Actions Speak Louder Than Words, So A Rantecdote: A Day at Sen. Obama's Law Firm

Ok, I control myself re. Barack's campaign, perhaps more than I should, but this nonsense over who wrote what in which speech is making me angry. Barack was the youngest person ever to edit the Harvard Law Review, has written more brilliant speeches, (even the ones he made in Chi were astonishing - you can find some by Googling from back in the day), than any politician I've seen run for any office in my lifetime.

Most politicians employ speech-writers to do most, if not all of the work to my understanding, (one of the things my Great-Uncle and his wife did in the Truman administration). Not Barack as far as I can tell. His speeches sound just like him to me. And what he says is all the more powerful because it therefore has the conviction of his own, original ideas behind it. Now there's a new wave in politics - someone presenting their own ideas. But seriously folks, all those famous lines from Presidents, who knows what percentage were actually written by the Presidents, (speech-writers don't get direct credit, big surprise). Some were I'm sure. Some Presidents were probably extremely good writers with bad ideas, some bad writers with good ideas and so on. Barack has both the ideas and the writing ability. Plus he can deliver as well as the best actor in Chi town; no small feat.

Sooooo... because he would stick up for me if someone was slamming my writing & he had the time or opportunity, (and for any of you if the cause were genuine), here's a little insight into his actions. As Sen. Clinton said:

"You know, there's a difference between speeches and solutions, between talk and action," she said. "You know, I was raised to believe that actions speak louder than words and what we need now is a president who will get in there, roll up our sleeves and get to work for you."

Ok Hil, here's what it was like to work with him, what was it like in your law firm?

When I first moved to Chicago, I was working for this extremely cool temporary agencey, (I know, sounds like an oxymoron, but there it was awesome!) I got to go to a different place every day, so quickly got to know my way around the city. Lots of places kept calling me back for longer assignments, but I wanted to audition at will, (was seriously pursuing theater at the time), so turned most down. The exceptions were WGN radio and Sen. Obamas' firm.

It wasn't a huge sun-shadowing building on LaSalle St. where most of the big deal firms in Chi town are, (the buildings really do block out the sun on LaSalle, it's a little freaky). Nope, groovy little brownstone tucked to the left of the loop or so. The receptionists' Mom was a blues singer who still toured. The attorneys' were brilliant Civil Rights leaders who not only fought against corporate and Gov't evil in court, among other causes, but lectured at Loyola and other impressive things. And unlike just about any other firm I've worked for, (and I've worked for so many I have to leave 1/2 of them off my resume at this point - I keep quitting when I run into corruption, hard to stick with a law firm, though wouldn't have been a problem had I stayed with this one), the staff actually was promoted - paralegals there had once been clerks, one was working towards law school...

Even though they worked on some of the biggest cases in the country, (one v/s Nabisco had a book written about it), they put their employees first. Now, don't get me wrong, I heard "It's not just right now, it's right now, right now", screamed down stairs when deadlines loomed there as much as in any other law office. And believe, things had to be EXACTLY right. But of course they did. These were cases filed under seal, or in the Fed. Court of Appeals, or both. At least a great deal of the time.

So, to elaborate on what I mean by put employees first. Well, they had some odd rules, or rather absence of them. For example, you could wear whatever you wanted. Some would test this, wearing sweatsuits, shorts, don't think I tested it, (I was way into clothes at the time and the cornocopia of fashion in Chi town nabbed me), but others did to the point that clients would ask if the office was also an apartment building. If you needed time off, you had time off, (and I missed so much I don't see why they didn't fire me - well, I do, the managing partner understood that I was young, saw my potential and was dedicated to cultivating it, staying on to become a paralegal and possibly go to law school was mentioned and I should have stayed, in retrospect - well, maybe not).

Anyway, all employees, from the clerk up, had full, immediately effective and equal benefits. Every type of insurance, including life insurance from a very good company was the best of it considering our lovely health care crisis, and everything else you can think of was also included. When it was your birthday, you got to pick where you wanted to go to lunch and the whole firm took a long one. Christmas parties were insane; one at the Madison office had included a circus for the children I believe. And the mother of one of the partners would bring beautiful, elaborate gingerbread houses each year for every employee with children.

I was paid more, and had better benefits, as a clerk there than almost any of my friends in Chi commanded with college degrees. Indeed, I was paid more then, (and that was 10 years ago), than I've been at times with firms in Richmond and Kentucky in the past 5 years as a paralegal. No joke. (Yes, yes, beating myself in my head for leaving, I was young and thought all law firms, hell, all jobs, were like that. They should be. And that is what Barack's actions speak.) I did all the court filing and rather than have me deal with the bus and train, they let me take cabs/gave me control of a small expense account to do so. The managing partner met with me regularly to tell me not only what areas could improve, but what I was doing that was terriffic.

I have been turned down for jobs because I'm 'not going to just remain a paralegal' or, like a friend of mine just had happen to her at a Richmond firm we both worked for, 'too smart'. They were the polar opposite. I remember one of the paralegals, under who's direction I know not but assume the managing partner, taking me aside and saying, 'We think if you know what is happening in these cases you'll be more interested in what you're doing' and she taught me the intricacies of litigation, step by step. I'd help them edit the pleadings, which generally contained arguments every bit as brilliant as those I'd studied in philosophy classes. They put me in charge of updating the law library, (back then actual books were still used rather than the computer), and no one discouraged my reading the updates as I added them.

Speaking of reading, another odd absence of rule was that I could read whatever I wanted at the front desk. A total bibliophile from the age of 3, I tested this constantly. I don't remember what contentious piece of literature started it, but I remember reading something and being surprised that no one told me to keep it out of clients' sight. So I tested the boundaries, going so far as to sit for a week or more quite openly reading the Marquis de Sade's "Justine". No one said a word. Well, I think it did elicit more conversation coming my way actually, but no one directly mentioned the book :)

And not only was I valued as an employee while there, but have had the benefit of the firms' encouragement over all of these years. I've continued to receive sage guidance when I've asked and have been given unexpected praise and encouragement, up to the present day. The managing partner has never failed to give me a beyond glowing reference, though on more than one occassion his doing so led lesser attorneys to not hire me because I 'needed to just go to law school.'

So, that is how Barack acts, as far as the rights of workers, free speech and all that goes.

I repeat, wonder what it was like to work in Sen. Clintons' law firm?