The Hand that Teaches Lawyers ...

Today’s Ledger reproduces the effort of one Rosa Brooks, a law professor, child of a famous writer, and associate/employee of George Soros. One might be tempted to dismiss as mere leftist rantings the writing of anyone associated with Mr. Soros (it still tickles my sense of humor: a socialist billionaire!) but that would be a mistake. It’s entirely possible that a leftist might, on occasion, actually be right.

In this particular effort, alas, our unhappy leftist plays true to form, complaining about George Bush’s "big lies" and employing the comical comparison to Hitler. (Given that Adolph was a self-proclaimed socialist, the left’s desire to turn him into a conservative is, perhaps, understandable).

And, admittedly, in the context of a brief op-ed, written for a lay audience, it might be asking a bit much for our esteemed author to actually mention any of those aforementioned "big lies". Happily, she actually cites two: the assertion that Saddam possessed WMD and the further assertion that the war would be a cakewalk. Shall we begin?

One, obviously, represented the conclusion based upon analysis of intelligence reports, the other is, clearly, a PREDICTION.

According to noted Bush partisan Bob Woodward, two weeks before the President actually made his decision to fight in Iraq, the CIA Director advised him that the presence of WMD in Iraq was a "slam dunk". Said Director, George Tenet, enjoys impeccable political credentials. As a Democrat, having served in the Clinton transition team and having been appointed by Clinton to the CIA post. (Tenet, bitter that the White House revealed his statement, and averring that same was a breach of honor, complains that his comments were taken "out of context" but admits that he believed that Iraq did, in fact, possess WMD)

So, Bush’s "big lies" include his reliance upon the unequivocal assertion by the Clinton-appointed Director of the CIA, presumably, therefore, the considered opinion of the intelligence pros. Cute.

And what about the "lie" that the war would be a cakewalk? Since when are predictions "lies"? They might be proven mistaken, but as they depend for their proof upon events no one can fully foresee, can they possibly be "lies"? As it happens, the war against the Iraqi military WAS a cakewalk; it’s been the irregular action, much of it fought by foreigners, undertaken since that’s proven difficult.

And it’s really rather comical to listen to the left contend that the Bush Administration’s national security policies have been repudiated or rejected. Leon Panetta, Obama’s choice as CIA Director, specifically promised that, in the "ticking time bomb" scenario, he would use "aggressive interrogation techniques" on terror suspects. Hello, "torture". Recently, the FISA court expressly sustained the Bush Administration’s warrantless wiretapping program, concluding, as the Bushies asserted all along, that same fell under the President's inherent authority. And just the other day, the Obama Administration averred, in an appellate brief, that the Executive possesses essentially unlimited, inherent authority to control classified information, free from judicial second guessing.

Or, as the Journal aptly put it, Obama channels Cheney.

The Left has its narrative, and mere facts will not suffice to deflect it from its deeply held, quasi-religious beliefs. Bush = Hitler.

And the true tragedy? Folks like Professor Brooks are educating(?!) the next generation of lawyers.