breadth of issues covered and the monstrous size of the opinions released, this doesn’t exactly make for light reading. What’s more, if an individual justice has a predilection for writing long-winded rambling opinions, it must make the correspondents’ job all the more difficult.

Curious just how many of the current justices have a natural flair for writing with a fluid poetic style when composing their opinions; I thought I would check in with some U.S. Supreme Court correspondents. According to Adam Liptak, who covers the Court for The New York Times, `` There are three great writers on the Court: [John G.] Roberts and [Elena] Kagan are great explainers and debaters, and both can turn a phrase.’’ `` [Antonin] Scalia is also enormously readable’’, Liptak says, ``though his sarcasm is not to everyone's taste.’’

Hailing Roberts, Kagan, and Scalia as some of the more graceful writers on the present Court, as Liptak does (and most of his contemporaries would most likely agree) this led me to wonder how these justices stack up against their predecessors, dating back to 1789?

With that in mind, I consulted with some of the leading legal scholars in the country, to get their opinion which justices exhibited a natural gift for the written word.

What follows, then, are some answers that came back.

• ``I think you might find general agreement that Robert Jackson wrote the best prose of any of the justices -- eloquent without being florid, shrewdly realistic without being cynical. Like John Marshall, another great stylist, Jackson had a knack for expounding the structural design of the Constitution, and also the conflicts within that design.  For a sample, see his opinions in the Barnette and Gobitis (compulsory flag-salute) cases and his famous opinion in the steel seizure case.

Holmes had the most brilliant aphorisms, which is probably why he is the most quoted of all the justices ("great cases, like hard cases, make bad law", "general propositions do not decide concrete cases", etc.)and also was capable of great eloquence (see his dissents in the Abrams free-speech cases and the Schwimmer case of a woman denied immigration because she would not swear to bear arms.

My own favorite on the current Court is Ruth Ginsburg. Her style is spare and unadorned, without rhetorical flourishes or quotable soundbites, but it is tightly reasoned and always well supported by evidence and examples.  She reminds me of Justice Brandeis in her powerful intellect and keen perception of the real-life consequences of Supreme Court decisions.  Her concurring opinion in the Obamacare case and dissent in the recent Voting Rights case are virtuoso performances. They are (characteristically) understated, but efficiently grind up the opposing opinions into rubbish.  This small, frail lady has been doing valuable service to the republic.''

-Robert W. Gordon, Professor of Law at Stanford University; a preeminent legal historian, prolific scholar with expertise in American legal history is author of a number of key works on legal philosophy, including ``The Legacy of Oliver Wendell Holmes (1992), and `Storie Critiche del Diritto'' (Critical Legal Histories) (1995).

 

• ``Several earlier justices come to mind as notable prose stylists. Holmes and Brandeis were wonderful writers. Holmes gave us some wonderful language. For example, dissenting in Lochner v. New York, which struck down a state law limiting working hours, he tartly observed: "The Fourteenth Amendment does not enact Mr. Herbert Spencer's Social Statics." He also cautioned, in Schenck v. United States, that "the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a crowded theatre and causing a panic." And his dissenting opinion in Abrams v. United States gave us the wonderful image of the marketplace of ideas as the basis of the First Amendment. There are many other examples.

As for Brandeis, I am particularly partial to this line from his opinion in Whitney v. California, which remains to my mind the most eloquent defense of freedom of speech ever articulated by anyone on the Supreme Court: "Men feared witches and burned women." Brandeis also observed that "in most matters it is more important that the applicable rule of law be settled than that it be settled right." Both of these lines came in dissenting opinions (well, as a technical point, the Whitney opinion is called a concurrence, but Brandeis rejected the Court's whole approach to the First Amendment issue yet reluctantly agreed with the result because of how the issue was presented in the lower courts).

A few other justices also come to mind. One is Robert Jackson, who in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette observed that, "if there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion." Jackson also famously observed in Brown v. Allen: "We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final."

Another is the second Justice John Marshall Harlan, who observed in Cohen v. California (a case that overturned the disorderly-conduct conviction of a man who at the height of the Vietnam War had a jacket emblazoned with "Fuck the Draft"): "While the particular four-letter word being litigated here is perhaps more distasteful than most others of its genre, it is nevertheless often true that one man's vulgarity is another's lyric."

Justice Stevens was no slouch as a stylist, either. One of my favorites from him comes from his opinion in Young v. American Mini Theatres, which upheld zoning restrictions on adult cinemas and bookstores: "Few of us would march our sons and daughters off to war to preserve the citizen's right to watch 'Specified Sexual Activities' in the theaters of our choice."

Finally, although I don't think he quite ranks with these others overall, Justice Souter produced a jaw-dropping line in a footnote during his first term on the Court. The case, American National Red Cross v. S.G., dealt with a very technical procedural issue. Responding to Justice Scalia's scathing dissent, Souter wrote: "The dissent accuses us of repeating what it announces as Chief Justice [John] Marshall's misunderstanding, in [Case 2], of his own previous opinion in [Case 1]. We are honored."

-Jonathan L. Entin,  Associate Dean for Academic Affairs; David L. Brennan Professor of Law, and Professor of Political Science at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law in Cleveland, Ohio, where he teaches Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, Courts, Public Policy, and Social Change, along with a Supreme Court Seminar.  Professor Entin clerked for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg when she was on the U.S. court of Appeals.

 

• ``I like [Robert] Jackson, with his Barnette decision [Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution protected students from being forced to salute the American flag and say the Pledge of Allegiance in school]  being the classic example. [Oliver Wendell] Holmes is good also, but he tends to be a bit on the sarcastic side in his dissents. I think [Louis] Brandeis writes better and with more passion. Compare their two dissents in Olmstead. I think the first [John Marshall] Harlan wrote well, as shown in particular by his Plessy dissent. On the current Court, I think [Anthony] Kennedy writes very well—his recent decision in Windsor is a good example. ''

-Robert Langran, Professor in the Department of Political Science at Villanova University and author of ``The United States Supreme Court: An Historical and Political Analysis'' and ``The Supreme Court: A Concise History.''

 

• ``One's appreciation of writing style probably has something to do with one's agreement with the content.  In my opinion, Justice Scalia is the most rhetorically gifted member of the Court.  He is especially good at skewering obfuscation and pretension.  No doubt that is more winning if one is not the target.

For an example of Scalia's mature style, with all the features that excite both fans and critics, I don't think you can do better than Part I of his dissent in Windsor, the Defense of Marriage Act case decided last week.''

-John C. Jeffries, Jr., David and Marry Harrison Distinguished Professor Law at the University of Virginia Law School and author of a biography on Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr., a justice he once clerked for soon after graduating from the University of Virginia Law School.

 

• `For [Robert] Jackson, it's hard to top his majority opinion in West Va School Bd v. Barnette and his dissent in Korematsu.  For [John]  Marshall, the classics are Marbury and McCulloch.  [Louis} Brandeis's dissents in Olmstead and Whitney top his list.  For Harlan, I'd go with the Plessy dissent.  And OMG, I left out Holmes, for whom the Abrams dissent, the Lochner dissent, and the majority in Missouri v. Holland would be my stylistic favorites.''

 

-Michael C. Dorf, Robert S. Stevens Professor of Law at Cornell University Law School, who has written over seventy law review articles and essays on constitutional law and related subjects and is the co-author (with Laurence Tribe) of ``On Reading the Constitution.''(Harvard University Press, 1991).

 

 ``John Marshall--Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.--Robert Jackson were certainly gifted writers but for a "poetic" style, I would go with Holmes who, in Grant Gilmore's words, "knew how to reduce an idea to its bare bones in a single, flashing phrase."

-Philip C. Bobbitt, Distinguished Senior Lecturer, School of Law at The University of Texas at Austin is one of the nation's leading constitutional theorists and author of six books, including: ``Constitutional Fate'' (1982) and ``Constitutional Interpretation'' (1991).

 

-Bill Lucey

WPLucey@gmail.com

July 1, 2013

Snowden Storm: How Much Damage to International Relations?

As Edward Snowden, the former technical contractor for the National Security Agency (NSA) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employee awaits his fate in the transit lounge of Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport; the extent of damage this 30-year old has done to strain relations between the United States and Russia and China remains an open question.

Working through the Guardian newspaper in London, beginning in May, Snowden exposed a number of classified documents gathered by the NSA, including the interception of U.S. and European telephone records and Internet surveillance programs, which touched off a heated debate about American privacy and civil liberties being violated. Of more concern to the U.S government, however, isn’t about Americans privacy being invaded; rather, their concern is the breadth of classified information that may have been passed on to the Chinese and Russian governments.

The U.S. government has charged Snowden with stealing government property, transmitting national security information without approval and willfully communicating classified data to unauthorized individuals, serious charges which violate the U.S. Espionage Act, and could result in a lengthy prison term for the Wilmington, N.C. native.

Before dashing off to Moscow, Snowden stayed in Hong Kong until he was given clearance to leave by the Chinese government.

The former CIA employee is believed to have sought asylum in Ecuador.  Despite his passport having been revoked by the U.S., he still would be able to board a plane.  

Passengers lacking border regulations are subject only to a fine of 1,000 rubles ($30), according to the Russia’s Administrative Code. Besides, Vladimir Putin has already stated that Snowden is free to travel at will, since he had ``committed no crime on Russian soil.’’

Since there are no direct flights to Quito, the capital of Ecuador, Snowden would have to fly to Havana first. The next flight to Havana from Moscow isn’t until Thursday.

Ecuador's foreign minister, Ricardo Patino, however, told the Associated Press, an asylum request could take up to two months to process, approximately the same amount of time it took Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to take refuge at Ecuador’s embassy in London.

In the meantime, John McCain, a senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Armed Services committees in meeting with reporters recently lashed out at both Russia and China, strongly asserting that Mr. Obama needs a "re-evaluation" of Washington's relationship with both Moscow and Beijing.

Beijing and Moscow countered with their own lashings. An editorial published in Xinhua, the state-owned Chinese news agency, argued that "the United States, which has long been trying to play innocent as a victim of cyberattacks, has turned out to be the biggest villain in our age.''

And Igor Morozov, a Russian lawmaker, wrote that the case exposed an American "policy of double standards."

All this couldn’t have come at a worse time for the U.S., especially with the war in Syria still unresolved.

Equally troubling, in July, the United States-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue begins in Washington in which a number of Chinese leaders are expected to attend to discuss, among other topics, the behavior of computers and online, while in September, President Obama is scheduled to travel to St Petersburg and Moscow to meet with Russian president Vladimir Putin.

So has the U.S. relationship with Moscow and Beijing taken a dramatic turn for the worse and could this hurricane potentially bring Russia and China closer together; or is this Snowden incident merely a mild thunderstorm, which will eventually blow over?

To answer these questions, I consulted with a number of Russian and Chinese scholars in order to get their assessment of the potential international repercussions.

Here, then, are some responses which came back:

• ``Neither Moscow nor Washington are ready for that Cold Shower having so many other problems.   But this case will deepen the mistrust between the two sides that exists already.''

-Lilia Shevtsova, Chairs the Russian Domestic Politics and Political Institutions Program at the Carnegie Moscow Center.

 

• ``For me, I wouldn’t think that this will strain US/China ties as the one country/two systems China/HK arrangement gives Beijing the ability to deny making the call on Snowden. I don’t have any idea if China’s agencies gathered whatever data Snowden may have. There’s little doubt that this incident has provided Americans, Chinese, and others with much more insight into NSA capabilities and practices. I do not know if Snowden has the ability to provide much more information or much more important information than he has already revealed.''

-Clayton Dube, Associate Director of the University of Southern California (USC) U.S.-China Institute.

 

• ``Relations between Russia and US have been "strained" and worse for quite some time - what with Magnitsky Act and Russia reciprocating with a ban on American adoption of Russian orphans; kicking out the USAID from Russia, strong disagreement over Syria - and  persistent anti-American rhetoric at home. The body language and facial expressions of both presidents at the G8 meeting in N Ireland gives one an idea of just how "strained" the relations have become.  I think possible cooperation between Russia and China on cyber issues should be disturbing to the US and - again, it can hardly do anything about it. ''

-Maria Lipman, Chair of the Carnegie Moscow Center’s Society and Regions Program and editor of the Pro et Contra journal published by the Carnegie Moscow Center.

 

• ``I would assume that Chinese and Russians copied all the materials Snowden has, so it is potentially a major intelligence leak for us depending on what he has.  I think the two sides will try to insulate the issues in the bilateral relationship from the Snowden case, although the Putin/Obama agreement last week to cooperate more on cybersecurity may take a hit.''

-Andrew C. Kuchins, senior fellow and director of the Center For Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) for its Russia and Eurasia Program.

 

• ``My sense is that there will be a brief flurry of bad feelings between Russia and the USA, and between China and the USA, but that the underlying importance of these relationships will force cooperation and a better tone in dialogue after a short while. Snowden may have helped the Chinese and Russians understand the extent of US surveillance operations, but the principal effect has been to inform the American public, which ironically doesn't seem to care that much.''

-Ronald Grigor Suny, Charles Tilly Collegiate Professor of Social and Political History at The University of Michigan.

 

• ``I think that this is a minor incident compared to all of the others that are worsening our relations with Russia (though it adds to the list of ways Russia enjoys feeling its sovereign difference). The more serious concerns is the crackdown on civil society and independent critical expression and conflicts over Syria.''

-Mark D. Steinberg, Professor in the Department of History at the University of Illinois and editor of the Slavic Review at UL.

                ***

 Bill Lucey
WPLucey@gmail.com
June 26, 2013