Only in Austin

This weekend, the firms that I work for hosted a celebration for the 25th anniversary of Barbara Barron and Manny Newburger practicing together, as well as the the 2nd anniversary of Barron, Newburger, Sinsley & Wier, PLLC. We joined several hundred of our friends and clients (some of whom were the same people) for barbecue and country music at the Salt Lick in Driftwood, Texas. What does any of this have to do with bankruptcy? Not much directly. However, it is a reminder to heed Shakespeare’s admonition to “do as adversaries do in law, strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.” (The Taming of the Shrew Act I, Scene 2).

Twenty-five years is a long time. While I wasn’t there for all of it, there is still a strange sensation of waking up in another time and place. Over 25 years, we have gone through the real estate bust/S & L crisis which spawned the RTC, the leveraged buyout bust which gave rise to mega-bankruptcies, credit card defaults leading to personal bankruptcy filings topping 1.6 million, Enron, bankruptcy reform and now the sub-prime mortgage crisis. During that time, newlyweds had children grow up, our hair grew thinner and our waistlines grew larger (at least mine did). The baby boomers who hoped to transform the world now look forward to retirement.

Over the years, we have met a lot of interesting people and many of them were at the festivities. Politicians and judges mingled with real estate developers, reorganized debtors and debt collectors. Lawyers, clerks and support staff drank margaritas together. However, the best story of the night was probably the entertainment (and I am not just talking about Barbara Barron gracefully two-stepping and doing the cha-cha).

The headliner for the evening was Brian Turner and His Redneck Band. Brian is proof that only in Austin, Texas can a Jewish solo practitioner pursue his dream of being a snuff-dipping country music sensation. (While Kinky Friedman is more famous, that’s only because Brian hasn’t been discovered yet). Brian represented a significant bloc of creditors in a contentious chapter 11 case that our firm handled. As we were wrapping up the case, Brian shared one of his CDs with us. His music hits traditional country music themes such as patriotism, fatherhood and failed relationships, but does so with a wry sense of humor.

With songs like “I Miss That Dog More Than You,” “If Love Is Blind Why Do You See My Faults See Clearly” and “If You Won’t Leave Me, I’ll Find Someone Who Will,” Brian harnesses a traditional country music vibe with just a little tongue in cheek. Even his tribute to his father contains the refrain, “So here’s to my dad/ who taught me all my bad habits/ some of my good ones, too/ Like to be a great dad/ believe in your country and never turn my back on you.”

I admire Brian for managing to practice law and pursue his dream as well. Let’s hope that the rest of us can do that as well.

Lightning Strikes Randomly Sometimes

Once upon a time, there was a female candidate for Vice-President. She had little experience on the national stage. However, she added excitement to the campaign of an older, more experienced yet dull candidate. The year was 1984. The candidate was Geraldine Ferraro. In 1984, Geraldine Ferraro had been a U.S. Representative for six years. That was the sum and substance of her experience as an elected official.

Fast forward 24 years. Sarah Palin is nominated as John McCain's running mate. Liberals are outraged. How can someone whose only experience consists of being a small town mayor and governor for two years be qualified to be next in line to be president? Let's state the obvious here. Sarah Palin was not the most experienced Republican, or even the most experienced Republican woman, to be nominated as Vice-President. Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and Elizabeth Dole both had better credentials. However, Sarah Palin was an articulate, attractive, post-feminist, Middle-America candidate who could add excitement to the McCain candidacy.

Is this unfair? Consider that the Democrats have nominated a charismatic four year Senator anchored by a Vice-Presidential candidate with decades of experience. The Republicans have nominated a Presidential candidate with decades of experience propped up by an exciting yet inexperienced Vice-Presidential nominee. There is a certain yin and yang here. Presidential campaigns are rarely won by experienced yet unexciting candidates. Otherwise Walter Mondale and Bob Dole would have been president. The race for President is akin to the finals of American Idol, except that each team has two players. Both tickets contain experience and excitement. This will make it a horserace to the end.

Neither Geraldine Ferraro nor Sarah Palin was the most qualified candidate to be Vice-President. However, to be the first of anything is as much about being in the right place at the right time as it is about merit. Sometimes symbolism is more important than substance. In this election year, the symbolism of a butt-kicking hockey mom who rose from the PTA to national prominence is the counterpart to the plucky, young son of a Kansas mother and a Kenyan father who was raised in Indonesia and Hawaii and achieved excellence at Harvard and in Chicago. Both exemplify elements of the American dream.

On an unrelated note, I had the opportunity to meet Geraldine Ferraro in 1982 when I spent a semester in Washington. I found her to be unimpressive. She spoke about how difficult it was for a female candidate to be elected. However, the briefing materials provided to us stated that she had outspent her male opponent by a ratio of 6:1. When questioned about this, she gave an evasive answer. Perhaps she said that if she had been a man instead of a woman, she would have raised even more. I am not sure any more. However, it does show that someone can be plucked out of obscurity and then return there or can achieve lasting fame. However, the whole process ia about as random as being struck by lightning.

Remembering Our Trips to Ukraine

One of the more interesting and rewarding things that our family has done is to make friends with the Drozd family in Lazarivka, Ukraine. Back in 1992, Valeska answered an ad looking for penpals for Christians in the former Soviet Union. She began corresponding with Natasha Drozd, an English teacher in a small village. Their familiy consists of Natasha, her husband Viktor, and their children Dima and Ulia.

We have traveled to visit them three times, in 1998, 2000 and 2005. There is nothing quite like spending time with a family to get to know a country. The hospitality that we received was unbelievable. When we first visited in 1998, we were often the first Americans had met in person. They opened their homes to us and we divided our time between sightseeing and dinners that ran late into the night.

The language barrier was not that much of a problem. Of course, Natasha speaks excellent English since her profession is teaching that language. Over the years, Dima and Ulia have become strong English speakers as well. We were able to talk to Viktor a bit in German. Val and I both took German in high school and Viktor learned some while he was stationed in East Germany during his mandatory service in the Red Army. The fact that none of us were that strong in German meant that we had to fumble around for the right word some of the time, but we were able to get the idea across most of the time.



Here are a few photos from 2000. I didn't have a very good digital camera on that trip, so I wasn't able to get very many pictures. I took a lot of video which I will try to convert to digital some day.



Our most recent trip in 2005 was the most emjoyable because the children were old enough to travel well and to fend for themselves much of the time. Kristen and Stephanie spent many hours playing outside with the neighborhood children and going to their homes. They learned how to milk a cow, while their friends learned how to play Gameboy.

I took a lot of pictures on our last trip. With the help of Kristen's friend Catherine, I have combined them into a movie that I uploaded onto Youtube. These photos cover home life in and around Lazarivka and trips to Zhytomir and Kyiv. I have used the Ukrainian spelling of these cities rather than the more familiar Russian version of Kiev.



Our children have grown up together around these trips. In 2000, Dima was 10, Kristen was 8 and Stephanie and Ulia were 5. In 2005, Dima was 15, Kristen was 12 and Stephanie and Ulia were 10. Today, Dima is 18 and will be starting his second year at the university in Kyiv. Ulia is now 13. Here is a current picture of them.

How the Democrats Can Still Lose

At the outset, I need to admit that I am supporting John McCain. However, I have not been very optimistic about his chances. As a result, I have been very surprised to see just how close this election is shaping up to be. According to Real Clear Politics, if the election was held today, John McCain would win the popular vote by a narrow margin and Barack Obama would win the Electoral College by a scant eight votes. Looking at yet another photo finish, you would think that both parties would be battling for the middle ground. However, when I listen to commentators on the Democrat side, it sounds like they are staking out positions on the far end of the spectrum. This seems like a prescription for snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.

Writing in the Los Angeles Times, feminist Gloria Steinem attacked Sarah Palin, stating, "This isn't the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need." What is the evidence that Sarah Palin opposes "everything most other women want"? According to Ms. Steinem:

She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women's wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions; she tried to use taxpayers' millions for a state program to shoot wolves from the air but didn't spend enough money to fix a state school system with the lowest high-school graduation rate in the nation; she runs with a candidate who opposes the Fair Pay Act but supports $500 million in subsidies for a natural gas pipeline across Alaska; she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, though even McCain has opted for the lesser evil of offshore drilling. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.

Is this what most women believe? I did some research on the abortion issue. Gloria Steinem, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton oppose any limitations on abortion, while Sarah Palin opposes abortion. Who speaks for most women? None of them actually. Women are as conflicted on abortion as the rest of the population. Depending on how you ask the question, either 75% of women believe that abortion should not be banned or 61% believe that abortion should be banned or restricted. This is because a plurality of 38% of women polled support restrictions on abortion but not banning it altogether. When added to the 23% of women who oppose abortion, they make a majority.

Sarah Palin is a unique individual. She is a strong, independent woman who happens to be very conservative. If Democrats attack her as an extremist in a dress, they run the risk that hockey moms, armed forces moms, NRA moms and moms with special needs children will decide that Gov. Palin looks a lot more like them than Gloria Steinem.

The Nation quoted Air America host Thom Hartmann as saying, "It's not left vs. right. . . . It's all of America vs. right-wing cranks." Liberal journalist Ariana Huffington was quoted in the same article as stating, "The problem is with the media, which presents 'all sides' when often there is only one side." What message do these liberal commentators convey? If you are not with Barack Obama, you are a right wing crank who opposes all of America. There is only one side to the issues and that is the liberal side. In other words, you are either for us or against us. That is a reckless strategy guaranteed to alienate the middle. Granted, this is not Barack Obama speaking. However, Sen. Obama can certainly lose credibility if he accepts support from people who want to take the country in a direction it is not ready to go.

Sometimes people who care passionately about politics make the mistake of only talking to others who share their beliefs. It reminds me of a cartoon I saw after the 1988 election where two tweed-coated professors are talking and one says, "I voted for Dukakis. You voted for Dukakis. Who the heck voted for Bush?"

This is shaping up to be an historically close election. On the one hand, you have a Democratic ticket which has a charismatic but inexperienced presidential candidate from the left side of his party anchored by a bland yet experienced vice-presidential nominee. On the Republican side, you have an aging one-time maverick with substantial experience propped up by a brash hockey mom outsider who has even less experience than Sen. Obama. There is a yin and yang between experience and excitement on both tickets. The election will be decided in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania, most likely by a very small margin. Both parties will be well advised to rein in their more ideological supporters and shoot for the middle if they want to win.