You just have to watch this. Words can't describe it.
Friday, November 30, 2007
It's the end of the month
This has been a very busy month, and as quickly as it passed, it sure took a long time to get through.
Today, with less than five minutes to go before I clocked out for the weekend, one of the other lawyers in the office walked up with a 30 pound box of papers and asked me if I'd be willing to transcribe the page cuts for the firm. Who can say no to such an offer? There were four of us who stayed to work on the project, and we managed to finish and get out of the office in less than 2 hours (overtime, woohoo), so it wasn't a bad thing.
I still don't feel like a lawyer. Perhaps it's because I don't have my bar card yet, but somehow I think it is more than that. I don't know what I was expecting. It's not like I thought there'd be some magical transformation after I passed the bar, or graduated from law school, or got my degree, or any of those milestones, so I'm not sure that I was expecting to feel any differently. But, I guess I was hoping for something, other than a general desire to be earning more per hour.
The kids are doing all right. The wife is doing well. The cats are doing all right. The gramma is recovering, though the grandkids should give her a call this weekend; I'll see what I can finagle.
I've got my holiday malaise going full stride right now. It'll pass. But it sucks while it's here.
At least it was payday, and I had (nearly) an extra week's pay in it. So that helps, particularly for Christmas shopping. We're hoping to go this Christmas without resorting to Plastic Man; so extra dinero shall come in handy.
I want a house for Christmas, and a non-temporary job. Feel free to hook me up.
Today, with less than five minutes to go before I clocked out for the weekend, one of the other lawyers in the office walked up with a 30 pound box of papers and asked me if I'd be willing to transcribe the page cuts for the firm. Who can say no to such an offer? There were four of us who stayed to work on the project, and we managed to finish and get out of the office in less than 2 hours (overtime, woohoo), so it wasn't a bad thing.
I still don't feel like a lawyer. Perhaps it's because I don't have my bar card yet, but somehow I think it is more than that. I don't know what I was expecting. It's not like I thought there'd be some magical transformation after I passed the bar, or graduated from law school, or got my degree, or any of those milestones, so I'm not sure that I was expecting to feel any differently. But, I guess I was hoping for something, other than a general desire to be earning more per hour.
The kids are doing all right. The wife is doing well. The cats are doing all right. The gramma is recovering, though the grandkids should give her a call this weekend; I'll see what I can finagle.
I've got my holiday malaise going full stride right now. It'll pass. But it sucks while it's here.
At least it was payday, and I had (nearly) an extra week's pay in it. So that helps, particularly for Christmas shopping. We're hoping to go this Christmas without resorting to Plastic Man; so extra dinero shall come in handy.
I want a house for Christmas, and a non-temporary job. Feel free to hook me up.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Random Trivia
On this day in 1995, President Clinton passed a law that ended the federally mandated 55 MPH speed limit.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
BDS is Real!
Most Americans have heard of BDS, or Bush Derangement Syndrome, by now. Often times, it's attributed to anyone who dares criticize anything the President has done or said in the past seven years.
But there is new evidence that BDS works the other way. The evidence? Karl Rove, who took an opportunity recently to rewrite history and blame Iraq on Congress. I first heard about this at Vim and Vinegar's blog, where she included the link to this video.
I recommend watching the video, but basically, what Rove says is that the administration was opposed to the AUMF in 2002 and that Congress pushed it through. Keith Olberman then points out that the website Whitehouse.gov has records showing the President urging Congress to go through with the AUMF and then congratulating Congress for doing it rapidly, and finally signing the AUMF.
This assertion also ignores the truth that President Bush did not need the AUMF to go to war with Iraq in the first place. The fact of the matter is the President had the authority (it appears) under the 1991 AUMF to invade (indeed, the 2002 AUMF makes reference to said Authorization as support for the new authorization), and the 2002 AUMF was there more to show Congressional support and help ensure the invasion was funded.
The sad part, in my opinion, is not that Karl Rove is trying to pass the buck, and playing fast and loose with history, but rather that I know there will be people out there who are so steadfast in their defense of this war and the President's actions that they will blindly cling to this assertion as reality no matter what the truth is.
But there is new evidence that BDS works the other way. The evidence? Karl Rove, who took an opportunity recently to rewrite history and blame Iraq on Congress. I first heard about this at Vim and Vinegar's blog, where she included the link to this video.
I recommend watching the video, but basically, what Rove says is that the administration was opposed to the AUMF in 2002 and that Congress pushed it through. Keith Olberman then points out that the website Whitehouse.gov has records showing the President urging Congress to go through with the AUMF and then congratulating Congress for doing it rapidly, and finally signing the AUMF.
This assertion also ignores the truth that President Bush did not need the AUMF to go to war with Iraq in the first place. The fact of the matter is the President had the authority (it appears) under the 1991 AUMF to invade (indeed, the 2002 AUMF makes reference to said Authorization as support for the new authorization), and the 2002 AUMF was there more to show Congressional support and help ensure the invasion was funded.
The sad part, in my opinion, is not that Karl Rove is trying to pass the buck, and playing fast and loose with history, but rather that I know there will be people out there who are so steadfast in their defense of this war and the President's actions that they will blindly cling to this assertion as reality no matter what the truth is.
Wednesday is Haiku Day
I'm in the spirit
Would that we could have some snow
But Houston banned it.
As always, I look forward to your contributions.
Would that we could have some snow
But Houston banned it.
As always, I look forward to your contributions.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Romney Knows the Answer
The problem with the cost of medicine is a result of all those damn lawyers. So, how do we put a stop to their actions? Simple. We cap Medical Malpractice suits. That way, doctors can keep medical costs down by not having to pay such high malpractice premiums.
Of course, this was wildly popular at the medical school where Mitt Romney was speaking. And why not? He said all the magic words - Cap, Frivolous Lawsuit, Money.
Of course, what this doesn't address are a couple things. First off, the suits that result judgments against the doctor are not frivolous. When a doctor commits a harm (i.e. malpractice), then being subjected to civil penalties is certainly not frivolous. Second, capping medical malpractice claims potentially hurts the victims of the doctor's malpractice. The injured party may have limits on their recovery that don't match the expenses from the services he received or cost to repair what injury the doctor caused. Finally, the best way to cap medical expenses from medical malpractice claims is to get rid of the bad doctors. The fewer doctors who commit malpractice, the fewer claims. The fewer claims, the lower the premiums. It's pretty simple.
Yet it's so much easier to cast the blame elsewhere. It's not the doctor's fault for not doing their job right. It's the greedy lawyers attacking those who commit malpractice. They need to be taught a lesson. Unfortunately, the "they" Romney refers to is the wrong they.
Of course, this was wildly popular at the medical school where Mitt Romney was speaking. And why not? He said all the magic words - Cap, Frivolous Lawsuit, Money.
Of course, what this doesn't address are a couple things. First off, the suits that result judgments against the doctor are not frivolous. When a doctor commits a harm (i.e. malpractice), then being subjected to civil penalties is certainly not frivolous. Second, capping medical malpractice claims potentially hurts the victims of the doctor's malpractice. The injured party may have limits on their recovery that don't match the expenses from the services he received or cost to repair what injury the doctor caused. Finally, the best way to cap medical expenses from medical malpractice claims is to get rid of the bad doctors. The fewer doctors who commit malpractice, the fewer claims. The fewer claims, the lower the premiums. It's pretty simple.
Yet it's so much easier to cast the blame elsewhere. It's not the doctor's fault for not doing their job right. It's the greedy lawyers attacking those who commit malpractice. They need to be taught a lesson. Unfortunately, the "they" Romney refers to is the wrong they.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Religious Freedom and Voter ID
In Indiana, Amish and Mennonites are entitled to get themselves ID cards without photos, because having their picture taken violates their religion. This has not presented a problem for the past several years. However, with Indiana's voter ID law, that might change. The suit is currently up at the Supreme Court, where among the injuries alleged is the violation of the Amish and Mennonite's religious freedoms protected under the First Amendment. As you will read on First Amendment Law Professor's Blog, what the law will require those who have IDs without pictures to do is to vote, then go in to the county election board and sign a sworn affidavit that they object to having their picture taken due to religious reasons. They must do this in order to have their vote counted, and they must do it every time they vote, which the members of the suit allege (and I agree) places an undue burden on them.
Perhaps if the law allowed them to sign the affidavit on the day they voted it might be different, but as it is, this is another good reason to dislike a bad law.
Perhaps if the law allowed them to sign the affidavit on the day they voted it might be different, but as it is, this is another good reason to dislike a bad law.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Hot Juicy Burgers
I'm hungry. I want a juicy, hot, soak the wrapper hamburger with some deep fat fried french fries.
I'd really like to go to Bubba's, but it's more like a burger stand, and it's a little chilly to be eating outside.
Maybe we'll go to Ruby Tuesday. I'm not sure.
I'd really like to go to Bubba's, but it's more like a burger stand, and it's a little chilly to be eating outside.
Maybe we'll go to Ruby Tuesday. I'm not sure.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Friday, November 23, 2007
Who's surprised, really?
| You Are Mashed Potatoes |
 Oridnary, comforting, and more than a little predictable You're the glue that holds everyone together. |
We Have Company
I've long supported the concept of separation of church and state. Many of my friends feel the same way. And, ultimately, many Americans feel the same way.
When you look at politics from the pulpit, you see that a majority (62%) of Americans don't want to be told who to vote for, or to have political speeches given from their religious leaders, which makes sense to me. Of course, I don't like the idea of anyone telling me who to vote for, so it would make sense to me to keep church separate from politics here to me.
Interestingly, in the article linked above, it shows that 29% of pollsters said they were less likely to vote for Giuliani now that Pat Robertson has endorsed him, as opposed to 6% who said they were more likely to. There were only 1000 people polled, so it may not have the highest rate of veracity. But still, that is something that Giuliani's camp might want to think about.
When you look at politics from the pulpit, you see that a majority (62%) of Americans don't want to be told who to vote for, or to have political speeches given from their religious leaders, which makes sense to me. Of course, I don't like the idea of anyone telling me who to vote for, so it would make sense to me to keep church separate from politics here to me.
Interestingly, in the article linked above, it shows that 29% of pollsters said they were less likely to vote for Giuliani now that Pat Robertson has endorsed him, as opposed to 6% who said they were more likely to. There were only 1000 people polled, so it may not have the highest rate of veracity. But still, that is something that Giuliani's camp might want to think about.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Random Trivia, Thanksgiving Style.
I first posted this on Thanksgiving in 2005.
Every year, Americans gather together with their families to celebrate the bounty of the year and to give thanks for all that we have on the Fourth Thursday in November with a huge Turkey and all the fixin's, a tradition that started in 1621 with the Pilgrims, Squanto, and the Wampanoag Indians, right? Well, not exactly. We'll look at some of the history of the holiday today.
First, it's true that there was a day of Thanksgiving in 1621, but, it doesn't look as though there was one in 1622. The harvest wasn't as good, there were many new settlers that needed housing and whatnot. The Pilgrims probably weren't in the best of moods for celebrating.
Second, The First Thanksgiving most likely wasn't in November. It was probably much closer to the harvest in September/October. Anyone who has spent any time in Massachussetts in November would tell you it's not exactly the best weather for celebrating.
Third, the Pilgrims didn't call themselves Pilgrims. They called themselves Saints.
Fourth, The letters and journals of the time indicate that Turkeys were not the big ticket item. The colonists came from England, where the lords greatly restricted hunting, and thus most people had never had venison before. In the states, where deer was plentiful, venison was very prominent at the first Thanksgiving.
- So where did Turkey come from? It appears as though it was a product of marketing in the late 1800s. Turkey was a much more profitable than other birds, so the lobbyists advertised immensely, showing pictures of a family gathering around a table with a big turkey in the middle. It caught on, and the picture printers (Think Currier and Ives) followed suit, with pictures of Pilgrims and a big Turkey.
So, if there was no second Thanksgiving, how the the 4th Thursday become the day? Well, Abraham Lincoln. In 1863, after the victory at Gettysburg, President Lincoln declared a national day of thanksgiving on the 4th Thursday of November. In 1864, after the victory at Antietam, they had another Day of Thanksgiving on the 4th Thursday. In 1865, President Lincoln was shot and killed. President Johnson decided to follow the Thanksgiving tradition set up by President Lincoln, and it became the holiday it is now.
Everything is fine and dandy right? Not quite. You see, in the 1930s one year, There were five Thursdays in November. Since Thanksgiving had traditionally been the last Thursday, (usually there are only 4), this posed a problem. The lobbyists for the big department stores wanted Turkey Day to be the 4th Thursday, because it gave people more time for Christmas shopping. Traditionalists felt that this undermined the historical significance (unaware as to the actual history of the holiday), and pushed for it to be on the Last Thursday. There was some fallout from that, with some states going on the 4th Thursday, and some going on the last. Colorado had a Thanksgiving Week, and another state had 2 thankgsivings. Thankfully, Congress intervened, and passed a law in 1941 signed by President Roosevelt that established Thanksgiving as the 4th Thursday in November. And The Lions have been playing ever since.
Every year, Americans gather together with their families to celebrate the bounty of the year and to give thanks for all that we have on the Fourth Thursday in November with a huge Turkey and all the fixin's, a tradition that started in 1621 with the Pilgrims, Squanto, and the Wampanoag Indians, right? Well, not exactly. We'll look at some of the history of the holiday today.
First, it's true that there was a day of Thanksgiving in 1621, but, it doesn't look as though there was one in 1622. The harvest wasn't as good, there were many new settlers that needed housing and whatnot. The Pilgrims probably weren't in the best of moods for celebrating.
Second, The First Thanksgiving most likely wasn't in November. It was probably much closer to the harvest in September/October. Anyone who has spent any time in Massachussetts in November would tell you it's not exactly the best weather for celebrating.
Third, the Pilgrims didn't call themselves Pilgrims. They called themselves Saints.
Fourth, The letters and journals of the time indicate that Turkeys were not the big ticket item. The colonists came from England, where the lords greatly restricted hunting, and thus most people had never had venison before. In the states, where deer was plentiful, venison was very prominent at the first Thanksgiving.
- So where did Turkey come from? It appears as though it was a product of marketing in the late 1800s. Turkey was a much more profitable than other birds, so the lobbyists advertised immensely, showing pictures of a family gathering around a table with a big turkey in the middle. It caught on, and the picture printers (Think Currier and Ives) followed suit, with pictures of Pilgrims and a big Turkey.
So, if there was no second Thanksgiving, how the the 4th Thursday become the day? Well, Abraham Lincoln. In 1863, after the victory at Gettysburg, President Lincoln declared a national day of thanksgiving on the 4th Thursday of November. In 1864, after the victory at Antietam, they had another Day of Thanksgiving on the 4th Thursday. In 1865, President Lincoln was shot and killed. President Johnson decided to follow the Thanksgiving tradition set up by President Lincoln, and it became the holiday it is now.
Everything is fine and dandy right? Not quite. You see, in the 1930s one year, There were five Thursdays in November. Since Thanksgiving had traditionally been the last Thursday, (usually there are only 4), this posed a problem. The lobbyists for the big department stores wanted Turkey Day to be the 4th Thursday, because it gave people more time for Christmas shopping. Traditionalists felt that this undermined the historical significance (unaware as to the actual history of the holiday), and pushed for it to be on the Last Thursday. There was some fallout from that, with some states going on the 4th Thursday, and some going on the last. Colorado had a Thanksgiving Week, and another state had 2 thankgsivings. Thankfully, Congress intervened, and passed a law in 1941 signed by President Roosevelt that established Thanksgiving as the 4th Thursday in November. And The Lions have been playing ever since.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Wednesday is Haiku Day
Turkey Day, Thursday
Man, those Lions. Frustrating.
But, I get Turkey!
As always, I look forward to your contributions.
Man, those Lions. Frustrating.
But, I get Turkey!
As always, I look forward to your contributions.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Warren Steed Jeffs Is Going to Jail
He has been convicted and sentenced to consecutive 5 year to life terms of Rape as an Accomplice.
Jeffs's attorney claims that this is a First Amendment issue. He claims that Jeffs was practicing his religion as he was conducting placement marriages. Apparently, Mr. Jeffs's religious beliefs including helping a 14 year old both get married and have sex against her will.
The problem with this is that he's still violating the law. The law itself is not a Constitutional violation because the law is not written to deny someone their right to practice religion, it's written as a blanket to protect minors from sex with those who could hold undue influence over them. It has a neutral application, and thus is not a First Amendment issue.
Still, it's unclear how long he will actually serve. It's going to be interesting to see what the final story is.
Jeffs's attorney claims that this is a First Amendment issue. He claims that Jeffs was practicing his religion as he was conducting placement marriages. Apparently, Mr. Jeffs's religious beliefs including helping a 14 year old both get married and have sex against her will.
The problem with this is that he's still violating the law. The law itself is not a Constitutional violation because the law is not written to deny someone their right to practice religion, it's written as a blanket to protect minors from sex with those who could hold undue influence over them. It has a neutral application, and thus is not a First Amendment issue.
Still, it's unclear how long he will actually serve. It's going to be interesting to see what the final story is.
What Happened
Scott McClellan is writing a book with the title above. In it, he apparently blames a lot of people for the outing of Valerie Plame, including the President and Vice President.
This after the President reneged on his promise to fire anyone involved in the affair, and commuted the sentence of Scooter Libby, because it was "too harsh."
This is going to be interesting. The book is due out in April; so there's plenty of time for the spin to come out with it.
I'm not sure how far I'd trust Scott McClellan. After all, he was part of the team that dodged the story and he was the one who said Rove and Libby weren't involved...
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
This after the President reneged on his promise to fire anyone involved in the affair, and commuted the sentence of Scooter Libby, because it was "too harsh."
This is going to be interesting. The book is due out in April; so there's plenty of time for the spin to come out with it.
I'm not sure how far I'd trust Scott McClellan. After all, he was part of the team that dodged the story and he was the one who said Rove and Libby weren't involved...
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
The next stone thrown
In the battle of Intelligent Design. Again, it strikes me as odd that these people fighting can only seem to see two possibilities in the development of the world as we see it.
The Discovery Institute has made a statement that the NOVA program, Judgement Day, Intelligent Design on Trial, if shown in classrooms across the country, violates the First Amendment. To support their argument, they refer to the following exchange from the program:
"Q: Can you accept evolution and still believe in religion? A: Yes. The common view that evolution is inherently anti-religious is simply false."
Apparently, the Discovery institute believes that a statement that one can believe in "religion" while believing in evolution supports one religious viewpoint. I'm not quite sure I follow. The First Amendment, as I understand it, exists to keep one religious tenet from controlling the means of the country, such as keeping Buddhism from becoming the state religion, etc. I don't see how saying one can believe in evolution and still believe in religion as a whole violates that principle.
It's funny, but sad, that compromise on beliefs is so hard to reach. If you want your children to believe in Creationism, then teach them that at home, or at Sunday School. But if I don't want my kids to learn that, or your version of that, then respect that and leave that to be my personal decision. Keep it out of schools, and I think everyone is better off.
The Discovery Institute has made a statement that the NOVA program, Judgement Day, Intelligent Design on Trial, if shown in classrooms across the country, violates the First Amendment. To support their argument, they refer to the following exchange from the program:
"Q: Can you accept evolution and still believe in religion? A: Yes. The common view that evolution is inherently anti-religious is simply false."
Apparently, the Discovery institute believes that a statement that one can believe in "religion" while believing in evolution supports one religious viewpoint. I'm not quite sure I follow. The First Amendment, as I understand it, exists to keep one religious tenet from controlling the means of the country, such as keeping Buddhism from becoming the state religion, etc. I don't see how saying one can believe in evolution and still believe in religion as a whole violates that principle.
It's funny, but sad, that compromise on beliefs is so hard to reach. If you want your children to believe in Creationism, then teach them that at home, or at Sunday School. But if I don't want my kids to learn that, or your version of that, then respect that and leave that to be my personal decision. Keep it out of schools, and I think everyone is better off.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Short Week
We have a short week this week at work, what with Thanksgiving coming up and all (we aren't New Jersey state employees). We'll be getting off work at noon on Wednesday and then will be off until Monday. While I'm looking forward to the time off; when I'm not working, I'm not getting paid, and I could use money.
Today we had the second annual office Thanksgiving day feast. I originally intended to just go get a sandwich, because I wanted to save my turkey for the Day. But, I relented; it's tough to pass up a free lunch.
I like work. I like the people there. But I wish I had a full time gig. It would be nice to stay on there, but I would want a little more money to do so. I'm still looking for government work, just not in NJ; and I'm looking for a corporate position somewhere, where being a lawyer is a benefit, but not necessarily a requirement...
Anyway, that's about it for this evening. The Apple doesn't want to go to bed, so we're taking turns fighting his will. According to the Supernanny, he should have given up and stayed in bed by now, but we all know the Supernanny is full of crap. But I digress.
Goodnight, everyone.
Today we had the second annual office Thanksgiving day feast. I originally intended to just go get a sandwich, because I wanted to save my turkey for the Day. But, I relented; it's tough to pass up a free lunch.
I like work. I like the people there. But I wish I had a full time gig. It would be nice to stay on there, but I would want a little more money to do so. I'm still looking for government work, just not in NJ; and I'm looking for a corporate position somewhere, where being a lawyer is a benefit, but not necessarily a requirement...
Anyway, that's about it for this evening. The Apple doesn't want to go to bed, so we're taking turns fighting his will. According to the Supernanny, he should have given up and stayed in bed by now, but we all know the Supernanny is full of crap. But I digress.
Goodnight, everyone.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Executive Irony
Would you disagree with the following statements?
When the Founders drafted the Constitution, they had a clear understanding of tyranny. They also had a clear idea about how to prevent it from ever taking root in America. Their solution was to separate the government's powers into three co-equal branches: the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary. Each of these branches plays a vital role in our free society. Each serves as a check on the others. And to preserve our liberty, each must meet its responsibilities -- and resist the temptation to encroach on the powers the Constitution accords to others.or,
The President's oath of office commits him to do his best to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." I take these words seriously. I believe these words mean what they say.... Others take a different view.... they forgot that our Constitution lives because we respect it enough to adhere to its words. Ours is the oldest written Constitution in the world. It is the foundation of America's experiment in self-government. And it will continue to live only so long as we continue to recognize its wisdom and division of authority.Those are pretty good, no? I think they do a pretty good job of explaining the concept of separation of powers in this country. But I have a hard time taking it seriously when it's said by the current executive, who I think has done as much to disrespect this Separation as any President in recent memory (recess appointments as an end around to Congressional approval, while technically legal, is not exactly in keeping with respecting the Separation of Powers; nor is ordering Congress to grant federal courts the jurisdiction to readdress the judicial decision in the Teri Schiavo case because he disagreed with the courts' findings, and warrantless wiretapping, there are those of us who still think is a violation of the Fourth Amendment). I'm not alone in finding this somewhat incredible. Glenn Greenwald commented on this, as well as other statements offered by this administration, such as the President accusing Congress of "acting like a teenager with a new credit card" for their budget actions. Unless I remember incorrectly, President Bush has spent more than any other president since LBJ (indeed the link I provided above says the same). It's a bit like the pot calling the kettle black, don't you think, for this President to call Congress names with regard to budget? I understand the desire to get back to fiscal conservatism, but statements like these are just irresponsible.
Now back to work
In many states, it's taken as a given. You get Thanksgiving off and you get the day after Thanksgiving off. How else are you going to celebrate the busiest shopping day of the year; if you can't go to work?
Well, about 80,000 government employees in New Jersey are going to find out - or they're going to be using a personal/vacation day to not find out. The Governor of New Jersey, believing that it's more important for government employees to be at work, earning taxpayer dollars, has decreed (it's by declaration of Governor in New Jersey, not law) that there would be no more paid day off for the day after Thanksgiving.
I understand the importance of earning your pay. But, really, how productive are these people going to be? I just think this was a bad move.
Perhaps the Governor just wanted to ensure 80,000 people would vote against him?
Well, about 80,000 government employees in New Jersey are going to find out - or they're going to be using a personal/vacation day to not find out. The Governor of New Jersey, believing that it's more important for government employees to be at work, earning taxpayer dollars, has decreed (it's by declaration of Governor in New Jersey, not law) that there would be no more paid day off for the day after Thanksgiving.
I understand the importance of earning your pay. But, really, how productive are these people going to be? I just think this was a bad move.
Perhaps the Governor just wanted to ensure 80,000 people would vote against him?
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Football
I think I've preferred college football to pro football since I was about 10. That's when I moved to Illinois and the nearest pro team was the St. Louis Cardinals, with quarterback Neil Lomax. They weren't very good.
I like college football because I think it's more exciting. It's more fun. The players are more into it. The fans are really into it. The whole environment is phenomenal.
I am from Michigan originally. Therefore I chose the Wolverines as my team growing up. My wife is a Husky from UW, so I cheer for them, as well (even though she doesn't). The Huskies have been down for a while, but I believe in Ty Willingham, even if my patience is showing strains. The Wolverines, on the other hand, have had a most disappointing year, in what many are speculating will be Lloyd Carr's last. I like Carr; I think he is a good coach. But Ohio State seems to have his number, and the team doesn't seem to have the same kismet this year.
At any rate, while it's been fun to watch the mayhem in the polls, it's perhaps been less exciting for me because I don't really have a pony in the race. Still. This is better than what the pros have put up in a long time.
I like college football because I think it's more exciting. It's more fun. The players are more into it. The fans are really into it. The whole environment is phenomenal.
I am from Michigan originally. Therefore I chose the Wolverines as my team growing up. My wife is a Husky from UW, so I cheer for them, as well (even though she doesn't). The Huskies have been down for a while, but I believe in Ty Willingham, even if my patience is showing strains. The Wolverines, on the other hand, have had a most disappointing year, in what many are speculating will be Lloyd Carr's last. I like Carr; I think he is a good coach. But Ohio State seems to have his number, and the team doesn't seem to have the same kismet this year.
At any rate, while it's been fun to watch the mayhem in the polls, it's perhaps been less exciting for me because I don't really have a pony in the race. Still. This is better than what the pros have put up in a long time.
Down Day
Down as in we don't have any plans for the day. But also down because of the mood I'm in. I'm not sure why, but it seems to happen every holiday season.
Anyway, we have little planned for today. I think I'm going to have some pizza rolls, and I got my oil changed (only 2000 miles overdue) and the nail taken out of my tire (only been there 2 months that I know of).
Mom is doing better. She's healing well enough to practice her high dive skills from her bed. I think she might want to wait before resuming her training, but I don't know much about bypass surgery. Maybe this is the right time.
I let Jamie borrow one of my Bar books to help her study for her Texas Civ Pro finals. I hope it helps her. Perhaps I could find my yellow book, too.
The kids watched schoolhouse rock; the Apple played on the DS, and the wife got to sleep in for a few minutes today. All things considered, it has been a blah day. Nothing too exciting; nothing too maddening.
I'm tired.
Anyway, we have little planned for today. I think I'm going to have some pizza rolls, and I got my oil changed (only 2000 miles overdue) and the nail taken out of my tire (only been there 2 months that I know of).
Mom is doing better. She's healing well enough to practice her high dive skills from her bed. I think she might want to wait before resuming her training, but I don't know much about bypass surgery. Maybe this is the right time.
I let Jamie borrow one of my Bar books to help her study for her Texas Civ Pro finals. I hope it helps her. Perhaps I could find my yellow book, too.
The kids watched schoolhouse rock; the Apple played on the DS, and the wife got to sleep in for a few minutes today. All things considered, it has been a blah day. Nothing too exciting; nothing too maddening.
I'm tired.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Designed Intelligently
I'd mentioned that NOVA was going to be airing an episode on intelligent design last Tuesday. It was pretty good. The program didn't really make any secret on the outcome, or who they thought should prevail, but it was pretty well-made nonetheless.
One of the things that struck me as interesting was that the supply of ID books ("Of Pandas and People") that showed up by an anonymous donor, which was testified to under oath in depositions by a minister advocate of ID (who also wanted to get Creationism back in school) who claimed he had no knowledge of how they arrived, when in fact he wrote the check from his personal account. I'm not certain, but I would argue that would be bearing false witness, and I don't know that one could justify violating one of the Lord's Commandments in an attempt to do God's work.
Americans United did a summary of the program, which you can find here. And you can download the episode on NOVA's website. It's a good episode to watch - it covers most of the bases.
Sidenote - the judge in the case was a Bush appointee, recommended for the position by Santorum.
One of the things that struck me as interesting was that the supply of ID books ("Of Pandas and People") that showed up by an anonymous donor, which was testified to under oath in depositions by a minister advocate of ID (who also wanted to get Creationism back in school) who claimed he had no knowledge of how they arrived, when in fact he wrote the check from his personal account. I'm not certain, but I would argue that would be bearing false witness, and I don't know that one could justify violating one of the Lord's Commandments in an attempt to do God's work.
Americans United did a summary of the program, which you can find here. And you can download the episode on NOVA's website. It's a good episode to watch - it covers most of the bases.
Sidenote - the judge in the case was a Bush appointee, recommended for the position by Santorum.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Off to the Races
And our high speed is up. It's stunning how much a difference it makes. You can see it; items coming up instantly; my smile existent.
It's like going from training wheels straight to Indy car. Only more interesting to me.
It's like going from training wheels straight to Indy car. Only more interesting to me.
A moment of silence for the moment of silence, please
I recently posted on the Illinois Congress override of the Governor's veto of the state mandated moment of silence. I commented that I thought the law was Unconstitutional.
I knew I wasn't the only one who thought so; indeed one commenter agreed ("Amen!"). But a higher authority than I or my good friend Photog has weighed in as well. The new law has been enjoined, according to this post on Religion Clause Blogspot.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think the law is vague, as does the judge. I think that mandating a moment for prayer (" silent prayer or reflection") is little more than saying "You all sit there so the Christians can remind you that they control this country," which is not the way this country was set up.
We'll see how this goes.
I knew I wasn't the only one who thought so; indeed one commenter agreed ("Amen!"). But a higher authority than I or my good friend Photog has weighed in as well. The new law has been enjoined, according to this post on Religion Clause Blogspot.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think the law is vague, as does the judge. I think that mandating a moment for prayer (" silent prayer or reflection") is little more than saying "You all sit there so the Christians can remind you that they control this country," which is not the way this country was set up.
We'll see how this goes.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Interesting, Very Interesting
When I first moved to Texas, back when our President was the First Clinton, I finally dropped AOL and went instead with DSL. I enjoyed the much higher download and upload speeds, and just really got more out of internetting. After I got married, though, we bought a house, which was not wired for DSL, and thus we reverted to dialup. Then we moved to Houston, where, based on limited income due to law school, we didn't have funds for high speed internets. That was tolerable, though, because we at least were able to connect at 50 kbps. Then, one day, for whatever reason, our dialup went kaput, and we instead were connecting at only 26.6 or less. This continued for 3 years.
On Sunday, my wife decided she wanted to switch again, and signed us up for DSL again. I'm anxious to start using the high speed connections, especially after crawling for the better part of five years, and crawling slowly for the last three.
Then, this evening, after I got home from work, I got online, and I noticed that we were connected at 50.6 kbps again. Now this is nowhere near the 700+ we'll be getting once our DSL starts, but it's much better than anything we've had since I started school. (At school our connection was wireless, so we did quite well there with the laptop, but at home was a different story.) I find it interesting, almost conspiracy theory worthy, that our dialup speed with our current provider inexplicably doubled the day before we are to start with our new provider...
Perhaps the real lesson here is that I need to get a life.
On Sunday, my wife decided she wanted to switch again, and signed us up for DSL again. I'm anxious to start using the high speed connections, especially after crawling for the better part of five years, and crawling slowly for the last three.
Then, this evening, after I got home from work, I got online, and I noticed that we were connected at 50.6 kbps again. Now this is nowhere near the 700+ we'll be getting once our DSL starts, but it's much better than anything we've had since I started school. (At school our connection was wireless, so we did quite well there with the laptop, but at home was a different story.) I find it interesting, almost conspiracy theory worthy, that our dialup speed with our current provider inexplicably doubled the day before we are to start with our new provider...
Perhaps the real lesson here is that I need to get a life.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
After a brief pause, the investigation will continue
Last year, amid rumblings that the President's warrantless wiretapping program, the one where the NSA gets to eavesdrop on US persons inside the United States without having to first go through the tedium of following the Fourth Amendment's requirement of getting a warrant before conducting a search, violated the Constitution, the investigators for the Justice Department's OPR were denied security clearances, which according to then Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, were denied by the President, not himself.
Apparently, whatever problem there was with the oversight of the Executive Branch has come to pass with the appointment of the new Attorney General Mukasey, as those investigators have received their clearances now.
It still remains to be seen whether or not the administration's program is Constitutional or not, but one could argue from a strict constructionist standpoint that the 4th amendment mandates warrants and the program bypasses the warrant requirement, and since the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, it trumps the program, that the program is unconstitutional. However, everything in Washington is open to interpretation, and I would actually be surprised if this investigation turned up anything that would make the administration look bad, especially now that the NSA has had a year to go through everything it's doing to sanitize.
Sorry about the sidebar, but with the problems with credibility that this administration has saddled itself with, it's tough to give their policies a fair shake.
Apparently, whatever problem there was with the oversight of the Executive Branch has come to pass with the appointment of the new Attorney General Mukasey, as those investigators have received their clearances now.
It still remains to be seen whether or not the administration's program is Constitutional or not, but one could argue from a strict constructionist standpoint that the 4th amendment mandates warrants and the program bypasses the warrant requirement, and since the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, it trumps the program, that the program is unconstitutional. However, everything in Washington is open to interpretation, and I would actually be surprised if this investigation turned up anything that would make the administration look bad, especially now that the NSA has had a year to go through everything it's doing to sanitize.
Sorry about the sidebar, but with the problems with credibility that this administration has saddled itself with, it's tough to give their policies a fair shake.
On Intelligent Design
Some time ago, I started posting a paper I wrote regarding Intelligent Design and public education. I stopped, because it was tedious, not just to write, but to read.
Tonight, however, NOVA will be airing an episode on Intelligent Design, which should be a fair bit more interesting than what I wrote for school. Anyone who has questions on what ID is may be well advised to check this story out.
This is also posted on the Religion Clause Blogspot, as well as First Amendment Law Professors Blog that I linked above.
Tonight, however, NOVA will be airing an episode on Intelligent Design, which should be a fair bit more interesting than what I wrote for school. Anyone who has questions on what ID is may be well advised to check this story out.
This is also posted on the Religion Clause Blogspot, as well as First Amendment Law Professors Blog that I linked above.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
It's beginning to look a lot like people have to start complaining
It's Veteran's Day. November 11, 2007. Five days ago, my children were finishing off their Halloween Candy. I was appalled that I have already seen commercials for Christmas on television. Yet, perhaps even more appalling is the fact that there are those on the Religious Right who feel obliged to use the first week of November to start shelling out their rhetoric of hate against companies that dare to understand that Christmas isn't the only holiday that is celebrated in December.
According to this article on Americans United, it's not just the usual spewing of ire against the phrase "Happy Holidays," apparently, they are also capitalizing on this, financially.
It's a good thing, too. Because those Christians are going to have to spend their Christmas money somewhere after boycotting all those department stores. Christianity arrives just in time, once again.
According to this article on Americans United, it's not just the usual spewing of ire against the phrase "Happy Holidays," apparently, they are also capitalizing on this, financially.
It's a good thing, too. Because those Christians are going to have to spend their Christmas money somewhere after boycotting all those department stores. Christianity arrives just in time, once again.
Hard Driving
We had an interesting weekend this weekend. As I mentioned yesterday, we went to San Antonio, where we got to see Sesame Street Live, which is, basically, a live action episode of Sesame Street. It wasn't bad; even The Boy enjoyed it. We then went out to dinner at Shoney's, where I had the all you can eat Seafood buffet. It actually wasn't that bad, either.
This morning, we went to the Cracker Barrel for breakfast. This wasn't as good as I'd hoped. I've never been to a Cracker Barrel before, but I'd heard good things. Instead, I got a bland biscuit, with some so-so gravy and my over-medium eggs were very runny. The Bacon was good, though, and there's certainly a lot in the country store.
After breakfast, we went to the Alamo, where we were treated to a presentation of the fight for the Alamo by one of the speakers. They have these every day, but we actually listened this time. I'd forgotten that this was Veteran's day; it was a nice thing to see on a day honoring those who fought and fight for our nation.
We then went to the Ripley's Believe it or Not Museum. Because we believe that our children should feel like they fit in among their surroundings from time to time. They all had fun.
Then it was time for a 4 hour drive home, which consisted of far less shrieking kids and angry dad than I'm used to.
Oh yeah, and we got homemade fudge at Buc-ee's. If you drive on I-10 between Houston and San Antonio, or down to Freeport, you must stop at Buc-ee's. It's a must-do.
Anyway, the wife is out getting dinner and fixin's, and I'm resting before I start working again. If things go well, I should be able to get a few more hours of overtime in this weekend.
The kids are watching A Christmas Story, and were playing outside for a bit, so they're in a good way right now.
This morning, we went to the Cracker Barrel for breakfast. This wasn't as good as I'd hoped. I've never been to a Cracker Barrel before, but I'd heard good things. Instead, I got a bland biscuit, with some so-so gravy and my over-medium eggs were very runny. The Bacon was good, though, and there's certainly a lot in the country store.
After breakfast, we went to the Alamo, where we were treated to a presentation of the fight for the Alamo by one of the speakers. They have these every day, but we actually listened this time. I'd forgotten that this was Veteran's day; it was a nice thing to see on a day honoring those who fought and fight for our nation.
We then went to the Ripley's Believe it or Not Museum. Because we believe that our children should feel like they fit in among their surroundings from time to time. They all had fun.
Then it was time for a 4 hour drive home, which consisted of far less shrieking kids and angry dad than I'm used to.
Oh yeah, and we got homemade fudge at Buc-ee's. If you drive on I-10 between Houston and San Antonio, or down to Freeport, you must stop at Buc-ee's. It's a must-do.
Anyway, the wife is out getting dinner and fixin's, and I'm resting before I start working again. If things go well, I should be able to get a few more hours of overtime in this weekend.
The kids are watching A Christmas Story, and were playing outside for a bit, so they're in a good way right now.
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Can you tell me how to get
We're on our way to San Antonio today. The wife got tickets to see Sesame Street Live, which means a four hour drive with children. I've been working on my parentisms, while trying to get the kids dressed. These guys can get ready for school in about an hour, but getting clothes on and brushing teeth on a Saturday morning apparently is an impossibility. The Apple has actually changed clothes 3 times (he's 3), and has been sighted running downstairs naked on some important secret mission known only to him - he runs down, naked, grabs some item stating he "needs" it, and runs back upstairs. It would be cute if we hadn't been trying to get everyone dressed to go.
Anyway, we planned on leaving at 9:30, and we're ready at 8:51, so apparently my ire has worked some.
Anyway, we planned on leaving at 9:30, and we're ready at 8:51, so apparently my ire has worked some.
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Busy Busy Busy
So, it's been a week since bar results have come out. It seems my firm has been quite happy to have four newly licensed attorneys in the office, as the breadth of our assignments has really started to grow. Of course, a lot of this work has come at the end of the day, where we're asked to do something at home that "should take no more than an hour" but invariably takes at least 3.
Understand, I'm not really complaining, because we can use the extra money. But I would be a little more excited about doing this stuff if I knew it was going to lead to a full time position. As it is, I'm finding myself more tired, and with less time for the family. Given the choice, I would much rather have the time with the family, but as a baby lawyer, you don't get to make that decision. So, at least for the next little bit, work is going to have to win out more than I would prefer.
Understand, I'm not really complaining, because we can use the extra money. But I would be a little more excited about doing this stuff if I knew it was going to lead to a full time position. As it is, I'm finding myself more tired, and with less time for the family. Given the choice, I would much rather have the time with the family, but as a baby lawyer, you don't get to make that decision. So, at least for the next little bit, work is going to have to win out more than I would prefer.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
More on Bar Passing
Here's the deal. We're told from the outset that in order to pass the bar, you need a score of 675 to pass. That's 675 out of 1000. Now, that might sound like a lot of wiggle room, because you have 325 points that you can miss. But those points add up quickly.
To give you a primer on how the scoring works, I'm going to refer you to this link. That way I don't have to pretend like I understand it all.
My score was a 717. In standard Air Force parlance, this means that I passed, with 42 points of overkill. My MBE scaled score (the multiple choice portion of the test) was a 148. If I remember correctly, this basically means that I could pass the Michigan bar, as well; provided I put in a good faith effort on the essays. But I digress - My 148 times 2 resulted in a score of 296 for the MBE portion of the exam. This means that I scored less than half of what I needed to pass the bar on this portion. I still needed an extra 379 points to get to 675. I ended up getting 421. That's not too shabby.
And now I get to work from home and at work. Woo hoo.
To give you a primer on how the scoring works, I'm going to refer you to this link. That way I don't have to pretend like I understand it all.
My score was a 717. In standard Air Force parlance, this means that I passed, with 42 points of overkill. My MBE scaled score (the multiple choice portion of the test) was a 148. If I remember correctly, this basically means that I could pass the Michigan bar, as well; provided I put in a good faith effort on the essays. But I digress - My 148 times 2 resulted in a score of 296 for the MBE portion of the exam. This means that I scored less than half of what I needed to pass the bar on this portion. I still needed an extra 379 points to get to 675. I ended up getting 421. That's not too shabby.
And now I get to work from home and at work. Woo hoo.
Sunday, November 04, 2007
Aftermath of the July 2007 Texas Bar Exam
So, the results are in, and I passed. As did 91.12% of my fellow alums.
I'm at work on Thursday, as are 3 of the 4 of us who took the bar this year, trying my best to concentrate on the job at hand. This is hard, because in addition to fighting some sort of bug, I have all sorts of nerves on edge waiting for the bar results. My friend Dan, who's also waiting for results, is about as calm as can be at the desk behind me. I check for the results about 4 times between 8 and 3, so not too bad, I'm sure, compared to many others. After the last check, I figure the results just won't be out today.
five minutes later, my cell phone buzzes - I've got a text message from Photog telling me results are up, congratulations. Less than 3 seconds later one of the Associates comes running out of another Associate's office all excited - "they're up! Have you seen if you're there?!" I'm currently trying to get to the site to see, and the page hasn't updated on my screen. "Hit refresh." Oh yeah, that works. So I do that, and there's the list of several thousand Texans who passed the bar. I scroll down, and see Dan's name, and then Jen's name, and then mine. The Associate looks at me, "I knew you all passed before I came out." Which I thought was kind of neat. The buzz in the office was pretty electric; but I mostly felt relieved and tired, as opposed to excited.
Dan looked up - "oh, what's going on? I passed, what?" He then celebrated for a few seconds, and went back to work. I, on the other hand, tried my hardest to think of friends I knew from school, which suddenly became very difficult. I did see Photog on there, and Red Hot Mamma, and others. It was nice; though there were a few names I was surprised not to see on there, which took some of the shine off the trophy.
Anyway, that's how I felt after getting the bar results up - relieved and tired. That's what the bar does to you.
I'm at work on Thursday, as are 3 of the 4 of us who took the bar this year, trying my best to concentrate on the job at hand. This is hard, because in addition to fighting some sort of bug, I have all sorts of nerves on edge waiting for the bar results. My friend Dan, who's also waiting for results, is about as calm as can be at the desk behind me. I check for the results about 4 times between 8 and 3, so not too bad, I'm sure, compared to many others. After the last check, I figure the results just won't be out today.
five minutes later, my cell phone buzzes - I've got a text message from Photog telling me results are up, congratulations. Less than 3 seconds later one of the Associates comes running out of another Associate's office all excited - "they're up! Have you seen if you're there?!" I'm currently trying to get to the site to see, and the page hasn't updated on my screen. "Hit refresh." Oh yeah, that works. So I do that, and there's the list of several thousand Texans who passed the bar. I scroll down, and see Dan's name, and then Jen's name, and then mine. The Associate looks at me, "I knew you all passed before I came out." Which I thought was kind of neat. The buzz in the office was pretty electric; but I mostly felt relieved and tired, as opposed to excited.
Dan looked up - "oh, what's going on? I passed, what?" He then celebrated for a few seconds, and went back to work. I, on the other hand, tried my hardest to think of friends I knew from school, which suddenly became very difficult. I did see Photog on there, and Red Hot Mamma, and others. It was nice; though there were a few names I was surprised not to see on there, which took some of the shine off the trophy.
Anyway, that's how I felt after getting the bar results up - relieved and tired. That's what the bar does to you.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)