May 5, 2010

Death of irony — J.B. Van Hollen edition

J.B. is the epitome of a partisan hack, no matter how much he tries to hide it. That's not to say some of his political opponents have not been equally biased on the other side.
Even more biased, I reckon.

Van Hollen declined to defend the Wisconsin domestic partnership provision because he was personally opposed to it as a matter of policy. In other words, Van Hollen acknowledged essentially that it would find a more effective defense from legal counsel hired outside his office. The additional State expense is relatively negligible.

That's a perfectly appropriate rationale and equally reasonable from a political perspective. Had Van Hollen represented the State in that case, he would have been criticized on precisely the same grounds he gave for removing himself: that his heart wasn't in it, so to speak.

Or worse, that he was engaged in an unethical act of sabotage.

It was an honest move on Van Hollen's part and liberals should be congratulating him for it, not using it to call him a "partisan hack."

Maybe he is. But not on account of that.

1 comment:

Free Lunch said...

Actually, it's not an appropriate rationale and it is very unprofessional. Lawyers have a duty, as members of the bar, to take whatever job they have and do it to the best of their ability. Van Hollen ran away from this case for personal _political_ reasons. He should be ashamed. Maybe he should be put up before the bar.