Stanley,
Successive governments of Australia have also shown a readiness to
appoint their cronies to various high offices - but here in Australia
we would refer to those cronies as "mates". The word "mate" in
Australia does not necessarily have to carry the connotation "crony"
- but in that context it would.
'Avagoodweegend mate : - )
Cheers
Ron Huttner LL. B (Hons)
(Retired) Barrister, Solicitor, Law Lecturer and Legal Researcher
Melbourne
Australia
'
On 08/10/2005, at 7:21 AM, Stanley R. Conrad wrote:
> Ms. Frye-
>
> I use the term "crony" in its denotative sense (i.e., for example,
> > Merriam Webster online: "a close friend especially of long
> standing", a pal), same is true of my use of "cronyism" (again >
> Merriam Webster online: "partiality to cronies especially as
> evidenced in the appointment of political hangers-on to office
> without regard to their qualifications"). Words, of course, have
> emotion-tinged connotations that are wise to be avoided when that
> is possible. If anybody can suggest reasonable alternatives to
> "crony" and "cronyism" I'd be happy to consider using them in the
> future.
>
> Both words, however (especially the latter) point clearly back to
> the person doing the appointing, not to the appointee (in this
> case, Ms. Miers).
>
> Whatever one's itemization of Supreme Court credentials might be, I
> suspect one would never find "crony" on the list.
>
> Stanley
>
> =================================<
> Stanley R. Conrad, JD/MLS
> Reference / Special Collections Librarian
> Rittenberg Law Library
> St. John's University School of Law
> 8000 Utopia Parkway
> Jamaica, NY 11439
> conrads@stjohns.edu
> 718-990-2012 (voice)
> 718-990-6649 (fax)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu on behalf of Frye, Nanna
> Sent: Fri 10/7/2005 12:28 PM
> To: law-lib@ucdavis.edu
> Cc:
> Subject: RE: Harriet Miers - Supreme Court Nominee
>
>
>
> Stanley --
>
> If you look at my reply to your posting from yesterday,
> you will see that my comments dealt solely with the criticism that
> Ms. Miers has no prior judicial experience. I made no reference to
> derogatory statements in other contexts. However, I do object to
> the highly emotional "zing" words, e.g., "cronyism," that are used
> by you to conduct this intellectual discussion. Let's start the
> discussion off by identifying what are the necessary qualities of a
> Supreme Court justice, what are the desirable but not required
> qualities, and what qualities are unacceptable. It is only when we
> establish the criteria that we have a means of measuring whether
> any nominee "measures up."
>
> Nanna Frye, Law Librarian
> Court of Appeal
> San Diego, CA
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stanley R. Conrad [mailto:conrads@stjohns.edu
> <mailto:conrads@stjohns.edu> ]
> Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 4:03 PM
> To: Frye, Nanna; Samuel E Trosow
> Cc: law-lib@ucdavis.edu
> Subject: RE: Harriet Miers - Supreme Court Nominee
>
> Nanna-
>
> If derogatory statements have been directed anywhere in this
> thread, I think they've been focused through Miers on the
> administration's disastrous record of cronyism (most glaring recent
> example is, of course, appointing a failed Arabian Horse judge to
> run FEMA). Questions about Ms. Miers' qualifications and views are
> of supreme importance to anyone who cares about, or is involved in
> the law. And to the degree that the administration resists the
> release of documents written by her, enquiring minds should be
> asking why.
>
>
> Comparing her case to Justice Powell is silly, actually. Read
> the biographical information you posted. Powell was not a crony of
> the administration that appointed him. Ms. Miers may be qualified
> -- we may never know -- but describing her as a "crony" is not a
> political judgment. It's a fact.
>
>
> Stanley
>
> =================================<
> Stanley R. Conrad, JD/MLS
> Reference / Special Collections Librarian Rittenberg Law
> Library St. John's University School of Law 8000 Utopia Parkway
>
> Jamaica, NY 11439
> conrads@stjohns.edu
> 718-990-2012 (voice)
> 718-990-6649 (fax)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frye, Nanna [mailto:Nanna.Frye@jud.ca.gov
> <mailto:Nanna.Frye@jud.ca.gov> ]
> Sent: Thu 10/6/2005 6:24 PM
> To: Stanley R. Conrad; Samuel E Trosow
> Cc: law-lib@ucdavis.edu
> Subject: RE: Harriet Miers - Supreme Court Nominee
>
>
>
> I am tired of the derogatory statements and
> intimations that
> Harriet Miers is unqualified solely because she has no
> prior judicial
> experience. Are you prepared to state that all nominees
> must have prior
> judicial experience? If so, then you are saying that
> U.S. Supreme Court
> Justice Lewis Powell was unqualified for the position.
> Here is his
> biographical information posted by the Supreme Court
> Historical Society.
>
> LEWIS F. POWELL, JR., was born in Suffolk, Virginia, on
> September 19,
> 1907, and lived most of his life in Richmond, Virginia.
> He was graduated
> from Washington and Lee University in 1929 and from
> Washington and Lee
> University Law School in 1931. In 1932, he received a
> master's degree
> from Harvard Law School. Powell entered practice with a
> Richmond law
> firm, where he became a senior partner and continued
> his association
> until 1971. During World War II, he served in the
> United States Army Air
> Force in Europe and North America. After the War,
> Powell resumed his law
> practice. He served as the President of the American
> Bar Association
> from 1964 to 1965 and of the American College of Trial
> Lawyers from 1968
> to 1969. In 1966, he served as a member of President
> Lyndon B. Johnson's
> Crime Commission. On October 21, 1971, President
> Richard M. Nixon
> nominated Powell to the Supreme Court of the United
> States. The Senate
> confirmed the appointment on December 6, 1971. Powell
> served on the
> Supreme Court for fifteen years. He retired on June 26,
> 1987, at the age
> of seventy-nine.
>
> Justice Powell is not a rare anomaly. One of
> the justices for
> the court where I work did not have judicial experience
> prior to his
> appointment and he is a most excellent jurist.
>
> Nanna Frye, Law Librarian
> Court of Appeal
> San Diego, CA
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-law-
> lib@ucdavis.edu <mailto:owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu> ] On
> Behalf Of Stanley R. Conrad
> Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 2:42 PM
> To: Samuel E Trosow
> Cc: law-lib@ucdavis.edu
> Subject: RE: Harriet Miers - Supreme Court Nominee
>
> Good point, Sam.
>
> It is of enormous importance to everyone involved in
> the law --
> certainly should be to law librarians. The fact that
> political issues
> factor into the nomination/confirmation process is
> wildly off point.
> The outcome of the nomination process here, ferreting
> out Miers'
> qualifications (or lack of them), her possible impact
> on the law for the
> next generation ... none of this should be trivialized
> by labeling the
> discussion "political."
>
> Unfortunately, as we've already heard, the
> administration is planning to
> refuse any/all requests for the work product she
> produced while under
> Bush's wing, justifying this with "executive privilege."
>
> We're apt to end up knowing much less about her than we
> knew about
> Roberts when he was confirmed.
>
> Stanley
>
>
> =================================<
> Stanley R. Conrad, JD/MLS
> Reference / Special Collections Librarian Rittenberg
> Law Library St.
> John's University School of Law 8000 Utopia Parkway
> Jamaica, NY 11439
> conrads@stjohns.edu
> 718-990-2012 (voice)
> 718-990-6649 (fax)
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:46:09 PST