1. She should blame it all on the bomb-makers from Falwell's Liberty University.

Nothing like a little competitive misdirect to get the truth-tellers off your trail.

Webster Hubble Telescope at 9:41PM on May 23rd 2007

2. Both I, a retired partner in a 350 lawyer firm and graduate of one of the top 20 law schools in the nation, as well as another lawyer, commented on this outrage yesterday in response to another blog on this subject. A Fundamentalist also commented that degrees aren't important or equal to knowledge. While some of the smartest people I have ever met have only a GED, I would not hire them to represent me in a legal matter.

Goodling, as mentioned, came from Regent University, Pat Robertson's law school. Even though its 26 years old, it was not even accredited until 1996, and is currently the proud holder of the lowest ranking a law school can have. Importantly, the school's aim is to EXPRESSLY violate the First Amendment separation of church and state by having its graduates reflect on "the critical role the Christian faith should play in our legal system."

My performance reviews as an attorney were outstanding as an associate and I made partner 7 years after being hired. During that time, I litigated my heart out - because in law, the first four years out of law school are essentially like a medical internship. Law school itself teaches general law and focuses on issue spotting and methods of case analysis. Learning the actual law of the field you practice in happens after you pass the bar, and at the same time, you learn valuable tips on "issue spotting" (ie by looking at the facts, you identify legal questions that the facts involve.) When issue spotting, if you are experienced in your field, you already know many of the pertinent legal questions, but almost always there are issues which only a good lawyer can spot and which require research.

My clients trusted me because I came from a good law school and had a solid basis of training in real life law for seven years before I became partner.

In contrast, Goodling comes from the lowest possible ranked accredited school, a school that went for years and years without even meeting standards for accredidation. Yet, within roughly 3 years she was the third level employee of the DOJ, with 3 minor cases in court under her belt; and was involved in the hiring and firing decisions of attorneys with better law school credentials and much more experience and expertise.

Her testimony yesterday revealed her lack of expertise. She admitted she "crossed the line" by breaking the "civil service rules", in other words breaking the law. In her position, even Goodling should have virtually memorized those rules since they were so critical to her job function. Then she sought to defend herself by stating "I didn't mean to." First, if this means she didn't learn the applicable legal rules of her job, she was unfit for the position. She also ignores the most fundamental axiom of law which EVERY first year law student memorizes: ignorance of the law is no excuse. She is either an inept inexperienced lawyer whose only job qualification was being a Republican Fundamentalist Christian, or she deliberately broke the law to further the goals of an extremist religious group in violation of the First Amendment. Either possibility is an outrage. Since Bush heads the executive branch, this conduct could be the basis for his impeachment (and there are SO MANY other bases). Now we find out that 150 other Goodling clones have been shot to the top in the DOJ or top level bureaucratic positions - all trained to destroy the First Amendment. ALL of these lawyers need to be closely evaluated for the quality of their performance in meeting their job duties, and Christianity or loyalty to the Republican party should not play a part in their performance review.

What is even more shocking is that these lawyers are committed to the second holocaust, with gays as the INITIAL victims. The Fundamentalist movement relies on the "Family Research Council" to argue its case to discriminate against gays in housing and employment, and to minimize the penalty for anti-gay hate crimes. It is headed by Paul Cameron.

What's the problem with Cameron? He's a man who has suggested that the extermination of gays might be necessary. Per the Southern Poverty Law Center:
He told the 1985 Conservative Political Action Committee conference that "extermination of homosexuals" might be needed in the next three to four years. He has advocated tattooing AIDS patients in the face, and banishment to a former leper colony for any patient who resisted. He has called for gay bars to be closed and gays to be registered with the government.

He was kicked out of the American Psychological Association, and was publicly rebuked by the Nebraska Psychological Association and the American Sociological Association. And he has been called the leader of a "hate group" by the Southern Poverty Law Center, America's number one civil rights organization for tracking the klan, neo-Nazis and white supremacists. The Southern Poverty Law Center went so far as to say that "Cameron's 'science' echoes Nazi Germany." And the SPLC tracks actual Nazis, so they have the right to make the comparison.

Paul Cameron and his organization have stated that the Nazis of Germany had the cure for homosexuality. They gassed or worked to death 2 million gays. He believes that only 1% of gay men will reach their senior years. He reported that lesbians are 300 times more likely to die in an automobile accident than straight women. Yet, he is the expert that many extremist groups quote when attacking the LGBT community. His “research” has been debunked by every reputable scientific organization for its bias and outlandish findings. The ASA commented, "Dr. Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism."

As Nazi Germany has shown us, once one target scapegoat group is literally eliminated through genocide, a fascist state turns to others: its political opponents, priests of other religions that disagree with them, union organizers, and political opponents. By the time the Goodlings of the world are done, an entire nation has been "cleansed" of any opposition to a theocratic dictatorship. All possibility of opposing the dictatorship are gone.

Besides being blatantly illegal and unconstitutional, I find Goodling to be a very SCARY example of what the Republicans have done to our government. Are you scared? If not, you should be.


Clearly, the “research” that Focus on the Family relies on has been debunked as overly biased, thinly-veiled propaganda. For example, he minimizes the size of the gay and lesbian population to something like 1% when actual reputable studies such as the Kinsey study and others, which have been subjected to peer review for accuracy and adherance to research standards and have withstood the test of time.

Of course, Jerry Falwell agreed with Cameron, and the White House said Falwell was a good friend to the Administration.

Phil at 5:03AM on May 24th 2007

3. Goodling first attended American University Law School. American University is one of the top 50 law schools in the country. She was there for a year and was in the top twenty percent in her class. She went to a top level liberal school and was at the top of her class. She went to regent because she wanted more like minded people not that she couldn't cut it. She also got a masters in public policy.

Goodling got the number 3 position six years after law school not three.

Goodling is in her mid thirties. Bill Clinton was a governor at a younger age. You have neurosurgeons who are younger than Goodling. You have federal judges younger than Goodling. She was born in August 1973 that is not young. Hillary Clinton had a job with a lot of responsibility in her mid twenties.

The baby boomers love to tell this generation how you are too young to do this. I never heard them complaining how bill Clinton had the responsibility of being governor at a younger age than Goodling.

Goodling didn't even have a serious legal job. She wasn't involved in policy. Sampson was looking to step up to u.s attorney.

Goodling was an aide. There are people her age many steps up in the ladder. You've had supreme court judges at her age.

Robert Kennedy Jr was attorney general at her age.

Most people goodling's age have been out of law school for 10 years. That is not young.

Next time you go after he little experience ask yourself how much experience bill clinton had when he was governor.

Joe Biden was senator at 29 and I don't hear baby boomers complaining about that.

Next time you go after Goodling liberals look up what the people you think that have experience were doing at goodling's age. Odds are they have more responsibility like Bill Clinton had at her age. If Clinton wasn't governor at Goodling's age he would have never been able to fill the vacuum and run for president in 1992. Clinton is only able to have his resume now because he had a lot of responsibility at a young age. If he had said i won't do anything with a lot of responsibility until he was 40 he would have never achieved what he did.

john at 6:14AM on May 24th 2007

4. I have had a law suit against Pat Robertsons and Cbn for 2 years Robertsons is the Chancellor of Regent University .The Virginia Court system is so croupt it is incredible .Attorney General is from regent university and Robertsons attorney Glen Huff former partner of 14 years is the attorney general ,Magstriate Judge has spoken at regent university and did nothing when in the FEDERAL COURT HOUSE IN VA ROBERTSONS THREATHENED MY LIFE AT A DEPOSITION I HAVE IT ON TAPE AND THE JUDGE DID NOTHING AT ALL AND TREATED ME LIKE A CRIMINAL ALL BECAUSE OF ROBERTSONS $$$$$$THATS THE BOTTOM LINE .AND FOR ALL YOU CHRISTIANS REBULICANS AND BUSH SUPPORTERS .I AM A ORDIANED MINISTER AND A REBULICAN ALL THEY CARE ABOUT IS $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$THATS IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

philbusch at 12:42AM on May 25th 2007

5. Hey Philbusch, just goes to show that Regent Univ. must be three fourths insane asylum with Pat's leadership, and one fourth law school. Hmmmmmmmm, I wonder if that is why they are rated a fourth tier (bottom of the bowl for accredited) law school?

Phil at 2:30PM on May 24th 2007

6. John writes: "Goodling didn't even have a serious legal job."

SHe was a licensed lawyer who took a vow to uphold the consitution and the laws of the United States and did neither. Either she didn't bother to learn the law applicable to her job, which is inexcusable; or she learned the law and purposely violated it. She may be immune from criminal prosecution, but she's not immune from disbarrment, and I expect that to happen in the next year.

Then, her next job will have NOTHING to do with law, which is as it should be.

Phil at 3:18AM on May 25th 2007

7. @ Retired Partner Attorney Phil,

I applaud Goodling for her tesimony. It is refreshing to see someone take it on the chin and sacrifice a promising career in the quest to uncover the truth in the US attorney-firings-scandal. She was wrong. She admitted she was wrong. She resigned when she realized she was wrong. And she has nothing to hide especially now that she has been granted immunity. She had every right to refuse to testify and "claim the 5th", but Goodling has sacrificed everything because she believes in truth and justice. And that is the real difference that Regent Law seeks in the legal profession: to train excellent, professional, honest, responsible attorneys. (It's everyone else who is covering their asses.)

Goodling's Christian faith is a double-edged sword for Gonzales and the Bush administration. Her strong work ethic and idealism were likely used against her until she realized all too late that she was a political pawn. But now, rather than fall on the sword of ideology and blind loyalty (as one would assume if she was such a "Bushy"), she has decided to tell the truth and expose the corruption that (we agree) actually does exist! So, rather than being some undesirable, anti-gay, fascist "Republican Fundamentalist Christian" (whatever that means) she is in fact, a refreshing breath of fresh air in the stench that is American politics and a blazing light in the dark shadows of actual blind political loyalty.

That doesn't sound like a robot to me. Gonzales doesn't quite have the scapegoat he thought he'd have. If Pat Robertson (Yale Law Alumni) continues to produce excellent law graduates who are guided by faith, conscience, and the ideals of truth and justice (rather than self-preservation)--then God bless him!!! We really need MORE of that in government, not less.

P.S. A history lesson for Phil: Gay Nazis killed the gays that you speak of. The SS guard was especially notorious for homosexuality in the ranks. The difference was that gays who viewed homosexuality as a type of super-masculine form of sexuality were considered superior. The gays who considered their sexuality to be more feminine in nature were the ones rounded up and exterminated (by the SS guard, etc.). That is the origin of the upside-down, pink triangle which was sewn onto the clothing of the "feminized" variety of homosexual persons.

And for being a retired partner of a large law firm and former graduate of a top 20 law school, it is unfortunate that you have such a low view of religious liberty and the First Amendment. You sound like there is some vast Christian right-wing conspiracy to take over the US government. I'm surprised that someone of your "pedegree" would stoop to equate Christianity with Fascism. For someone who claims to know the law so well, your comments smack of discrimination against people of faith--especially Christians and the suggestion that Christians in public service should be closely monitored or fired simply because they are "Christian" is absolutely illegal. Just try to suggest something similar about Muslims or Jews and you will instantly understand how ignorant your comments really are.

Jay at 11:58PM on May 29th 2007