Young, Bible-quoting attorneys are suddenly under siege

Posted on by

I wanted to get to this story earlier today, before the rest of the blogosphere jumped on it, but it is still worth discussing here. Early this morning Manish tipped me off to the fact that the U.S. Attorney from Minnesota that I had blogged about two weeks ago was back in the news:

It’s a major shakeup at the offices of new U.S. Attorney Rachel Paulose.

Four of her top staff voluntarily demoted themselves Thursday, fed up with Paulose, who, after just months on the job, has earned a reputation for quoting Bible verses and dressing down underlings.

Deputy U.S. Attorney John Marty is just one of the people dropping themselves in rank to simply a U.S. Attorney position. Also making the move are the heads of Paulose’s criminal and civil divisions and the top administrative officer.

The move is intended to send a message to Washington – that 33-year-old Paulose is in over her head. [Link]

<

p>But here is the most important tid-bit in my opinion. I should have suspected something like this earlier:

She was a special assistant to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, worked as a senior counsel for deputy attorney general Paul McNulty and is best buds with Monica Goodling – the assistant U.S. Attorney who recently took the Fifth rather than testify before Congress. [Link]

<

p>Best buds with Monica Goodling?? Usually I’m not one to believe in guilt by association, but suspending that belief here sure makes for an interesting hook! Goodling is the same woman currently in the news (she just resigned today) because she wants to plead the 5th in front of a Congress that is demanding to question her over her involvement in the recent purge of U.S. Attorneys. She hasn’t even said what questions she is pleading the 5th for! Is it a coincidence that a fellow “believer” ended up becoming the new U.S. Attorney from Minnesota?

Goodling’s involvement in Attorneygate is not the only aspect of her role in the Bush administration that bears examination. Her membership in a cadre of 150 graduates of Pat Robertson’s Regent University currently serving in the administration is another, equally revealing component of the White House’s political program.

Goodling earned her law degree from Regent, an institution founded by Robertson “to produce Christian leaders who will make a difference, who will change the world.” Helping to purge politically disloyal federal prosecutors is just one way Goodling has helped fulfill Robertson’s revolutionary goals. [Link]

But back to Paulose for a minute:

Sources familiar with the U.S. Attorney’s office described the mass management resignation in Minnesota as “extraordinary.”

“This is a decapitation of the office,” said a source with knowledge of the situation. “I’ve never heard of anything like this. People work all their lives to be at these high levels in the office. This is an extraordinary event.”

The former managers either did not return calls or could not be reached for comment Thursday night.

A source said managers had been unhappy with Paulose and decided to resign collectively.

“They did it jointly because they couldn’t stand her anymore,” the source said, citing what has been described as her “dictatorial management style and general lack of management experience…” [Link]

<

p>

<

p>

75 thoughts on “Young, Bible-quoting attorneys are suddenly under siege”

  1. lol, I do get ahead of myself. That wasn’t the implication at all. It was in response to the comment that said,

    “Certainly you can ask that we not verbalize these urges, but to eliminate the thoughtcrime of focusing first on a female’s looks would probably take surgery, or at the very least some heavy medication. You might be a bit more successful in influencing FEMALE behavior that certainly acknowledges, and again, honestly, attempts to capitalize on men’s genetic programming. If men are so weak, so shallow, so unevolved that they are unduly influenced by a female’s looks, perhaps this generation of women can rise up against the oppression and cast off your makeup, designer clothing, expensive hairstyles, etc. and get down to the basics of presenting yourselves as genderless, beauty-agnostic workers who are just as good as men in lawyering, doctoring, or whatevering. What a utopia…a world where women will stop competing with other females in presenting your beauty, so you can instead compete in the game to be recognized as the best account manager, or marketing executive, etc. Let’s all sing “what a wonderful world” together.”

    Women’s looks can’t be the source of various forms of oppression/misogyny (from rape to “hot or nots”). Women don’t have to wear designer clothing to be raped, so it certainly isn’t that men are weak and shallow because of women’s looks. Men aren’t even weak and shallow, I know many instances (though, for the life of me, not on this thread) where men have proved consideration, kindness, and equal treatment time and time again. Why all the self deprecation and “all men will do this” generalization as an explanation for that behavior? Despite my sardonic attitude, I know it’s not true.

    The cases in India I’m referring to, that have had a longstanding impact on my life, did not involve the kind of women the previous comment described. They were in arranged marriages, to men who were frequently more impoverished than them but of a higher caste (so you can rest assured about your wallet), they couldn’t afford competition with their peers because they ran to each other for comfort when they were beaten, sold, and destroyed in more ways than one.

    I just wish I knew what women did on this thread, apart from just ONE appearing in a photograph, that warrants conversational and casual misogyny. We’re nowhere near your wallet and definitely not fighting each other to see who has the prettiest font.

    Just sayin’.

  3. Sorry for 41 & 42, I was frustrated.

    Asha’s Dad (#26):

    Personally it’s a combination of personality, intelligence, physical beauty, and athleticism. Excelling in one area or the other can make up for deficiencies in the other areas (smart women are sexy).

    MorningSunshine (#32):

    THis post is not about her “sexyiness” and I just find it pathetic that some men would rather talk about her looks because “THAT CONCERNS THEM MORE” than current issues related to her position as an attorney. She may be “hot” as a woman, but she is represented here as a professional attorney first and foremost.

    Agreed with MorningSunshine.

    Basically Asha’s Dad is saying that sexiness/hotness is more than just about looks – it can be about a range of other things like personality, intelligence, etc. The point is that hotness and sexiness still pertain to a woman’s sexuality, and no matter what the contributing factors are to her sexiness, this post (and many others like it) have absolutely nothing to do with the woman in question’s sexuality. So even by saying it’s not just about her looks, you’re still reducing her to her sexuality and nothing more by talking about how hot she is; there’s an underlying assumption that, no matter what a woman does, it’s all for the male gaze. Whether she’s a successful attorney or a supermodel, a woman is not constantly and exclusively performing her sexuality, and her hotness – no matter which one of her qualities you find hot – shouldn’t constantly and exclusively form your judgement of her.

    Ardy (#36):

    Another thing, like it or not – calling a woman hot is just one of those things guys do offhand. Even guys who have a three figure IQ and actually find smart women hot for their smartness. Does not mean they appreciate smart women any less. So lets refrain from putting all guys under the same bucket, shall we?

    Let’s not indeed.

  4. WOW Vivek. You nailed it. I’m thoroughly impressed. That made my morning! And as for those other threads, the fact that they date back as far as a year tells me that this one will leave just as much of an impact. Well, I guess we keep on truckin’ then….

  5. Comments #14, #35, and #51 are from the same person using three different handles, which is poor form and not welcome here. I’m not surprised that someone making vulgar sexist statements would adopt three different monikers to do so. Either you got manners, or you don’t.

  6. Hah! And here, I posted as “sorry to burst your bubble” to sound more level headed because I usually whip out the name “Antahkarana” as my online warring Kali Ma avatar of sarcasm and controversy. Bad form. Maaf karo.

  7. Antahkarana (#55):

    And as for those other threads, the fact that they date back as far as a year tells me that this one will leave just as much of an impact.

    what to do like that only

  8. Comments #14, #35, and #51 are from the same person using three different handles, which is poor form and not welcome here. I’m not surprised that someone making vulgar sexist statements would adopt three different monikers to do so. Either you got manners, or you don’t.

    You forgot to add that we BAN for that. That’s how unwelcome such shenanigans are here. Antahkarana, I like the logic. 🙂 Unfortunately, people do this for a more craven reason– they want to weigh a thread’s direction in their favor, if that makes sense. If two or three people are saying something controversial, that’s better than one, etc.

  9. Vivek – Thanks for pointing out the flaw in my argument or at least allowing me to see that it was only a partial argument geared towards the general nature of attractiveness rather than a person’s ability.

    I was only attempting to point out that physical beauty is only one element in what attracts one individual to another. I was not attempting to reduce her to a sexual object, at least not consciously. I tried is a half hearted and sarcastic manner to make a comment on the general nature of one of the tangents that this post took. I did not make any references to her and did not use any names or adjectives to describe her physical appearance. I also did not comment on her performance as an attorney or the controversy surrounding her swearing in ceremony. For that I apologize.

    I realize that women are not put on this earth to perform for men and that their purpose is not to perform their job in the most sultry manner possible. I do think most people, in addition to being respected for their abilities want to be viewed as attractive or handsome or professional but at the same time they do not want to be oogled at and viewed as a sex object. So point well taken. I will resolve to never make a comment on someone’s physical appearance unless the post is specifically addressing physical appearance.

  11. Someone has posted a press release from Paulose’s office on the News tab talking about how her family fled Kerala because it was a Communist state. Maybe I know very little about Indian history, but my family is from Kerala and Tamilnadu and my husband’s family is from Kerala. I have never heard anyone talking about how they “fled” Kerala because of Communism. In fact, most Malayalis I know credit Communism for things like really low infant mortality and really high literacy in Kerala. Hot or not…this woman is spreading dangerous lies about India and needs to be checked. Also, the press release says that she graduated from Yale University Law School and the University of Minnesota undergrad. I think only Monica Goodling when to Regents Law School.

  12. to add on to what Lakshmi said, i bet it’s complete bullcrap that her family was persecuted. im from a christian/hindu mixed family, and from what i’ve seen, the communist movement helped christians more than any other group in kerala.

  13. I agree with the two previous commenters.

    The press release from Paulose’s office is utterly absurd (fleeing Kerala being communists etc… what the ?)

    And this other link via Ultrabrown says similar things and mentions her family being Christian and her grandfather coming to the US to study theology.

    It’s like they’re trying to fit her life story into the “godless communists persecute christians” mold.

    This is beyond ridiculous. I hope it’s a clueless underling in her office that wrote this stuff up and it slipped by her.

    Surely she can find a way to express her admiration for the USA without implying untruths about the old country.

  15. Maybe they bought into the domino theory: once Kerala fell, next was Tamil Nadu, then Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, and before you know it, Dravidastan is breaking away taking Sri Lanka with it. North and South would separated by the much villified Hyderabad Wall, etc. etc. Let’s give them the benefit of the doubt here, folks

  16. It is possible for people to flee India from communists. I was recently in Kolkata, and my cousin’s wife was travelling to her native town every weekend to stay with her parents. Why? The parents want to sell their home, and the CPI-M boys – ‘club boys’, as they’re known – have demanded a cut of the proceeds. When the old parents refused, the communists replied: ‘okay, just see whether you can live in this town anymore’. There are regular reports in the papers about rapes, burglaries, other violence committed by Party members and going unpunished. Don’t see why Kerala would be exempt from all this.

  17. her grandparents came to the US in the 60’s. the commies took over kerala in 1957. among other things, they opened fire on workers and beat students, most of them roman catholic. things got so bad that nehru had to step in and take over kerala from the communists.

    she said her grandparents “fled” kerala, not that the were “refugees” or asylum seekers. i would say that “fled” sounds like a strong word, but under the circumstances, its understandable.

  18. Manju & Ms. Rachael P,

    Both of you on this are full of sh……

    First, the communist government in Kerala was only between 1957-59. Sure, there was student and other unrest (which only killed 15 people) but the reasons for Nehru stepping in are very different.

    On the other hand, in 60s (when Ms. Rachael’s grandparents immigrated), communism in India was under heavy siege – party splits, and with prominent leaders in jail.

    Ms. Dharma Queen, Kerala’s experiment with communism is unique within India, and rest of the world context too – good or bad – take your pick – therefore, Bengal extrapolation is meaningless. This said, every party in India has goons (with no exceptions), and muscle they way through.

  19. Thanks for the comment Manju. Ok, i didn’t know about that bit of history. Still, like you said, “fled” sounds like an overstatement. I think I’m going to email my older relatives (who were around at the time) about what the commie advent in Kerala was like and if there were christians at the time who felt threatened. (The only link I found when I googled “communists kerala 1958” was a Time mag article from 1958, which I’m going to assume was not a completely objective source).

  20. And thanks for those very informative links Kush (my last comment was typed before I read yours); setting some of the record straight.

  21. kush:

    i don’t necesarily disagee with you. i think the objection to RP’s commets is that she seems to imply asylum or refugee status when her grandparent simply left. “fled” sounds too harsh (since they could have simply went to another part of india) but i think she was just trying to convey how bad things got for some roman catholics in kerala at the time, as dharma queen documents.

    btw, why did nehru take over?

  22. btw, why did nehru take over?

    They are many reasons: It was the first opposition party (different from Center) in power in India. The reasons usually found in political analysis for Nehru stepping in are: 1) Their total inability to react to Gandhian disobedience (the students and others) in Kerala, 2) caste dynamics (the early supporters of communists in Kerala were lower castes even though EMS Namboodiripad was a Brahmin) even in caste-lite state like Kerala worked against them (therefore, it is unlikely that they would target Christians even though I can understand in late 50s, Christians were very dominant in Kerala, and they might have viewed communist rise in Kerala in 50s with suspicion that was mutual), and 3) Their shakey (support) stance on Chinese invasion in Tibet, and nationalism.

    In fact, a lot of people see 1957-59 as a very successful experiment – communist party or not, irrespective, when a local governments (state) could go diametrically opposite to the mainstream (rest of India, and Center – the Federal Government) in terms of political and social statement.

    BTW, after 1957-59, it was only in 70s, communist parties in India came back to power. 60s was probably the toughest time for communists in India when Ms. Rachael P. family was supposedly escaping them.

  24. To suggest Christian oppression in Kerala by Marxists is laughable. Marxist land reform essentially stripped the Namboodiri Brahmins of their large bequeathed landholdings. The primary benefeciaries (those who were able to obtain the land) were Christian traders. I think its safe to say that the richest community in Kerala are upper-caste Christians.

    I think Paulose contrived a “coming to America” story to match her admittedly breathtaking rise to US Attorney.

  25. She obviously has no management experience and she is in Minnesota for god sakes, not exactly a haven for diversity.

    I strenuously object. Lack of foundation.