Iran's PR victory?

After 9-11, the United States declared war. We didn't declare war on an enemy state; we declared war on a concept - terrorism. The president entered us into this war under his Constitutional warmaking authority pursuant to an AUMF signed by Congress. Our goal is to eliminate terror, specifically, Al Qaeda, who was deemed (and later corroborated) to be responsible for the attacks on September 11. One aspect of war is capturing enemy combatants. We captured a lot of people we declared were Al Qaeda members or Al Qaeda supporters, and we held them in, among other places, Guantanamo Bay, in Cuba. There, the detainees have been held without the right to challenge their detention, without the right to see the evidence against them, without the right to see the witnesses against them, they are subject to harsh treatment (at one time torture, perhaps, as well), and are subject to coerced confessions, which can be used against them in trial - trials that will be for their lives, for losing their case almost inevitably will result in death. Winning just means they get to go back to Guantanamo Bay, but that's for a different time.

The United States has sent the message to the world that this is how it treats those it captures pursuant to the laws of war. Common article 3 of the Geneva Conventions apply here; the president can't invoke the law of war for the capture and prosecution of enemy combatants and then claim a loophole that allows him to not offer the protections granted by the laws of war (gotta take the bitter with the sweet - one of the major holdings in Hamdan). We have told the world, as the superpower, that we consider this treatment to be acceptable.

A short time ago, 15 british Marines were captured by Iran. They were detained without access to international aid, they were subject to coerced confessions, and they were paraded over the airwaves. Iran had the confessions from the sailors, that they were violating Iranian waters. Iran had a violation of the laws of war, they had a confession, and we really were not in a position to forcefully say "you can't execute them," because that is what we hope to do with the few (I think 10?) detainees currently awaiting trial using coerced confessions as a principal piece of evidence. Yet, they didn't do so. They released the sailors - and there was much rejoicing.

People will argue that Iran had to do this, that it had no other viable choice, because executing the sailors would have invited retaliation, and perhaps that's true, but who would have been the aggressor? Per our actions in the war on terror, said executions would arguably have been justified. The western nations that attacked Iran would be punishing Iran for following the United States' lead.

While one could argue releasing the sailors was the "only" choice, it certainly was the best choice for Iran and the rest of the world. And for all the hateful rhetoric that Ahmedinejad spews, in this instance, he set the proper example.

On Intelligent Design

Last year, I took a seminar class called "education law." I loved that class, so much, in fact, that part of me wanted to become an education law lawyer. Maybe I still want to, I don't know.

Anyway, my paper earned me a B+ in the class, which may have been a little higher than I deserved; I wish I'd have put in a little more time to make a stronger paper. Being that I think many people don't understand the idea of Intelligent Design, or why people are opposed to its teachings, I thought I would do a piece by piece posting on my blog. So, without further ado, here is the introduction, and I apologize in advance for the cites:

In 1927, John Thomas Scopes went on trial for teaching that humans evolved from monkeys. In what was a very controversial issue, the Supreme Court decided that the state was not wrong by refusing to allow the instruction of evolution in public schools. Though Tennessee’s Supreme Court reversed the ruling of the lower courts upholding the statute, it did so the on grounds that the Judge levied the fine, not the jury, and the Court declared a nolle prosequi on the famed “Monkey” trial.[i] The past eighty years have seen jurisprudence on this matter nearly stand on its head. Today evolution is a part of virtually every public school’s curriculum while creationism has been all but shut out of the schoolhouse. Some have praised this reversal while some have fought it tooth and nail. Some have even parodied the fight to teach alternative theories[ii].

This paper will discuss the history of Intelligent Design in schools, from its roots in creationism through creative science up to intelligent design. It will explain the tests used to determine whether or not an Intelligent Design program violates the Establishment Clause, how the country reached the position it has regarding intelligent design, as well as where Intelligent Design might stand in Texas. Finally, it will offer a proposed curriculum that incorporates intelligent design into public education while surviving First Amendment muster. First, we will discuss the Constitutionality of teaching evolution.

---

[i] See Scopes v. State, 289 S. W. 363, 367 (Tenn. 1927).

[ii] http://www.venganza.org

So honored

My good friend GTL at Gun Toting Liberal did me quite the honor yesterday. He placed me on his list of five bloggers who make him think. My thanks go to Papamoka, who directed me to the site, where I've had the opportunity to take part in many a great debate.

One of the responsibilities I have as a result of this award, though (much like a chain letter), I have to name five people who make me think. I like this, because it gives me the chance to point people to blogs I read. To be fair, though, I will not include family members (they make me think, but I don't believe in nepotism).

First, I'm going to breach etiquette a little, and point right back to the GTL - I have been the part of a great many discussions on that site and look forward to many more.

Then, in alphabetical order, I offer the following:
2. Bookworm
3. Good Enough Mom
4. Vim and Vinegar
5. War Professor - who has been a bit of an absenteeist for the last several months, but is an excellent poster when she can find the time.

I enjoy everyone on my blogroll, otherwise I would not link to you. It's rather difficult to find a way to narrow the list down, and this list, like GTL's, could easily be different 6 months from now, as it most certainly would have been different 6 months ago. Every one of the blogs above provide well-written positions and unique perspectives that I enjoy reading. They are all courteous, cogent, and congenial, even in disagreement, and many bloggers could take a lesson on rational discourse from any of them.

Objection, Hearsay

Hearsay is: any out of court statement, made by a declarant (person), which is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

Essentially, this means that the person made the statement to prove that the statement he is making is true.

Great, just great

As if we didn't have enough going on with graduation, and bar review and bar exam and trips to Pennsylvania for training and getting the daughter ready for kindergarten and the Boy going to an advanced program at a different school next year and the little boy potty training...

The rabbit's dead.

"Mission Accomplished"

I've heard the cover story for a long time now - that the banner that flew behind president Bush on March 1, 2003 when he declared a victory in the war on terror (decide for yourself the veracity of that statement) referred to the sailors on the ship, who had, indeed accomplished their mission and done so capably and admirably, and that the president had nothing to do with it.

However, I am also more than certain that the implied message was what president Bush intended to convey, and as Commander in Chief of the military, he could easily have not had that banner flying behind him.

What I want to know, though, is when did the "official" reason for the banner come out? The earliest reference I can see (with my very limited research - school is keeping me very busy today) is from October of 2003, where the White House insisted that, while they made the banner, the Navy requested it and was responsible for it. When did the story get released, and what was the true intent of the President standing in front of the banner to make that speech? Give me dates and links, not speculation.

When you can't deny...

There's always the amnesia defense. I find it incredibly scary that these are the people who were selected for their positions because they were highly qualified (i.e. "competent"), yet they have the memory spans of goldfish (random trivia - pregnant goldfish are called "twits"). How could these people be trusted to run the country when they all apparently suffer from Alzheimer's?

And I don't buy into the crap about this being a witch hunt. Accountability of the executive branch (or of the government at all) is NOT a witch hunt. Perhaps the apologists should stop attacking the people asking the questions and instead starting challenging those who were asked the questions to answer them fully and honestly. Perhaps every step this administration takes is looked upon with strict scrutiny because so many of the previous steps turned out to be deceptive. And perhaps, had this administration exercised its oversight somewhat more effectively in the six years of unquestioned governing, it wouldn't be subject to external oversight now.

Why is it so hard to find a good restaurant on the moon?

Because there's no atmosphere.

That's a bad joke - quite possibly the worst joke I've ever told (most of my jokes, I'm not too modest to admit, are quite the knee-slappers), but I take solace in the fact that it's not my joke, I read it somewhere.

Anyway, it provides a pretty good segue into the point of the post - NASA is testing an inflatable shelter for use on the moon. I must confess, I am nowhere near an expert on outer space, but from what I understand, to inflate something, you would need air, and the moon is pretty much devoid of air, hence the spacesuits worn by Neil Armstrong, et al when they landed in Nevada - er, on the Moon... My conclusion - not based on any science above what I remember from 6th grade, would be that an inflatable ANYTHING on the moon would be a dumb idea - from shelters to pools to those chairs that you get from drinking enough beer or smoking enough cigarettes... But, if NASA can get the government to approve it (and they've granted monies for things just as dumb, e.g. how long it takes to prepare two eggs for breakfast, or the political effects of bullfighting in Spain), then go for it. I'm thinking of asking for a grant of several million dollars to study the effect of having several million dollars in the bank account of a law student with a wife and three kids.

Is He the Guy?

Is this man the best choice for president out there? There are many people, including myself, who say yes.

Wednesday is Haiku Day

The kids woke up at
three this morning, and then had
to sleep next to me

Going Fishing

My father booked a deep-sea fishing trip for us, my father in law, and The Boy for graduation. We got the deposit in this weekend, and the wife of the guy we're chartering called me to confirm. She and I got to talking a bit, because she was at home alone for the day (the Capt. was out fishing), and I was between classes so I had some time to spare. We got to the topic of why we were going fishing and I mentioned it was a graduation gift. She asked where I was going to school. I mentioned I was in law school downtown, to which she replied, "That's ok, Bill (the captain) will take you anyway."

She said some charters won't take lawyers. That made me sad.

Rule Against Perpetuities

When considering the Rule against Perpetuities, you don't look for a particular person as the life-in-being, rather you look at the facts and ask, "Could everyone alive at the time of the grant die and 21 years pass before the interest might vest?" If the answer is yes, then the grant is void as violative of the Rule Against Perpetuities.

Just a refresher before all the bar reviews.

A case of the Mondays

I'm not moving to Salt Lake City. At least, not now.

I woke up early this morning - about 4:45. Laid in bed for an hour and a half, because I didn't want to get up and I kept hoping I'd fall back asleep. I don't ever fall back asleep.

Finally got out of bed, got the kids up, except the apple (youngest son) who wouldn't go downstairs for breakfast. instead, he stayed on the landing informing me that the kitty cat was "there" (on the coffee table). I didn't fight with him, because I was busy fighting with the refrigerator. Maintenance came out some 10 days ago and defrosted it because there was no freezing going on. I ended up having to do the same thing today, because the food we bought over the weekend was still not quite frozen (most of it was, but not all of it), and the milk, coke, water, and diet Dr. Pepper were all warm. Anyway, I spent about 2 hours on that all told this morning, but back to the apple. He informed me of the cat's incredulous decision to be on the coffee table a good 30 times or so, and by then the other kids were back upstairs getting dressed. When I suggested that apple get dressed, he started throwing a temper tantrum that lasted from 6:45 until I left him at daycare a half hour later. Two adults were barely able to get a shirt and shorts on this guy - I never knew toddlers could make their bones disappear at will.

I had an eye exam today. First one in four years. My doctor was curt, to be polite, and just short of rude to be more honest. My appointment was for 10. at 10:37, I went to the receptionist to find out if there was any way I could get an estimate as to when I'd be seen. I asked politely, because I don't want to piss off the office of the doctor who's going to be doing things to my eyes (if I have any true phobias, it would be irrational fear of eye trauma), but I thought to myself as I was inquiring, "you know, I had an appointment on Friday that I missed because I was downtown and they said they couldn't fit me in. I could have gotten back in time to be 45 minutes late, which apparently is about when I'm going to get seen for this appointment. I always operated under the premise of you set appointments so that people know when to be in and out of the clinic. If you are 45 minutes late 2 hours into your workday, then perhaps you need to schedule fewer appointments." Anyway, I had an eye pressure test. I hate eye pressure tests. This one included taking a machine roughly the size of Gerard Depardieu and putting it in my eye socket, without first removing my eye. I got to look at a shiny blue light, but I could not walk towards it, because like all good eye exams, they first put my head in traction. Then I got to look at all the rows of letters with the flipping of the lenses - "which looks better, one, or two?" Seriously, in the history of recorded civilization, has there ever been a one that looked better than a two, or vice versa? I think the doctors are pretty much just flipping a piece of fuzzy glass over and over to mess with us. Anyway, I got my exam done, I need a new prescription (which I got) and after a bunch of toussling with the insurance folks, figured out the reimbursement program for my new frames, which should be ready Wednesday, Thursday at the latest.

All this meant I missed my first two classes of the day (I could have been on time for the second one, but I was 45 minutes late getting seen). Then, I had to rush through the school trying to find the phone number of the opposing counsel to whom I had to deliver the discovery requests and pre-negotiate a plea agreement that he didn't seem too keen on prenegotiating, which I think bites, because, really, I've worked my tail off for that class and just once I'd like to have a week where I didn't really have to work so hard to prepare for class. Anyway, I got that stuff turned in to him, then I had to rush to work to find out how my GLBA went - horribly. I don't think I could have been more wrong, unless I'd done a HIPAA agreement instead. Anyway, I had an hour to fix what took me 3 hours to mess up, and somehow I managed to do it right this time. I actually had a big thing on here that I just deleted regarding this topic; I figured it better to leave it at this.

Then I went back to the daughter's school to pick her up and take her to daycare. She got in the car and immediately asked for her lip-talk. I asked her what she meant, she said lip-talk. I tried to hand her the apple's styrofoam cup "telephone," but that's not a lip-talk. I looked on the chair she was pointing to and saw my folder, a cushion, two CD jewel cases, and a laptop. She wanted the laptop. It's her Barbie Laptop. When she turns it on, Barbie's head comes on the screen and says something to the effect of "welcome to my super-fab laptop." I can see how to a 5 year old listening to a digitized barbie voice emanating from a head with moving mouth that it could sound like lip-talk. So I gave it to her. She played with it. I listened to ESPN Radio. I love having the stereo back, but I've turned into an old man - I no longer listen to music, I listen to talk radio. I'm not an angry old man yet, though, because I don't listen to Rush (who I don't care for) or Savage (who I really don't like).

Then I went back to class. I didn't read for class. I had been too busy with my drafts for my transactional skills class and my mini trial for advocacy that reading kind of took a back burner. Fortunately I didn't get called on, because I was completely unready - first time all semester in that class. Then I had my transactional skills class. I have my review for my first drafts tomorrow. We were supposed to e-mail those in today so that the professors would have time to review. I forgot the 24 hour requirement, but I e-mailed what I had - I'd spent about 4 hours working on my JV this weekend, and had a good bit done. After I e-mailed it 23:50 before the appointment, I opened my JV to see how it looked. There was nothing. All the work I'd done over the weekend was gone. So I spent class not listening to the professors, frantically trying to reconstruct all that I'd done over the weekend. I got a good bit in, a lot of boilerplate, and whatnot, so I went up after class to tell the professors that I'd work on it for an hour or so this evenign and turn it in before I went to bed. The professors both had other obligations for tomorrow (as do I with advocacy), so they suggested we just reschedule. My partner and I agreed heartily. So I have a bunch more time to put together a licensing agreement to go along with my JV. It looks (as of now) that my partner will be doing the distribution agreement, so I have the long of it, but I don't mind.

Anyway, I got home, played with the kids for a few minutes, and then got them shuffled into bed at 8. Now, at 10:00, I think The Boy finally fell asleep.

A tale of two hypotheses

The first one comes from a while back, when the President insisted that he did not need a Warrant to listen in on the telephone conversations of United States Citizens, despite Supreme Court rulings otherwise, the Fourth Amendment, and an unquestionably reasonable alternative to his program (the FISA courts which have a 99.96% Warrant Approval rate and are available post facto). The president's position was that this was a necessary tool in the war against terror and that it's not unconstitutional as he understands the Constitution, and besides, if you have nothing to hide, then why the concern if someone is listening, but they won't be listening anyway, because the NSA follows strict guidelines, but we can't tell you what those are because it would help the Enemy (you know, Terror, which is not an entity, but a theory and therefore the War on Terror could conceivably never end). i can't begin to tell you how many people (all Bush apologists) who argued that this is a minor inconvenience - yes, facially violating the Fourth Amendment is a "minor inconvenience" - and I need to be "rational."

Now, these same people are defending Alberto Gonzalez and the administration in defending him against requests to go up before Congress pursuant to a subpoena to testify as to the involvement regarding the firing of 8 US Attorneys for, what the document dumps have illustrated, appear to be partisan reasons (i.e. they weren't "loyal bushies"). The president has gone so far as to say that he has proposed "reasonable" alternatives to testifying under oath, which is, talking off the record, and that the information Gonzalez et al. possess is protected under "executive privilege." This is a separation of powers issue, and there is certainly an issue to consider as to whether or not this is something that could be protected by executive privilege. I would like to limit executive privilege, and I fear that the administration's attempts to expand it would impermissibly extend the power of the executive branch to such point that there may no longer be co-equal branches in government, which is, in my estimation, exactly what this president wants - expansion of Presidential powers under a Unitary Executive Theory. For those Republicans who support this concept, I ask you, are these the keys you'd be willing to hand Hillary should she win in '08? That scares me almost as much as Bush operating under this theory, but I digress. The point is that in this case, the President has essentially been asked - "if you have nothing to hide, then why do you resist these people going under oath to testify?" One idea, as John Dean, the author of the link above says: "[Y]ou show me a White House aide who does not want his conversations and advice to the president revealed, and I will show you someone who should not be talking with or advising the president."

Anyway, here's the contrast - the first problem is a Constitutional issue - the administration violated the Fourth Amendment - the rights preserved for the protection of the People from the overreaching of the Government. The second one is a personal issue. Nowhere in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights is there any mention of "executive privilege." The concept, such as it exists, is a creature of the Administrations past (Nixon and Clinton relied on this concept), and any reach it does have is limited and should remain limited - lest we become a nation of subjects and no longer a nation of the Free.

Busy Morning

The last few weeks have been rather busy. Today, I had to notarize and mail out my bar application, finish drafting a GLBA, and still have to work on a licencing agreement, a distribution agreement and a Joint Venture agreement.

On the bright side, my bar application is mailed in - late fee and everything. I elected to send the payment via teller's check, so that I could be sure that the group I was paying (the board of law examiners) was the only group that could pay, and that the money would definitely be there when they tried to cash it.

I interviewed for the job in the office in which I'm interning on Thursday - long story short, I won't be getting the job and I'm ok with that. Yesterday, we went and met the audit department - it's much lower stress, and the pay would be about the same, maybe a LITTLE bit higher, but not much. And when my boss heard that I'd be willing to move to Utah for the right price, she sent my resume up to the general counsel office up there. That's probably chasing a rainbow, but it would be much closer to gramma, papa, the aunt and uncle and cousin(s).

Anyway, that's the current update - I need to get my resume out to more people. And I'm tired. And I have to get ready for Plea Bargaining and hearings on motions for Tuesday, and to meet with the model corporation regarding the agreements. And the reading. Always the reading.

Every Little Thing

When I was a senior in high school, I was selected to play with the University of Washington band at a basketball game. At the time, a girl that I'd had a big thing for in Junior High and High School, who had graduated two years before me attended UW. One of the pieces we played was "Every Little Thing She Does is Magic," and while I played it, it reminded me of the girl who I had the crush on. And, ever since then, whenever I hear the song, it reminds me of the University of Washington, which reminds me of the girl I had the crush on, who I married 9 years later.

I like the Police a bit more today than I did in 1991.

Wednesday is Haiku Day

I'm going fishing!
After graduation, yay
I've waited too long!

I look forward to reading your submissions

Flip-flopping

I remember hearing my whole life that gay was a choice, that a person decided to be gay. It was a conscious decision, not a product of nature. I remember this being the prevailing thought process for many, many years.

But, apparently, there has been a switch in thinking. No longer is gay a choice, you are born gay. It's not something you catch, it's something that's inside you. That's the only logical conclusion, isn't it, when a president of a seminary suggests that there should be "prenatal treatment to reverse gay orientation," and that such treatment would be biblically justified.

I can't begin to conceive of how insane this is...
If God made man in his image, and gay is a biological trait, then how is it a sin to be born the way God made you? Am I oversimplifying? Perhaps, instead of trying to cure what God made, we should reconsider what man wrote in His Book...

Bushspeak?

The administration said that "mistakes were made" regarding the firing of eight federal prosecutors pursuant to e-mails that indicated they were not "loyal bushies." However, the President is not on record as saying that "There is no indication that anybody did anything improper."

Read that for a minute - it's not improper, in the Executive branch of the United States Federal Government, to make mistakes that result in the termination of individuals who received excellent assessments.

I don't really care if the President fires US Attorneys. That's part of his job. I don't like that the attorneys were fired pursuant to a PATRIOT ACT provision that seems unrelated to the reason the attorneys were fired. I don't like that the administration first blamed Harriet Miers, and said that Karl Rove had nothing to do with it, when he in fact, did, and I really don't like the "reasonable alternative" that the president has offered - that it is unnecessary to put these individuals under oath to testify as to the role of the firings. I really hate the idiotic "but Clinton did it, too." So what? President Bush ran on a platform that he was going to bring respectibility back to the White House. He has not done so. And he needs to start holding those who work for him accountable to the American Public when they make "mistakes." If Congress believes that putting them under oath to have a record of their testimony, then that's what should happen.

I certainly don't want the precedents that this administration has suggested here and in other issues to move on to a potential Hillary White House - bad bad bad.

Not a Kafka Dream

So, I had spring break. Sort of. I worked every day, I have a contract I need to finish drafting for review by the Contracts department, I have to apply for the position for which I'm interviewing on Thursday, and I have not been sleeping as much as I'd like. Over spring break, I had over 150 pages I was supposed to read for class on Monday and Tuesday, plus a licensing agreement and a joint venture agreement that I had to start drafting, plus I was selected to be the attorney for the pretrial hearing on a motion to suppress for class today, when I entered into spring break thinking I'd finally get a week off (I've been lawyer 6 of 9 weeks, more than anyone else in class except one, who also has 6), so I had to draft a bench brief - I finally got one done, but it's not very good and I didn't rely on it for my argument. I had to draft questions to interview my client and to conduct the direct on her and the cross on the police officer, and I didn't fully understand what we were doing, and didn't get much guidance in the support materials.

After 10 hours at school yesterday, I got home and started writing. I wrote and I drafted, and I swore and I hit the table and the chair and the computer and the c- well, I couldn't catch the cats to hit, but I would have (note to PETA people, I'm joking). Anyway, I got to bed at about 11:35 last night, too tired to fall asleep and too stressed about the case for today to be able to relax enough to drift off. So instead, my subconscious goes into overdrive.

I dream that I'm having a conversation about work and contract drafting with a dead bird. It looked like an Amazon bird, very colorful, but without the big Toucan beak. It was laying flat on its side, and (someone?) was holding it so that it was a straight line from the beak to the feet. (They?) were going to cut its head off for some reason, and I kept trying to stop them from doing so because it was the only thing that could guide me through my contract issues and prepare me for trial the next day.

Then I realized I was going insane. And I tried to relax, but I couldn't, because all I could think about was why I was thinking about some dead talking bird.

Shocked and Appalled

Wrestlers use steroids?! In what world? I can't believe this would ever happen.


Oh, and CSI Miami is on. They just did a test to recover fingerprints from a pair of sunglasses - there was exactly ONE print on them, and it was a whole print recovered from one of the lenses. Because when I commit a crime and then touch glasses, I make sure to touch one lens and only with one finger. I HATE THIS SHOW!

New Links

I've started reading a couple new blogs. The first one, Vim and Vinegar, is written by a former bar member in North Carolina (I believe), who writes far better than I could hope to match. She's got good insight, and I've enjoyed reading her comments at the Gun Toting Liberal for some time now.

The second blog, which I've not yet blogrolled, is Dick Polman's blogspot. He's a political journalist from Philadelphia, so he's got the writing and research skills of a seasoned journalist combined with the personal involvement that comes with a blog. His writing is quite good, and his points are very well made. The most recent example can be found here. If you have an eye for politics (and are critical of the current administration) then I think you'd enjoy this blog.

And the Boy is No Slouch, Either

The Boy took the test today - not too shabby!

Remember the Sabbath Day, and Keep it Holy

Just in case people forget, last week, General Pace condemned homosexuality as "immoral," in support of the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.

I think that at this time DADT is the best policy for the military simply because I don't think war is the time to integrate open homosexuality to a hostile group in a hostile environment. But that's beside the point.

The point is that the general pointed out that Homosexuality is immoral, and Sam Brownback agreed. Because it's immoral, and the military shouldn't condone immorality. The military needs to stick to the teachings of the bible, which condemns homosexuality - hence the source of the "immoral" concept. So, I think the military must do a better job of following the teachings of the bible. This means that the military should stop killing - it's one of the ten commandments. And let's not forget adultery - I seem to remember a lot of husbands and wives cheating while they were overseas while the command "officially" condemned it then turned the other way. And of course, remembering the Sabbath Day - I don't believe breaking the Lord's commandments on Sunday is in keeping with this commandment either. And Thou Shalt Not Lie? Don't we partake in disinformation in the military? How is that not lying?

Or is it just that morality is relative? And these aren't breaking the commandments, because they still believe in the spirit of the commandments, and thus they are not immoral?

Or, if breaking the commandments is a sign of immorality, then why would we not way the immoral gays fighting and killing and lying and breaking all those laws that were written by the Lord?

As If It Were Ever In Doubt...

Thanks to Good Enough Mom for the link!

Isn't it Ironic?

President Bush accused Democrats of using troops as leverage to win political battles.

He then said that the budgets for Afghanistan and Iraq must be approved "without strings and without delay," so that Congress can prove that they support the troops. Because the only way to support the troops is by giving President Bush exactly what he demands, even though his direction has, by his own admission, not gone well.

I think it's high time Congress showed the President, through its at least six separate Constitutionally granted national defense provisions, that troop support does not equate to blind allegiance to a general who declared Mission Accomplished in 2003 to a job we're still working on today.

And perhaps the President should not suggest that those who don't follow him blindly do not support the troops. Someone might consider that using the troops as leverage.

How I Spent My Spring Break

This was my last Spring Break in school. So I spent it the way anyone would spend their last bit of freedom: I worked. And I studied. And I wrote for class. And I'm going to look over a midterm tomorrow. And I still have to figure out what a bench brief is and how to draft one. And I have to write the critiques of the opening statements and jury arguments from last week. Spring Break, my foot.

But, we did take some time to do some fun things. Last Sunday we went to the Zoo, and the kids had a blast. And yesterday, after work, the wife and I took the kids to the Rodeo. It's about 20 miles away, and it took us over an hour to get there. Traffic in Houston sucks. But it was pretty cool. We didn't actually get in to the Rodeo itself, but we spent time at the livestock show, where we got to see a gaggle of swooning girls standing on various tractors and other equipment to try to get a picture of some Country Singer guy - don't ask me who, as far as I can tell there's only one country singer and he wears different wigs and or outfits to pretend he's a different singer.

Then we went to the food circus. This is similar to any other food circus at any annual event. The kids had alligator, I had a pulled pork sandwich and fries, and the wife had a sausage on a bun with fried, and we had 3 drinks, so we spent about $31. The gator was the cheapest part of the meal.

Then we went on to the carnival rides. The kids loved the rides, especially the little roller coaster. The little boy and the wife went on a pink elephant ride, which I understand he enjoyed quite a bit. But perhaps the best ride was the 150' ferris wheel, which afforded a great view of the city, and of the area that once was Astroworld (a lot smaller than I'd have thought it would be for an amusement park).

All in all, we had a good time yesterday. Tonight I get to watch the kids and prep for trial while the wife goes out partying. I think we'll have pizza. Or cat food. Whichever is quicker...

The best musical

Well, maybe not the best, but one of my favorites has got to be Man of La Mancha.

If I ever get a horse, I'm going to name her Rosinante.

It's March 14th!

Happy Pi day!

3.14159265-something...

Maintenance

Our guest bathroom toilet leaks. It's been leaking for quite some time now. I put in a repair request twelve days ago.

The refrigerator is not refrigerating. The freezer is not freezing. The air conditioner is not conditioning. We put the work orders in for these yesterday, after which the main office said they'd send someone out "today." Nobody came.

So I went back today and requested they come and fix our air conditioning (it's been in the 80s the last few days), and that they come and fix our refrigerator, lest we lose some $35 in meat and a bunch in other foods. They apologized for not sending someone out yesterday, and that the guy was there, and they'd send him "right over." I said great, I'd be gone for a little bit, but I'd be right home.

I went to the grocery store - we have little food that's not in the freezer, and we were out of milk; I wanted some ready for when the fridge would be repaired so the kids could have breakfast.

I got back from the grocery store, and as I'm bringing in the last of the groceries (Coca-cola - it's a necessity), a maintenance guy shows up. "I have a work order for your toilet, it's leaking?" "Yes, but please tell me you're also here for the refrigerator and A/C." "Sorry, no."

I was happy, let me tell you.

Then the guy offered to look at the refrigerator - thank goodness - nice guy.
Then, while he was working on that, about 20 minutes later, the other maintenance guy shows up, and he fixes the A/C. So now I have a working A/C, a toilet that still runs, but doesn't leak, and a refrigerator that's about to be put back together, hopefully defrosted and working right.

And I'm only halfway through my case for Tuesday, for which I must prepare a bench brief, which I don't even know what it is, let alone how to draft one. Fun fun fun, but I have no T-bird to take away.

Funny

We went out to eat today after going to the zoo. The kids had a great time at the zoo, though I got a little dehydrated, but that's beside the point. We went to Fuddrucker's - which has pretty darn good hamburgers - and ate there.

While we were eating, a family came in and sat down behind my wife and daughter - so I could see them, but wife and daughter couldn't. Anyway, there was a guy who sat down with a shirt that had some clever writing on it, which I thought I'd share with you verbatim:

Stupidity is not a crime. Your free to go.

Even if I had laughed out loud at it, I don't think they guy would have understood why.

The New Math

President Bush a short time ago announced that after listening to the input of such sources as the ISG, the military, and anyone else he could say he talked to, he had decided to increase the troop strength in Iraq by 21,500. He assured us, on national television, that this increase would be all the extra forces we would need to secure Iraq and end the sectarian violence - the violence that didn't exist until we invaded Iraq based on faulty premises (seriously, if the President truly believed that they were responsible for assisting Al Qaeda, as he said he believed after every other reason he fronted fell apart - and don't give me that shit about how democrats believed the same thing, I don't care - THEY DIDN'T INVADE IRAQ BECAUSE OF IT - then why did he insist on a new authorization for use of military force, when the one issued after 9-11 clearly authorized using any means necessary to destroy those who supported the people the president determined were responsible for the 9-11 attacks? I really want to know), and that we would then win the war that he and his administration up until recently insisted was going well and that the damn MSM was losing us this war. He insisted this was the case. I remember, because I posted on it shortly thereafter, saying I hope he's right, but I'm skeptical.

Apparently, he was lying to us. But he's not known for that, so this is a shock to the american public. It seems he approved sending an additional 4400 troops to Iraq for necessary support for the surge. As you can tell by the title, I think I've figured out the way for the President to sell this to his base, since nobody else is likely to believe anything he ever says again (and this was before this latest bit of silliness) - use new math.

You see, we did send 21,500, and that's all that is needed. But we need to augment that number by adding 4400 people. That normally would be 25,900 people, or 100 short of 26,000. Since we're short of that amount, we don't estimate 26,000 - we would estimate low, or 25,000. That of course, leads us to being over by 900 people. You add that to the 100 we were short on the initial estimation to keep us from 26,000, and you get 1000. You subract 1000 from the 4400 that we sent, because they didn't go under our estimate, and you get 3400. Now, you take that 3400 and you subtract them from the 25,000, because we didn't send 3400, we sent 4400. That gets you to 25,000 - 3400 = 21,600, or an increase of only 100 people, which, if you remember is the same number we were short on 26,000, so we can take that off and leads us to the proper equation - 21,500 + 4400 = 21,500.

Can't be simpler than that.

Did I do the right thing?

I intern at a bank, in the contracts analysis department. I like the office I'm in; the people are nice, the hours are more friendly than law-firm hours would be (though with the high volume they're currently experiencing and understaffing they currently face, it's more than a 9-5er), and it's not as adversarial in nature. Additionally, they are looking to hire a new analyst, and have told me that they will pull my resume when I apply.

One of my classmates, a friend, asked me last week how I got involved in the internship, and if I knew of any jobs in this area... I hesitated. Job hunting for soon to be graduates can be rather territorial, and if you get a lead that you want, it can be very tempting to not divulge that to others who are looking. Finally, I did tell her, figuring that if she was better suited for the job than I was, I shouldn't be the reason she doesn't get hired. I also told her to let me know when she sent the resume in so I could tell my supervisor, who could tell HR to pull her resume.

I feel bad, because even though the bank had not yet posted the job opening when my friend asked, I waited to tell her. I still haven't put my resume in - it's going to take a while to get through the application process on the bank's end - and she hasn't suffered any from the delay, but I can't help but feel bad that I didn't tell her because of selfish reasons.

Why don't I feel better about having told her?

Shameful Confessions

I confess that on more than one occasion, I have taken the elevator to go up one floor (e.g. first to second floor).

Your turn.

That Darn MSM

They're attacking the Republicans again. This time, the report announces that Newt Gingrich, the man who led the charge against Clinton during his impeachment for lying about an extramarital affair, was actually carrying on an extramarital affair at the time.

Except, wait - Newt admitted to the affair. So this wasn't undercover MSM work trying to discredit a prominent republican for daring to be republican. And hold on - he admitted to the affair to James Dobson, who, last I checked was nowhere near the MSM.

But here's the strange thing, so me. Dobson didn't vilify Gingrich for failing to obey the 10 commandments, at least, the Methodist version, which says "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery." That doesn't seem to be a very pro-family action.

I don't presume for a moment that Gingrich and Clinton are the only politicians who have had affairs. I find it interesting that the affair was such a big deal to this hypocrite, which now suggests that it was little more than political posturing, which is exactly what the Neocons are now pleading for the democrats to not do.

I don't like the democrats, and I would not vote for any of them, except maybe a Richardson/Obama ticket, but stuff like this makes me want to cast an opposition vote just to keep the republicans out of office. Still, I'm probably going to vote Libertarian again.

Entering Law School advice

Today, I got to participate in a round table discussion/luncheon at our school. Included were students, faculty, staff, attorneys, and judges, including (in my group) the Honorable Lynn Hughes, and in other groups Texas Supreme Court Justice Medina, and several others.

One of the discussions in our group revolved around what the school needs to do to help produce more effective lawyers. One of the glaring problems mentioned by the lawyers and the judge revolved around professionalism. Future lawyers of the world - appearances matter, not just for you, but for the attorney you work for, the firm you work for, the judge you work for, and the client you work for. What does it say about my law firm if my associate does a client intake/meeting for me and her hair is wet? Or he's not wearing his shoes? Start the habit early, as a 1L of preparing yourself to look like a lawyer - it matters.

Not only will you look better, but you're probably going to be better prepared in class - think better, respond better, and get more out of the educational experience. Don't wear a hat to class, shave, brush your hair, little things go a long way.

Random Trivia

Harry S Truman was the last president to not have a college degree.

Wednesday is Haiku Day

Classes nixed Friday
Early start to spring break, but
Saturday test - blah.

As usual, I look forward to reading your contributions

Jurors Talk about the Scooter Libby trial

And why they found him guilty, here.

Pet Peeve

One thing that continuously gets my goat (Besides goat rustlers) are groups of 2 or three people who insist on walking side by side, slow as molasses, oblivious to the fact that there are several people in the hall, or on the sidewalk, or wherever these people are gabbing, trying to get by them. I'm not saying that we are more important than you, but your conversation is certainly not more important than free flow of traffic. Make a hole; let people move, darnit.

Are there any other goat-getters out there?

Opening Statement, First Draft

May it please the Court?

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury,

Today, you have been called by the state to take a test. This test has but one, true/false question: “Richard Steven Mantooth is guilty of burglary of a habitation.” You don’t have to go this alone, though. We will paint a picture for you, one which will lead you to the correct answer. Consider the facts and evidence carefully, though, because only the correct answer will lead to justice being served.

Joseph and Katharine Bass are your neighbors. Like all of you, they live in Newtown. They are not natives; they came to Newtown pursuing their piece of the American dream – a home of their own in a quiet, peaceful neighborhood, the type of neighborhood we all strive to keep alive. The Basses wanted a yard, a place for their child to play, a place for barbeques, a place with a patio, where they could sit on a warm summer evening and drink lemonade while their son chased fireflies. They wanted a street, with sidewalks upon which their son could learn to ride his bike, and friends with whom to play ball. The Bass family found that home at 316 North Manus Drive, and for three years, they had all this, here in Newtown.

Then, just after they rang in the new year last year, something happened to their serene world. On January 17^th, while her husband was at work, Katharine was called away on an errand, a short jaunt from home, one of those things that we all have to do from time to time. Like most errands, she was not gone long, less than an hour. But that’s all it took to destroy the tranquility the Basses found in our town.

It was like those “what’s different in this picture” invasions – one where everything looked right, but was certainly not. The house seemed normal enough at first glance, but quickly, Katharine noticed something askew. The Bass’ bedrooms, the most private places in their home, where they felt most secure, had heard the steps of foreign feet. Their dressers, probed by strange hands, dirty fingers rifling the private recesses of their home.

These hands didn’t stop at disturbing the security the Basses had come to know in our town. They took from the Basses. The police report said jewelry and radios, total value between $2500 and $300 were stolen, but that’s only because there were no boxes marked security, or memories, and no report could estimate the sentimental value of those items stolen.

The next day, January 18^th, the police receive a call from a local pawn shop. A man was in, trying to sell jewelry and radios – the very same items those foreign footsteps walked off with from the Bass house the day before. That man was Richard Steven Mantooth.

The state will introduce evidence demonstrating that Richard Steven Mantooth entered into the Bass’ home at 316 North Manus Drive on January 17^th of last year, without permission. The state will show that Mr. Mantooth intended to commit a theft from the Bass’ home. It will show that Mr. Mantooth took from the Bass’ home, without permission, two transistor radios, jewelry, including a brooch, an antique lapel watch, and an heirloom watch. The state will offer evidence that Mr. Mantooth then took his ill-gotten gains to a local pawn shop, where he intended to sell the items. The state will show through evidence that Richard Steven Mantooth is guilty of burglary of a habitation.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, the state has one question for you to answer: “Richard Steven Mantooth is guilty of burglary of a habitation, true or false?” By the end of this trial, you will have been provided with all the information you will need to reach the right conclusion. If you believe, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Richard Mantooth is guilty of burglary of a habitation, then you will answer true. If there is ANY reasonable doubt, after hearing all the evidence, then you will answer false. Your answer will be the right answer, so make sure you are well prepared to find it.

Weekend Update

The kids played with bubbles today. I don't know what it is about bubbles that kids love so much, but I'm glad for it.

The in-laws came to town Wednesday night. We got the new car Thursday afternoon, and they left Friday morning.

We have a new car. It's a 2001 Chevy Cavalier. It's essentially Chevrolet's version of the Escort, but this one is more recent than the Escort was, had no broken bumper, has a heater, upholstry, and a stereo. So while it's a lateral transfer, it's also a step up, so I guess it's a diagonal transfer.

I like it. It's nice to have something to listen to besides myself in the mornings - I can get boring after 3 years driving downtown.

We're having steak tonight - I'm cooking. Go me.

Random Trivia

When a cat in Egypt died, the cat's owners would shave their eyebrows in mourning.

Wednesday is Haiku Day

The Princess is sad
'Cuz she wants a cough drop, but
She's not six. Or sick.

As always, I look forward to your contributions!

Voir Dire

Most states pronounce this in the French fashion, "Vwah Deer," but Texans know better. Here, it's pronounced like it looks, "voy-er die-er"

That's what we did in Advocacy today. It was fun. But I don't know if I'd like doing it "for real."

Lots of good stuff, though. There's a lot to jury selection and deselection than meets the eye.

Truth, Justice, and the American Way

Superman was an illegal immigrant. The police never arrested him. The Daily Planet paid him. Discuss.

Memo to Self

I don't like writing memos for class. They are difficult for me to focus on for any great length of time, and I get frustrated because what I want to say in 7 words I have to spread out over nearly 7 pages.

Anyway, I finished my memo last night at about 10:30, and I wasn't happy with it, but I was done with it.

Then I read for Criminal Trial Advocacy, where I play a lawyer tomorrow (again) with my partner and then maybe I'll get to sleep a little, and get over my cold.

Stupid Memo

It's for a 2-hour class. I spent 2 hours on it Friday, 4 hours yesterday, and so far, 5 hours today, and I'm not even halfway through.

This is frustrating. Even more so because it only goes towards part of my class participation, which is only 15% of my total grade. Why am I so concerned about this, and why can't I get myself to finish it?

Why should this matter?

I don't care for Mitt Romney. I don't think he would make a good president. I think he's polarizing. I think he played both sides of the gun issue.

But all of my opinions are based on my impression of Mitt Romney, not Mitt Romney's Great- or Great-great grandfathers. Seriously, I could give a crap if his great grandfather had five wives. That does not mean that Mitt supports polygamy; in fact, he has gone on the record as being against it. He doesn't practice it. I don't see how what his ancestors did has any bearing on his qualifications to lead this nation. In my mind, this is as asinine as it would be for an article to come out saying "so and so, a candidate for the presidency, has in his (or her) family tree members who owned slaves. Candidate, however, has spoken out against slavery." It would be seen as stupid, which it should.

As idiotic as this article's topic is, I'd almost be willing to believe that the Romney camp had it released to garner airtime to attack its relevancy in his campaign for president, to get people talking about him, in his defense, to garner support... almost.

Maybe I should join the ACLU...

The Freedom From Religion Foundation will be in oral argument before the Supreme Court next week, challenging President Bush's Faith Based Initiative.

I hope they succeed, though I think they won't.

I want them to succeed not because I oppose charities, or because I oppose President Bush. I want them to succeed because government funding of religion can easily lead to government direction of religion (or a state-run religion), which is what I think the First Amendment sought to avoid.

This is the same reason I oppose religious intrusion into government - because I fear government intrusion in religion. I don't want the government to tell me how I should pray, or to whom I should pray. I don't want it telling me which version of the 10 commandments is right. I especially wouldn't want the government to tell me that my representation does not matter if I am not of the same faith or denomination as those in charge, as would be the implication for all the Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, Taoists, Wiccans, and others in America.

I think one of the overarching goals of our government, based on the representative democracy principles, is to help ensure that the minority viewpoint can be protected from the oppression of the majority, and I think that one aspect of this is the Faith Based Initiative, which, though perhaps noble in intent, runs contrary to how I view the First Amendments proscription on establishment of religion, and the Lemon Test's Endorsement test.

I hate CSI Miami

At one point in time, I enjoyed watching it because it was bad. Now, it's just bad. The crimes are too ridiculous to consider viable, and the solutions are almost as laughable.

The dialogue seems like an afterthought, as though the producers (thank you, Jerry Bruckheimer) said "let's get some good special effects going here, oh, but they need to say something." Cheesy one-liners by David Caruso with his insanely stupid sunglasses, unlikeable characters, convenient "brainstorming" sessions, where one of the members seems to be an expert on whatever unbelievably obscure situation exists (non-native tree leaves, for example), even more convenient SINGLE HAIR OR FINGERPRINT SAMPLES that get through DNA testing or other matching in about 25 seconds, not to mention all the blatant 4th, 5th and perhaps 6th amendment violations.

I'm actually upset now, just thinking about that stupid, stupid show.

Mysterious Ways

I woke up this morning and didn't feel like going to my morning class. My second class in the morning was cancelled, and I was tempted to use that excuse to just skip my other morning class. But, at the last minute, I decided it would be best to save my absences for when the children were sick, or some other issues come up. So, I dropped the daughter off at pre-k and headed downtown to school. 45 minutes later, I arrived at the door of my class, where the sign was posted: Class Cancellation - International Environmental Law.

I'm not quite sure why He did that to me, but at least y'all get a chuckle out of this.

Wednesday is Haiku Day

I don't have any
Compulsive disorders; that
Assertion was mean.

As always, I look forward to your submissions.

Playing favorites

The daughter has a new favorite song - Good Vibrations, by the Beach Boys.

I will allow this to be her favorite song, on grounds that it is the single greatest rock and roll song ever written and/or performed.

Being Nice

Jamie has accused me of being mean to her. So I'm going to be nice to her, because I am a nice person.

Jamie, you are better at getting us cardiovascular exercise in New Orleans in the evening than anyone I've ever been in New Orleans with.

Maybe I AM a Democrat...

Your 'Do You Want the Terrorists to Win' Score: 83%

You are a terrorist-loving scoundrel who hates our dear leader and the values he defends. There are few redeeming qualities about you. You most likely celebrated when the evil-doers hit us on 9/11, then opposed the Iraq war when we tried to pay them back. You hurt us at every step and cause troops to die in the field by questioning Bush's decisions. You are most likely a lost cause, doomed to be a brainwashed victim of free thought and liberalism forever. No dose of Ann Coulter's prose can save you now.

Do You Want the Terrorists to Win?
Quiz Created on GoToQuiz

Family Update

I'm still alive and well; I've got an internship at a bank as a Contracts Analyst, which potentially could possibly maybe lead to full time employment with the bank if they decide to open a permanent position and would like me to fill it, maybe.

The wife is working hard; and still does the bulk of the laundry (I help around with other things but have proven to be more harm than good with respect to laundry). I think she's pretty much ready to have a husband who's NOT in law school for a change. She needs a trip to a spa.

The Boy has his benchmark tests at the end of this month... the scores on the benchmarks and TAKS testing for caucasians in his school have dropped over 30% since last year, while scores for the other demographics have improved about 5%, give or take. Just something my wife noticed. Thank goodness for No Child Left Behind. Actually, The Boy has only missed one benchmark question this year. He's smarter than NCLB would like.

The daughter got a fat lip today. She fell and bit into her lip as she hit the back of my chair. She's tough, though. Can't faze her with a little blood (ok, she cried a lot, but she got over it). She also got new shoes today, so she's happy.

The little boy used the potty 3 times today. This is cause for celebration. He also watched Monk about 30 times (he starts it then goes and plays). Right now he's playing Harry Potter with his brother. It's cute.

The cat peed on my jacket today. She pooped on the landing last night. She peed on something else yesterday. I changed the cat litter yesterday morning. I think it's time to change the cat.

That's all - goulash is almost done. Talk to ya later!

Mardi Gras

New Orleans is back to normal. They have fixed everything. How do I know this? Because on Yahoo! this morning, I found an article bemoaning the lack of toilets for Mardi Gras. You see, people can't find toilets during the festivities, so they end up going wherever they can find a spot. This ends up being bad for the landowners on the parade routes. This problem made the top headlines for today, which must mean that everything else has been fixed up all hunky-dory like. Of course, the tourists aren't the only ones who are having trouble finding a toilet in New Orleans.

There are the residents of the Lower 9th Ward who live(d) here:
And here:


And the people who live(d) here:



And the residents of the Lafitte Projects who used to live here:


But they don't matter, because they're poor and don't bring money in to the city. So who cares where they pee?

Saengil Chukha Hamnida!

Today is the Chonger's 65th Birthday! The dear leader is honored to have your well wishes, and he knows you thank him for being the lodestar leader for the 21st Century. Everyone should take a moment to remind yourselves how lucky we are to have him leading the pride of Northeast Asia.

UPDATE
Check out this link to the good people at the Gun Toting Liberal who celebrate the Dear Leader's guidance as well.

Class Assignment Help

As I have mentioned before on this blog, I am enrolled in a National Security Law class this semester. This class is outstanding; I'm so glad I elected to take it. Currently, we are looking at the War Powers Resolution as a result of the struggles of the Separation of Powers issues during Vietnam. One of the assignments we have for Monday is to re-reread the War Powers Resolution of 1973 and consider its strengths and weaknesses. We are to figure out how to "fix" the War Powers Resolution to make it better than what we currently have - what would you add, what would you rewrite, what would you strike altogether?

While I will be doing this over the course of the week, I thought I would take this opportunity to ask those of you who are interested in manners such as this to put your thoughts on this subject in a reply to this post. I am interested not only in forming my own opinion, but seeing how my opinion matches and diverges from other opinions, and I see this as an opportunity to get input from a variety of sources while developing my opinion - which can be of great help. You can get to a link of the War Powers Resolution by clicking here, and then clicking on the section numbers at the Cornell law website that comes up.

The thread is open to all commenters, and I encourage civil debate. Thank you for your help.

Diplomacy inaction

I've written about North Korea once or twice on my blog. See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

The good folks at the Gun Toting Liberal have a collection of links regarding the recent agreement reached in the six-nation talks regarding North Korea's nuclear program, and a quick rundown on why it's ok to negotiate with Asians but not Persians.

I don't have time to get into detail on any of this, but suffice it to say, I think negotiating with the Chonger and North Korea to get them to agree to not do what they were supposed to not be doing in the first place is just fueling the fire of their regime (and this is a regime, if ever there was one).

Anyway, if you have a minute, click on some of the links above and see what the good folks have to say. And if you want to know what I think, you have over a dozen links above, as well.

Unforgettable-Natalie Cole/Nat King Cole

Happy Valentine's Day, Kirsten

We fear change

We're getting new Dollar Coins. And apparently, we still don't like them. Why? Because.

I honestly have no idea why we are so reluctant to use dollar coins. They cost less and last longer than dollar bills; they don't tear up; they are almost always going to be accepted in vending machines (once we change the vending machine coin slots)...

Perhaps the problem is that Canadians have been using them for years already. God knows we can't ever do anything that appears to be following what someone else does - it's an affront to our sovereignty. Kyoto? Hell no. Trade Unions? Hell no. UN? Screw them; Americans know best what's best for the world. But back to the Canadian dollar coins... why should we do what Canadians do? They negotiated NAFTA provisions that protect Canadian culture, yet did nothing to ensure the protection of our culture. What culture do Canadians have, anyway? Why should we bother copying something from a nation that is so afraid of getting real culture that they negotiated accords keeping our culture from them? We shouldn't.

But seriously, is there really any REAL reason for rejecting dollar coins?

Things you learn while avoiding studying

Actually, to be more accurate, things you learn while taking a break from your 8th hour of preparation for Criminal Trial Advocacy.

Anyway, I was surprised to learn, that I will be graduating in 3 months from the same law school that Dan Rather attended, and from which he received a law degree. (source: wikidpedia)

Still no GI Bill

I don't mean to harp on the same thing over and over again. But, I've been in school for almost a month now and the GI bill still hasn't been processed by the VA. The first part of this blame goes to my school; they were the ones who held on to the paperwork for 3 weeks after school started before starting to process the paperwork. The excuse I got was that the new system our school put into place is hard to understand - no disagreement here - 3Ls have pretty much conspired to never use STANLEY.

The second problem, though, is with the VA. I swear the program is designed to make it next to impossible to use. The GI Bill is set up to reimburse your education expenses each month, which means that in order to get the GI Bill benefits, you have to be able to afford to enroll in school in the first place (i.e. pay tuition). Then, after each month, you confirm the enrollment and get paid for the previous month (provided the school gets the paperwork in and the VA processes it), so you need to have been able to afford your living expenses for school before you get compensated as well. If you can meet these hurdles for as long as it takes for the school and the VA to get their respective acts straight, then you get paid between 7 and 10 days after you've confirmed your enrollment.

For many people, this might be somewhat easier, but the amount we spend on daycare is pretty close to the amount we get paid for the GI Bill, and without that money, we end up hurting a lot more than we should.

Now, the school does have options for emergencies similar to this. There is an emergency loan program set up in the school. Admittedly, I know very little about this program, but, since everything the school does is geared towards making money, I'm fairly confident in the assumption that the school would charge me some sort of fee for taking out this emergency loan (i.e. I would have to pay back more than I received). I'm not going to do this. I'm not willing to pay the school money to be able to tide myself over for the time I'm not getting paid the money I'm owed due to the school's negligence in either training their staff or processing the necessary work to ensure its students are able to afford the costs of attending class.

I hate my car.


UPDATE

I called the GI Bill yesterday and to my surprise, they had processed the paperwork finally. I am disliking the VA less today.

Criminal Trial Advocacy

I will be playing the lawyer again on Tuesday. The exercise this week is expert witness testimony. I know we're the plaintiff, and I think we're trying to establish that the drowning was murder, not an accident. The expert is a medical examiner who will be testifying on the expert work product that was produced by a different medical examiner.

There will be 3 of us on the prosecution team - myself and the two minitrial prosecutors from the first minitrial.

My minitrial partner will be doing voir dire in three weeks with the minitrial prosecutors from the third minitrial; I think I am the more fortunate of the two. Jury selection is a valuable skill to have, but I have already sat in on it once for a Courts Martial, so I'm looking forward to doing the direct and redirect of the expert witness.

Time to get back to work.

Ch-ch-ch-changes

Well, I gave in and moved to the new blogger. I did this mostly because blogger told me that the next time I logged in, I'd have to switch to Google blogger.

Since I made the change, I decided to change the name of my blogspot, as well. No more (myname).blogspot.com. Instead, I've changed to binjoditch.blogspot.com. This was partly for privacy reasons, and partly because I wanted my url to match my blog's name a little more closely, and now seemed like the best time to do so.

So, I'll stop by all my regular readers' blogspots to say howdy, but everyone needs to update their links, if they want to keep me around.

It's Aliiiiiive!

I got my new A/C adapter. I'm back in business.

Strangely, the woman who backed into me has not been seen (ok, not strangely, but expected)

Still no GI bill.

Start work tomorrow.

gotta figger out dinner for tonight - I'm thinking cheeseburgers.

I hate my car.

The morning after

So after I finished my post complaining about the recent spate of bad luck, I called Dell tech support and actually got to talk to a live person after only about 3 minutes (woohoo!)

I explained the situation, explained how this has happened several times both to myself and people I know with the same computer, and then the operator proceeded to do a troubleshooting process for me. I'm not too upset about that; it's her job, and I was going to end up getting my AC adapter on warranty (no money to pay, yay!).

So long story short (too late), I will be getting a new AC adapter in 1-3 business days. So I just have to live without a computer at home for that long. Taking notes by hand can be tough with my handwriting, but I think I can manage.

We're still waiting on GI bill and daycare compensation, but at least I have a power cord coming. Small victories.

Complaint session

So I got hit by a car yesterday by a woman who has no insurance and who speaks no english. My GI bill has not yet come in - in fact it has not yet been processed by the VA because the school did not send out this semester's enrollments until last Friday, even though we'd been in school for 3 weeks by that time, and we need that money for such frivolities as food, transportation, diapers, and daycare. But the GI Bill isn't the only thing we're missing out on. We also have yet to receive the daycare reimbursements for January, because the people in charge of that somehow lost their paperwork. In all, we're currently running about $1000-1200 short on a budget that has about $90 to spare in a month. As if this all isn't bad enough - my battery charger for my laptop chose today to quit working. I don't know what it is with Dell Inspiron 5150 battery chargers, but they seem to have a shelf life averaging about 9 months. This will be the fourth time I've replaced my battery charger since I got the laptop back in June of '04, and I don't know that the warranty is even going to cover it this time. It should - I am not the only one who has experienced problems with the battery charger/ac adapter with this model, so it appears to be a design flaw, and I can't see how it makes sense to charge us for a problem that is ingrained in the design itself; especially if it was unforseeable by us, the consumer. I know, I'm getting pissy about something that I don't know will happen, but 2007 hasn't exactly rung in completely cheerily for us - I mean, my wife's grandmother died a couple weeks ago as well, the little boy got pinkeye, etc.

But, I might have a job for after I graduate, so there is a silver lining on this cloud that is winter 2007.

I hate my laptop's battery charger
I hate my car.

Exercise in Futility

I had the heat on in my car this morning because it was cool (spring-like weather for the rest of the country, but cold for Texas - 40 degrees). I had the heat on from the moment we left to take the kids to school until the moment I returned sans kids. I then got out of the car. The temperature was warmer out of the car than it had been in the car with the heat running for half an hour.

I hate my car.

Apparently, I'm boring

This is evidenced, apparently, by the lack of Jessica Simpson content in my blog posts.

I have a reason for this, and it's not just because I find this stuff interesting. It's because I would sooner gargle with pureed dart frogs than mention anything associated with that bad-acting-full-body-convusion-singing-overhyped-undertalented-annoying person (note - these are opinions, not facts - author makes no express or implied statement of truth for any of the aforementioned adjectives).

But, since I am so boring, I thought I'd take the moment to write about something a little more interesting. About a walk I took one damp evening. You see, my friend and I had been trying to get to this restaurant called Bacco's, and I knew it was on Chartres in New Orleans. So I told her we had to go to Chartres. And we eventually got to Chartres, thanks to my navigational skills, i.e. being able to read street signs. So while we are on Chartres, where I knew the restaurant was, and made clear mention of said fact on numerous occasions, my friend took it upon herself to move OFF of Chartres, because she recognized a building. Knowing that I can't leave a friend unattended in New Orleans, especially at night when she's not been to New Orleans before, I alter my route to stay with her. Eventually, we end up back on Chartres (naturally) at a corner where I recognize a plaque on the sidewalk. I make note of this plaque and say that we are almost at Bacco's. She insists that we have to leave Chartres again, because she sees the building "right there," and so she takes off in a westerly direction. We then finally come up on the back of the building she sees, and she needs to get in the front of it so that she can get her bearings. I try to walk up the alley (north), but she refuses, instead going around another building (North, then East) and ending up right where we would have been had we gone up the alley I'd started down. Then, knowing where she was, she proceeds to lead us further east until we get to the street she knows we have to go down. I look at the street sign. it's Chartres. We head south on Chartres, PASS THE CORNER WHERE I SAID WE WERE RIGHT AT THE RESTAURANT, walk another block south, and there's the place. Unfortunately, because we went for a trip around the block, we got to the restaurant just 10 minutes after they'd finished seating for the evening, so we didn't get ot eat there. Then it started to rain. And I with no umbrella, and my friend with hers breaking.

Not all stories have happy endings. I've still not eaten at Bacco's. It probably is the best restaurant in New Orleans.

Moral of the story, never let a friend who's never been to New Orleans look for that building. It's like trying to find the end of the rainbow.

Ow, my neck!

I dropped off all the kids today, as I normally do on school days. The Boy first, then the little boy at daycare. Then the daughter and I went to get some gas - I was down to half a gallon left. Finally, we go to her bus stop, which is fun in a car with no heat. Anyway, we get her dropped off, I head back to the apartments. Due to timing, if I get to the complex a minute or two later than normal, I end up having to wait for the middle school kids to get picked up by their buses, which happened today, so I'm stuck about 30 feet from the entrance to the complex, with two cars in front of me. Well, as I'm standing still, since I can't go anywhere, the car in front of me decides it might be a good idea to put her car in reverse and back up. At first, I think she's just going to go back a few inches, and then I realize she ain't stopping. And sure enough, she backs right into my car, which was at a complete standstill. I had tried putting it in reverse, but being an Escort, it doesn't respond to desperate pleading, so I hit the horn, which sounded pretty much at the same time the car made contact with mine.

Of course, the lady doesn't speak English, doesn't have insurance, doesn't want me to call the police because she has other tickets, and wants to pay for my damage - which fortunately is rather light - just a broken bumper and a scraped up turn signal. She looks at it and suggests to her friend that it might cost about $50-60. Her friend, apparently a little more pragmatic, said it would probably cost a couple hundred. In the meantime, I now have to miss half a day of school to go get my car's damage estimated so I can get the money from her so I can get it fixed, which I don't want to do because it's an Escort, and I still hold out hope that you good readers will surprise me with my graduation present.

I hate my car.

10th amendment issues

Maine was the first to issue a resolution opposing the Real ID Act of 2005. Several other states quickly followed suit - Georgie, Wyoming, New Mexico, Vermont, Montana and Washington all rejected it.

I oppose this Act, in part because of 10th amendment issues - state's rights. I also oppose it because of the rashness of it - conceding to federalism under the terrorist scare. Our Constitution was written to limit the powers of the Federal Government, to keep it from becoming too strong. Yet, we have stretches, where the Federal Government tries its best to take control of issues that are fine staying with each individual state. I favor smaller government, which would mean that I oppose acts that would pass more control to the Federal Government, which means that I oppose the Real ID act - it's unnecessary, and insulting to the states to suggest that they can't be trusted to regulate something as small as an ID card.

We shouldn't get involved

When we attacked Yugoslavia in defense of the Kosovar Albanians, one thing we said was that we were not pushing for independence for the region that has been a part of Serbia for 2000 years.

Apparently, we lied.

In my mind, this would be no different than Europe, or any large nation going on the record pushing for the return of Manhattan, or the breadbasket to the native Americans who sold it for $26 in beads. We would consider that an assault on our sovereignty. Why then, do we push for the same in another country? The Albanians are pseudo-sovereign as it is - different language, different schools, no taxes, etc., under the premise of CALLING themselves part of Serbia. Why do we support them? Genocide can't be the answer - we supported Croatian independence, and they commited acts of genocide in the name of Nazism during WWII against the Serbs. So, why? It's got to be because Serbia is a communist nation, and we eschew communism. And that is a horrid reason to tear apart a nation that has done us no harm.

The Intent of the Founders

I attended my first CLE conference yesterday. I got no credit. However, I rather enjoyed the session. Professor Erwin Chemerinsky came out to our school to discuss the religion clauses of the First Amendment, along with our own Professor Kathleen Bergin.

I think the course was named improperly, as there was little discussion as to what the Founders meant with regard to religion. Thomas Jefferson's statement was brought up, as was a comment from Roger Williams (from the Constitution era), who once noted that the concept of separation of church and state helps protect the autonomy of religion.

Professor Chemerinsky first commented that historians could very well note that the keystone issue of the late 20th/early 21st Century is the rise of fundamentalism worldwide - be it Christian, Islamic, or Jewish. He also noted that one thing fundamentalists have in common is the desire to use the government to push their agenda, and one of the barriers to that in the United States is the "wall of separation" that has served as our country's backbone for so long. He mentioned how in the 1940s and 50s, the big push was to keep religion and government separate.

Where to go from here...
Let's see - there are basically three approaches (theories) to what the founders meant with the religion clauses. I will cover the first approach on this post, and come back to the other two later.
1: Strict Separation - (this is the approach Professor Chemerinsky prefers) That the government should be as secular as possible to the greatest extent possible. Professor Chemerinsky notes that as an absolute, this is impossible without encroaching on the free exercise clause, with chaplains in the military and prisons, for example. The concept is that if the government stays out of affairs of religion, then religion does not have to fear the government controlling it. An example of where this could come in handy is with the concept of subsidies for religious schools. There is a push in some circles to require that if the government provides monies to secular private schools, then it should do so with religious private schools. If the government gets into the church schools, then it can use the money as leverage to coerce the church to educate according to the state's agenda, not the church's. If the government feels that a Baptist-based methodology is best, then that's what the church schools, be they Catholic, Methodist, Jewish, or whatever, would end up having to follow that curriculum. If the state wants to endorse the Lutheran ten commandments as opposed to the Jewish or Catholic ten commandments, then that's what's going to happen. Finally, the Professor notes that if the Government finds a way to start giving subsidies to church functions, then the U.S. taxpayer will end up having to spend his own money (through taxes) to finance a church whose philosophy he disagrees with. For an example of this, consider what would happen if a Satanic church started a school and asked for government funds - the government would use your money to finance a school that the fundamentalist Christians would likely most abhor - yet is entirely consistent with what the fundamentalist movement is pushing for. Tax dollars should not go to fund religion, the argument goes, and as such, the government should try to remain as neutral as possible.

Interesting sidenote - the ten commandment displays such as the one at the Capital Building in Austin were placed by Cecil B. DeMille to promote his movie The Ten Commandments. He placed these all over the country, at least 60 of them.

Intented Consequences?

A Michigan appeals court ruled that the state's marriage amendment "prohibits government agencies and public schools from providing health care and other benefits to the same-sex partners of employees if the benefits are modeled on those provided to married couples," according to this Detroit Free Press article. The article notes that almost all of the involve parties agreed that whatever the outcome, there would be an appeal to the State Supreme Court.

I like to hope that these were unintended consequences of the gay marriage ban. I also think that it displays part of the problem with these amendments. Apparently, even though everyone is created equal, they are not entitled to reap the same benefits for the object of their affections, if the object of their affection happens to be the same gender as themselves.

This same problem comes up in the case of wills - and is one of the most common challenges to the validity of wills - that a gay partner is not a natural object of one's affection. As such, the family of the deceased often succeeds in having the wills declared invalid.

I don't care if you approve or disapprove of homosexuality. I do, however, think it's wrong to use the government to hold down a demographic, particularly in the absence of a valid public policy.

I'm troubled

Since I've been on blogger, I have had stretches where certain words I've used have generated more hits than others. For example, when I placed some "Black Water" lyrics up here some time back, I had several people stop by for that. My comments on Yu-gi-oh (june 25) still get hits fairly regularly, as does my post on Max Schnelling having passed away (some 2 years ago now).

But the most common search term people have found my site with recently is "preteen," which I used in a post last month. For whatever reason, people keep doing searches on blogger/google/etc. using just the word preteen, and ending up in the binjo ditch. Are there really that many preteen bloggers out at 11:24 at night, or is there something more underhanded (I won't use the word sinister to mean bad - I'm a lefty).

Look, if your head is in the gutter, that's one thing, but keep any pedophilic tendencies out of the Binjo Ditch. They're not welcome here.

Random Song Reference

Ohio - by Crosby, Stills, and Nash.

Wednesday is Haiku Day!

Pinkeye is gone now
but little boy has hollow
cough - hurts just to hear.

Advocacy

I was lawyer again today. I played the prosecution while Red Hot Mamma played defense. The witness was hers, and I got the cross. I had a pretty small role today; raise objections - which I missed a couple leadings and a hearsay, as well as a reading...

While I was doing my cross, my wife called and told me I needed to get the daughter. It turned out that she was able to pick up the girl, but since the daughter was not feeling well, I left early (with permission) and got the girl from daycare so she could lay down at home and get some rest - we had a little fever run through us last week, and I think she's still feeling a bit of that.

Anyway, it's giving me a chance to finish up reading on NAFTA, where I still have about 20 pages to read.

I like NAFTA, it's interesting, and the setup is not that bad.

You see, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade carved out concepts for trade agreements - Trade Unions (such as the EU) and Free Trade Agreements (e.g. NAFTA). There are plusses to both, but frankly, it sounds like Free Trade agreements might actually be a little better... First off, you can leave a FTA, you can't leave the EU.

The United States, as a general rule, likes Free Trade Agreements - each of the last three Presidents (both Bushes and Clinton) supported Free Trade Agreements. It's going to be interesting to go through this.

Back to work.

The Symbol of Our Country

Apparently, the Luddite movement is catching on with our Nation's fowl. A suicide attack by a bald eagle carrying a deer head left some 10,000 Juneauans without power. The kamikaze run was less successful than the subverter would otherwise have hoped, though - the city didn't even lose power for 45 minutes.

Atlatl starfruit

I can't remember the name of the game, but I think I first saw it on Particleman's blog a couple years ago (maybe Google Smack, or something?). Anyway, the point of the game is to take two random words, run a google (or Yahoo) search, and try to find a combination that has only one site come up on search result.

The above combination was the one I used, which probably won't work anymore, since the combination is now on my blog, but if you find yourself in need of something to occupy your time and you can't leave your desk...

Interesting

You Are Sunset

Even though you still may be young, you already feel like you've accomplished a lot in life. And you feel free to pave your own path now, and you're not even sure where it will take you. Maybe you'll pursue higher education in a subject you enjoy - or travel the world for a few years. Either way, you approach life with a relaxed, open attitude. And that will take you far!

What Time Of Day Are You?

And the Protests come

The right of the people to gather and petition the government for a redress of their grievances is one of the rights endowed in the First Amendment.

But that does not mean that you have to listen to Hanoi Jane - who probably is more harmful to the anti-war crowd than she is helpful.

Grandpa's Little Helper

Bad news for all those devotees of Bob Dole and Mike Ditka: Medicare will no longer cover prescriptions for Viagra, Cialis, or Levitra, except as treatment for Pulmonary Hypertension (a lung ailment) or other such ailments.

The move is calculated to help save money for Medicare.

It also is calculated to ensure elderly men don't fall on hard times.

The Surge

I disagree with the surge.

As I've mentioned before, I don't think it's going to be effective - that the president insists that it will work with an extra 21,500 when that's just about how many we could afford to increase the troop load by seems a bit too coincidental.

But, I believe that the President has this authority under his duties as Commander-in-Chief. I think Congress is wrong to try to strip funding for a part of the war - trying to use the pursestrings to execute Commander-in-Chief duties. I see this as an unconstitutional act on the part of Congress, and one that does not jive with Congress' joint resolution authorizing the invasion (I mean "liberation"). I think that Congress has the authority, after the two year period for which they've authorized funds to raise an army have expired, they have the option of no longer funding the war, period, or they can renew funding. I see the threat of not funding one portion of the president's strategy to be an unconstitutional foray into executive powers.

I'm not alone in this thinking - in this op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal, a writer has said somewhat better what I tried to say above. Though I do not agree with everything in the article, I think he is right on point with this premise.

The law in this area is unclear, which is why there is debate as to whether or not Congress can do this, but I think a challenge that went to the Court would rule against Congress' actions, and in the interim, many of our soldiers would be in greater harm than they already are by the President's string of bad decisions.