Search Views


Browse Archives

Views

My Friend Al Gonzales

March 2, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Recently, a New York Times reporter called me to discuss legal matters. He co-wrote a story about Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and the next day's Congressional hearing on domestic spying and other anti-terrorism matters.

The Times story briefly included mention of our conversation, outing me as a long-time friend of the AG, identifying me as one of his "supporters," and using a quip that I had used, that Gonzales was "one of my three Republican friends." He also printed one of several examples I had related concerning Gonzales' lawyering skills, and he accurately noted that he and I "disagree on almost every issue." Alberto and I came to Houston as
professionals at the same time in 1982, and we have had many personal and professional activities in common, as young Mexican American lawyers in the same city will do.

The conversation had been nearly an hour, and the reporter accurately and fairly captured my answers to his many questions, which ranged from Governor Bush's DUI to whether or not the Geneva Convention covers al Qaeda. I get calls regularly from reporters, and thought nothing more of it. However, when I came into my office on Monday morning, I found about 20 e-mail messages from fellow faculty members across the country, condemning me in one way or the other about the remarks I made. The story had been posted on several faculty-driven listservs, along with public and private remonstrances and notes of support. One said, " Este buey no merese tu apoyo" (This mule doesn't deserve your support), while another was headed: "What are torture and war crimes against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color between friends?" Thinking that I could not address each one, I posted this note on a law professor listserv:

"All I have to say is that I have many friends, including most who wrote me. I have never required loyalty oaths of my friends, nor they of me. I disagree with many people about many things, but have never set as a precondition of friendship that we agree on social or political issues. I am not about to start doing so now."

We were off to the blogging/listserv races. Since then, I have received dozens of faculty responses, public and private, mostly along these lines: "Hell, Michael deserves this because he in effect endorsed Gonzales" to "Man, I disagree with his choice of friends but he clearly has the right to choose his friends" with all the degrees along this spectrum. The most vociferous have accused me of war crimes, guilt by association, and the like. The most cutting mistook my reluctance to respond further to each iteration as thin-skinned aloofness: "And it is really too bad that some people can be talked into shutting up or walking away just because their feelings get hurt."

A few lawyer friends and family members weighed in, uniformly positive, and reminding me how much they always disagreed with me on various matters. A few whose voting behavior I did not know revealed themselves as Republicans, and assuming I was counting them among the three I had thought I had; overnight, my Republican posse doubled.

After a week of this, I am astounded that people do not see the difference between friendship and politics. It is not often I need to guard my left flank; this whole thing has me baffled, and somewhat amused. I feel like I am in a Mark Twain novel, looking down at my own funeral from the church balcony.

In an odd way, this whole thing has been salutary -- being slimed by some of these folks in public actually helps (such as the "war criminal" calumny from one bozo who has kept carping), but some of the scorchers I have received (in English and Spanish) were of more interest to me. For example, a professor whose work I have always admired wrote me: "Michael, for what it's worth, I think that you are you entitled to have whatever friends you want to have, and to maintain your friendship despite some political disagreements.  But further, such disagreements can deepen real friendships, and when the one or both of the friends are important political actors, maintaining the friendships can also improve national politics by giving those actors access to different information and opinions than they might get from their toadies."

That is my story and I am sticking to it. I am the oldest of 10 children, and we disagree all the time. How could it be otherwise with friends and colleagues?

At the end of the day, I have come to believe that Al Gonzales is probably more worried than I am about our friendship ruining reputations, now that he has been outed as my friend. The whole imbroglio with the nomination of Harriet Miers shows that Republicans can be fickle with friendships and affiliations, but I work hard to keep my friends. And as a postscript, the then-University of Houston president who hired me and with whom I have stayed in touch over the years, Barry Munitz, was in the news this week over the situation at the Getty Trust, where he resigned as president. I do not know Barry's political affiliations, but it has been a tough week for my few friends in high places.

But I will say this: when he returns to Houston, it is Al Gonzales' turn to buy.

Michael A. Olivas is the William B. Bates Distinguished Chair in Law at the University of Houston Law Center.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on My Friend Al Gonzales

  • Sad
  • Posted by The Unknown Professor on March 2, 2006 at 7:40am EST
  • It's important to surround yourself with people of other viewpoints, or you end up in an echo chamber. My closest friend on the faculty has viewpoints that differ from mine on just about any topic we can imagine. We have a political discussion about once a week. No matter what the topic, however, we always end up laughing.

    It's become a source of puzzlement to those on our floor. They don't understand how we can disagree so much and still enjoy ourselves.

    I forget who, but someone once said that "A friend is not someone who agrees on the answers, but one show agrees on what are the important questions".

  • Friendly Persuasion
  • Posted by John Thelin , Professor at University of Kentucky on March 2, 2006 at 7:45am EST
  • Even though Michael Olivas and I have our differences on important matters (e.g.,who were the most talented, under-appreciated rock 'n roll performers of the late 1950s and early 1960s) I continue to work hard at maintaining our friendship. It's worth the effort.

    Let's put this political tempest into the right teapot (or, at least, Teapot Dome Scandal): when Warren G. Harding was on his death bed he confided to his aide: "It's not my enemies I'm worried about -- it's my friends." Warren was right -- he had relied on an old friend who was a medical quack to be his personal physician. Loyalty extracted a price, as Harding's friend misdiagnosed what turned out to be a fatal illness.

    I decree that Michael Olivas is right, even if he is to the left.

  • the lessons of Sherif, Goffman, etc
  • Posted by ex-prof on March 2, 2006 at 11:00am EST
  • One thing that this article teaches is that a lot of folks are quite unfamiliar with the research on social relationships (and quite unobservant of the process by which they have formed relationships). Muzafer Sherif's research with young campers long ago showed that attachments have far more to do with things like proximity and group affiliation than they do with any personal preferences and compatiblity. So, it should come as no surprise that the author, who shared a similar, and very salient, group affiliations (ethnic, age cohort, geographic, and professional) when he first met AG should develop a friendship with him, regardless of any scattered, implicitly political personal opinions AG might have voiced. (Of course, political affiliation is also a salient group affiliation for many, as the author has learned, but people rarely voice these at the outset of any relationship, as also evidenced by the author's testimony. Indeed, there are powerful social norms against expressing those affiliations early on. That's why I assume that those political affiliations were only expressed implicitly in scattered personal opinions at least early on.) Goffman also demonstrated that our circumstances choose our own personalities as much as our friends far more than we ever consciously do.

  • Friendship Crosses Party Lines
  • Posted by john F. DeFelice , Assistant Professor of history at University of Maine at Presque Isle on March 2, 2006 at 11:00am EST
  • John Thelin is correct, even though he's from the right (quid pro quo). The echo chamber is a lonely place to live. I have friends from the far left and the far right What surprised me years ago is that their rhetoric is identical. All you have to do is substitute a few words (as I did above) and there is no difference at all! Its once you get past their ideological shells that you often (not always) find in both camps decent human beings. This generation of political rhetoric would have us live in the litter not in the layers (my apologies to Stanley Kunitz). Both parties have plenty of litter. But when one stops listening to the other, nobody wins but the trolls who feed on litter!

  • Friends
  • Posted by Kevin , Undergraduate on March 2, 2006 at 12:40pm EST
  • I guess this demonstrates how politicized the nation is - when those who do not share your opinions are not simply friends with whom you disagree but should be counted as enemies to be greeted only with scorn and shrill attacks.

    I am lucky to have friends from all across the political spectrum. One of the great joys of my high school junior year was the political discussions I had over lunch - we had a Republican (me), as a well as a Democrat, a Libertarian, and a Communist. The Democrat and Libertarian were and still are dating and are planning to marry. There is no reason we cannot discuss politics in a civil and reasonable manner - it is unfortunate that the great political discourses on our campuses are limited by an irrational antagonism.

  • Friends (Indeed)
  • Posted by Carl on March 2, 2006 at 3:00pm EST
  • I agree with Kevin's comments. One of my cousins, who is well over 60, recently spent some time with my son-in-law. Afterward, he commented (seriously) that my-son-in-law was the first intelligent Republican he had ever encountered, either personally or in the media.

    I suspect that my cousin is hardly alone in his sentiments (not about my son-in-law, of course, but), drawing stereotypical conclusions about the intelligence, and even the ethics, of those who differ with us politically.

    This is deeply saddening.

  • You are right, Michael
  • Posted by Steve Katsinas , Director, Education Policy Center at University of Alabama on March 2, 2006 at 3:10pm EST
  • Dear Michael:

    My guess is that the vociferous nature of some of the communications regarding your relationship with your friend Al has more to do with (a) the divide that currently exists in our body poltic, (b) the bombastic tone of poltiical discourse, particularly that which occurs on-line.

    It is my view that it's always good to have frineds across the political aisle, and it's sad to read how overcharged the rhetoric can be sometimes.

    If only we could all get along....

  • Only in academe
  • Posted by Larry on March 6, 2006 at 8:30am EST
  • This whole thread is amazing. While some have accused me of being liberal (in fact, I am a member of the ACLU), on a daily basis I have cordial relations with people that will say very bad things about my political beliefs. (In fact, some of them tell non-lawyers how evil the ACLU is.) But this doesn’t interfere with our relationships, and many of them are actually friends of mine. Only true political ideologues play this game.

    Recently, I have noticed that lawyers that were never in private practice (e.g. Alito-types -- but not Roberts-types) actually disliking lawyers that represent people or corporations that are oppressed, but I think this is just a blip on the radar.

  • Your Commitment to Justice is beyond reproach
  • Posted by Gregory J. Vincent , Vice Provost and Professor at University of Texas on March 6, 2006 at 3:40pm EST
  • Dear Micheal I have admired your work for years and I remember reading about your accomplishments when I was a law student at Ohio State (where you received your Ph.D). You were featured in a volume entitled They Came and Conquered,a book that featured prominent Buckeyes of Color. You work over the last three decades certainly demonstrates a strong commitment to justice and civil rights. Your personal friendship with the Attorney General does not cause me any concern. In fact it is good to have a diverse group of friends. Your record speaks for itself.