Labor Day Weekend

So, I'm down about 17 pounds (give or take) from when I took the Bar Exam. I just need to do that at least one more time and I'll be happy (two more and I'd be really happy).

I also need to start running. I'd like to do a 5/10K this year (Aaron, I expect you to sign up, too), but I have never been a great runner - part of why I want to do it, I think.

I also need a job. I'm still looking, but nothing's biting out there.

We went to church today; the kids did better than last week; they still have some work to do, though. Little things, like not lying down on the kneelers. I'm not quite sure why we have kneelers at our church, but the kids don't need to be using them as cots.

We're going to go back to the gym today. The wife isn't too thrilled about that (she's still sore from yesterday, and we have lower body today). The kids won't want to go until we're there, then they'll have fun and not want to leave when it's time to go. We might put swimsuits on the kids and let them get in the pool, but I'm not sure about that yet. We'll have to see.

And the college football season is over, after one week.

Faith based initiative

One of the big arguments made by those in favor of the Faith-Based Initiative is that "it works." They suggest that by using Christian programs, criminals getting out of prison will not become repeat offenders. This program has been touted by President Bush in the past as well as other members of the Republican Party and by the Religious Right. Often, what those speaking in favor of the program are seeking is tax dollars to fund their religious programs, to try to preach to the people on the Government's Dime. Of course, this could easily be considered endorsing religion, or using coercive tactics, but try convincing a fundamentalist of that.

Case in point - in Oklahoma, the department of corrections has turned to a group known as Genesis One to help with inmates about to be released from prison. According to this article from Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the program does not currently receive tax dollars, but it might after this November, "under the terms of a new state law that requires corrections officials to partner with faith-based groups on reentry programs."

This law would then allow Genesis One to preach (basically) the word of God to whatever convicts it can get its hands on, and do so with the State's tax dollars. The program claims to be open to everyone, according to Americans United, but one of the fundamental requirements is that the participants must be willing to "accept God." In other words, the state would be paying money for the advancement of Christianity, which seems very akin to a Government Endorsement of Religion, which is prohibited under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Perhaps this could be considered justifiable if the program actually cut down on recidivism amongst prior convicts, but a five year study cited in the article has shown that the recidivism rate for non-participating individuals was the same 39.6% as with those who completed the Genesis One program (source cited in the article in Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice Steven W. Taylor). So what we end up with is a government-funded coercive endorsement of Christianity that doesn't even reduce what it claims to reduce. But what does effectiveness have anything to do with it?

All Apologies

I blogged a few days ago about President Bush snubbing the widow of Sgt Patrick Stewart, the Wiccan soldier killed in Afghanistan. In the post, I said that President Bush should issue a public apology to Ms. Stewart.

It turns out, he did apologize the next day (Thursday). This was the good and right thing to do. President Bush even went so far as to say that the Wiccan religion should not be discriminated against. I'm not sure how much he believes that statement, but at least he said it, and he deserves credit for that, as well.

Kudos, President Bush.

I agree with Bush

It's not often that I think President Bush made a good move, but I think his statements and proposal today regarding the mortgage crisis (how long until someone dubs it "mortgagegate?") were necessary and right.


President Bush proposed a plan to assist those homebuyers who were enticed into buying homes at variable rates by mortgage companies that were more interested in selling a house than helping a family achieve the American Dream. You remember these companies - the folks trying to sell you on variable rates because "the rate could go down and if you're in a fixed-rate mortgage, you'll lose money," when the rate was at 6%. The rate COULD have gone down, yes, but it could also have gone up a whole lot more (i.e. up to 14%), and of course, they went up (go figure). Then there were the mortgages that started low, then popped up after a few years (introductory rate ended).

President Bush suggested that the Government should assist these people, so they don't lose their houses. He also said that this bailout should not be used to help speculators, or those who knowingly got into mortgages they couldn't afford. This latter one creates a bit of a loophole/wiggle room, because legally, "knowingly" doesn't mean you actually know; rather, it means that you SHOULD HAVE known, which could make it more difficult for struggling families to get the help they really need.

Some Democrats think the program is too late; others think it's too little. I think it's a good first step, and we should applaud the President for taking an important move toward helping American victims.

Hockeytown, 98

I'm watching the 1998 Stanley Cup Finals, Game 2 (Redwings v. Capitals). I have it on tape; my father taped it while I was in Korea. We had quite a few Redwing fans in my flight, so it was a nice series to have.

My wife thinks it's funny that I would watch the same hockey game over and over again, but I don't see anything wrong with it (especially when it's one of the great games of all time). I figure it's no different than watching reruns of Fame (which I was subjected to these past two weeks) or any stuffy British show on Masterpiece Theatre (every Sunday).

At least it's more entertaining, and the acting is usually better.

Miscarriage of Justice

A recent study shows that non-smoking women who grew up in households where their parents smoked were 80% more likely to suffer a miscarriage during pregnancy.

The study did not say whether or not those parents of women who suffered miscarriages were being prosecuted for involuntary manslaughter for contributing to the death of fetuses.

Sometimes it's funnny just because you get it.

It's lunchtime, as we just got back from the gym. So as I'm fixing a bologna and cheese sandwich on a sesame seed bun for the Apple, I offer him some Veggie Tales Fruit Snacks that I got at HEB.

Then I got the contradiction. And I laughed.

Random Trivia

The most yolks ever found in one chicken egg was 9.

Wednesday is Haiku Day

If you rearrange
The letters in New York Times
You get "Monkeys Write."

Just thought y'all might enjoy that.

Honoring Those Who Served

There are at least three distinct differences between President Bush and Sgt. Patrick Stewart (deceased). First, Patrick Stewart actually went overseas and fought in a war. Second, Patrick Stewart was killed in action, and third, Patrick Stewart was a Wiccan.

It's the last part of that situation that President Bush apparently has issue with, as did the Veteran's Administration. You see, the VA apparently did not want to put the inverted pentagram on Stewart's headstone in the VA cemetary in Reno, because they did not consider Wicca to be a "real" religion. President Bush has spoken out against Wicca in the past. That's ok. President Bush is entitled to his thoughts on the Wiccan religion. But when he acts on that prejudice, that's where I have a problem:

On Tuesday, following an address to the American Legion's national convention in Reno, [President] Bush met with norhtern Nevada family members of soldiers who have perished in combat. Roberta Stewart, whose husband, Sgt. Patrick Stewart was killed in combat in Afghanistan, was not invited, even though other relatives of Sgt. Stewart were.

The article notes that Sgt. Stewart's parents and brother were invited to meet with the President, but not his widow. As if to rub salt in the wound, the President did invite the widow of a fellow servicemember who perished in the same Chinook Helicopter as Sgt. Stewart.

All I can say is shame on the President. It was bad enough when the VA attempted to deny this veteran's religious choice the same respect it does others, but when the leader of the nation acts as though a woman who stood up for the rights of ALL servicemen and women on her soldier husband's behalf is somehow deserving of a one-finger salute, then that shows a fundamental flaw in how he approaches religion and religious freedom. This was wrong, and President Bush owes her a very public and very personal apology.

Rank Has It's Privileges

We first were taught that in Basic Training. What it means is that you get certain bits of preferential treatment the farther you are promoted. The most glaring example of this that I saw in the Air Force was when I had to abdicate my chair so the XO (A Major) wouldn't have to stand.

But there are more beneficial applications of the RHIP concept. Let's say, for example, that you are the commander of a group of reservists, enlisted people and NCOs. Under your leadership, these soldiers participate in various human rights and Geneva Convention violations. Their pictures are posted all over the internet, and you did nothing to stop it, curtail it, or even know about it. Or even worse, you knew about it, and implicitly authorized it, or you deliberately turned a blind eye to it.

The enlisted soldiers and NCOs who were involved? They get prison sentences (Remember Lynndie England? She got three years in jail) up to 10 years. You, the Commander, the person who is overall responsible for the actions of your soldiers? You get a reprimand. Not for what your soldiers did - they've already been scapegoated. No, you get a reprimand because you discussed the investigation after a General told you not to. You will forfeit a month's pay ($7400 - more than I made my first 9 months in the military), and get to consider retiring next year.

Lieutenant Colonel Jordan was understandably relieved that he is finished with this ordeal, "When I first saw photographs of the horrible abuses at Abu Ghraib, I was shocked and I was saddened. After today, I hope the wounds of Abu Ghraib can start to heal." Other people who are not able to start healing? Those subjected to the dehumanizing treatment, Former PFC England, former Cpl Charles Graner, and former Staff Sergeant Ivan L. Frederick.

For the record - every other officer implicated in the action received administrative reprimands. LtC. Jordan was the only one who went to trial. Let's not forget that Lynndie England was not even allowed to plead guilty, yet she is sitting in jail. Enlisted members are doubly screwed in situations like this - they are supposed to not obey unlawful orders, yet they are precluded from questioning the orders they are given. Rank Certainly has its privileges. And the Army is full of crap when it comes to accountability.

There Will Always Be Prayer in Schools

The first time I heard that, or something similar to that, was in a Mad Magazine from the 1970s (it was my uncle's). More recently, I heard Constitutional Law guru Erwin Chemerinsky say it in a discussion on the Intent of the Founders with regard to the First Amendment's proscription on establishment of religion. It comes to mind whenever I think of schools and religious discourse.

For those of you who don't know (and I hide it pretty well, so you might not be aware), I believe in separating religion from public education as much as possible. I think that religious instruction is a personal/family issue, and that it has its place, and it is not the role of the public education system to teach my children which deity is correct, or how to worship Him, Her, It, or Them.

In essence, this is why I disagree with Texas new Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act. I think any law that requires schools to give time for students to proselytize to the rest of the student body, captive due to attendance requirements, lends itself to coercion and endorsement of religion by the state. Consider the school with one Buddhist family. Their children ask to speak their views on their religion before a football game. If they are even granted the time (which is unlikely in many instances), they would be the subject of some serious hazing by the students and their parents in many parts of Texas. Also consider the parent's reaction when a Wicca starts generating interest in her choice of religion amongst the Southern Baptist crowd, or the Satanist takes the microphone at a pep rally. All those who lobbied for the right to put God back in school are going to be hurting for a reason to deny Satan a chair as well. Not to mention Vishnu, Zoroaster, Buddha, Confucius, Baal, The Great Spirit, or whomever else might ask for a seat.

I'm not the only one who dislikes this law. The Houston Chronicle recently ran an article on the issue - click here. From the article:
Rather than protecting students from religious discrimination, the law's true accomplishment will be the creation of state-sanctioned forums for students who wish to pray and proselytize to captive audiences. ... Students could cite their religious convictions to condemn gay and lesbian students. They could promote their faith as the only true religion. They could pray fo rthe conversion of specific students. They could even promote atheism, Satanism, or paganism. ... Spring Branch [independent school district] trustee Theresa Kosmoski worries that school districts will face expensive litigation no matter how they implement the law...

The problem with using the government to fight your religious fight is that you end up violating the ideals you wish to favor, or worse, you end up violating the ideas upon which this country was founded.

You Can Call Me Steve, J.D.

Well, it's only been 3 months since I graduated, but I finally picked up my Diploma from school. Somehow, I expected it to be inked in gold and stenciled on the hide of a California Condor - does it always take this long to get your diploma?

Anyway, I have it, and I'm not going to give it back, so I'm happy for now.

I'm also sore. I took the Apple to the Y today, so he could get some good play time in (he has some separation anxiety issues with his siblings in school), and so I could keep up with my exercise. I dropped the first 12 pounds pretty easily, but now I've been hovering between 12 and 15 for about 2 weeks. I'd like to get down at least 15 more before I taper off, but any little bit is a good thing.

That and job hunting, my big deals for right now outside my family.

The Bible as a Weapon

I grew up learning to love my neighbor, and to turn the other cheek; that God is Love, and various other Biblical truths. While I have read the Bible, I confess I didn't remember Psalm 109. For those of you who share my ignorance, Psalm 109 is where the Bible teaches about imprecatory prayer, or prayer for the misfortune of God's enemies.

Why was I reminded about imprecatory prayer? Because a Southern Baptist Preacher has declared it time to resort to imprecatory prayer against the Americans United For Separation of Church and State. And what has this group done to invoke the wrath of God (at least, in Reverend Drake's mind)? They asked the IRS to probe the tax-exempt status of Drake's congregation. You see, generally, churches are tax-exempt, which carries with it the burden of not being able to campaign for political candidates. It turns out that Rev. Drake issued a statement endorsing Mike Huckabee as a presidential candidate.

From the article:

Drake told his supporters that he attempted to talk to Americans United for the Separation of Church and State about the issue. He cited a verse from the Gospel of Matthew that says "if your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you." Drake said his efforts were rebuffed.

Drake did not say, according to the article, what sin was actually committed by the group. From what I can gather from the LA Times Article linked above, though, the sin committed was asking a government agency to look into potential improper (illegal?) actions by a person/organization. In other words, urging one entity to obey the law and check into another entity's possible illegal activity is a sin against God. Well, maybe not against God, but against Reverend Drake, apparently. You see, the imprecatory prayer is to be used against God's enemies, but that doesn't necessarily mean that someone who has pissed off a Baptist preacher from Buena Park is God's enemy, just that preacher's (also from the article).

It's a shame when religious leaders use religion to attack, instead of trying to persuade. It's even more shameful when religious leaders invoke their Deity to counterattack inquiries into that leader's potential improper action.

Gonzales Gone?

Alberto Gonzales reportedly is going to resign as Attorney General.

This is good for America, in part because it's unlikely, no matter how hard President Bush tries, that his replacement will be anything less than an improvement.

While it's still unclear that Alberto Gonzales did anything illegal (in part because of the frantic blocking methods put in place by the administration), it is clear that he was causing more harm than good by continuing in the position. The smart money is that he partook of a popular Bush Administration tactic of waiting until the story got cold enough to deny the Democrats a "victory" by his resignation, despite the fact that it was more or less a foregone conclusion.

President Bush, if he was truly interested in serving the best interests of the American people, should have first insisted that Gonzales resign when the issue first came to fruition, and second, should ensure that Gonzales was, or is, available for any investigations on the record. If Gonzo has indeed done nothing wrong, then there would be no harm in so doing (much like the justification for the right to wiretap my records). But, like most politicians, President Bush and company are less interested in serving the best interests of America, and appear to be more interested in promoting his political party, and hindering the other.

Election, 2008

It bothers me, really, that the candidates started popping their heads out of the ground last November, campaigning for an election next year in November. But, that's the state of American politics anymore (is it really "too late" for Fred Thompson to enter?).

The problem with this election is that, really, there doesn't appear to be a decent favorite among any of the "favorites." It looks to be a retread of 2004, where we had the choice between a poor executive who acts before he thinks and a person who appeared more interested in his hair than in running a country. So far, it looks like a choice between a self-promoter who doesn't really answer much about herself, other than to say she can take it, and a self-promoter who appears to be stronger on paper than in real life. Following behind, we have a Republican flip-flopper and an inexperienced Democrat, and a bunch of others.

My question is, if the election were tomorrow, and you got to choose among everyone who is still in the race, who would you vote for? And more importantly, who do you think I should vote for (this is a "convince me" topic, not a "I want to do what you say" topic - argue your candidate's position)?

If I were to pull a lever or hang a chad today, I would dye my thumb purple for Bill Richardson. He's tough on border security, his state's economic growth has exceeded the country's during his time as governor, he's a progressive - the closest thing to a true moderate among the R and D candidates. I have supported his position more regularly and agreed with his statements more often than any of the others, and I think he would be the person best suited for the role of President. If nothing else, he didn't try to snow his congressional district by telling them he intended on being their senator and then immediately announce his candidacy for president as soon as possible (to give people the opportunity to forget) after the election.

Barring that, I would support a Ron Paul, who is more libertarian than any of the R and D candidates.

What do you think?

Church Mice?

One of the benefits of being the youngest family at church (indeed, the only family with school age children or younger) is that you have an entire congregation of grandparents, who just love that children are present at their service. This means that the children get away with things that otherwise would cause whispering among the masses. This means when the Apple sits during Children's Sermon and waves to the congregation, 30 grandparents smile, chuckle, and wave back. It means when the Princess dances down the pew to shake hands during the call to worship, people exclaim she's adorable and shake her hand with a large grin.

This doesn't necessarily make me feel any less embarrassed by their behavior, but at least the children are welcomed by the rest of the congregation.

The Shrewd Shrew

Say what you want about Hillary, she certainly knows how to keep her name in the papers. This time, it's not making a fuss about a fashion article in the Washington Post, though. No, this time it's making a calculated statement to ensure that several people make comments and point fingers. The comment? That a terrorist attack will help a republican candidate more than a Democrat.

This is a very smart move on her part, because it puts her position out there, gets her name back on the headline, and lends itself to other discussions. There will be those who will criticize what she said, assailing her for using the threat of terror to score political points. There will be the "but the Republicans have said that, too" crowd, and then there will be those who will debate the veracity of her assertion.

My hunch, though, is that she was not attempting to point out she is the best candidate to deal with an unexpected terrorist attack (which is basically what she said), but rather she was trying to make sure that people kept talking about her. This is the stuff that keeps her in the lead for the Democratic nod for President, and she seems to have a good shot at getting that nomination.

She is a polarizing figure, perhaps more polarizing than President Bush. She plays at being a moderate, when she's actually closer to the fringe, and I sort of think she's the candidate the Republicans want to face next November, because they think she will be the easiest to play "better us than her" with. Should that come to pass, then we'll see another election like 2004, where we had bad and worse to choose from.

This century has proven to be the strongest argument in favor of a viable third party in our country's history. Now if only all the real moderates and independents in this country could just find a way to work together...

School Days

We went to meet The Boy and the Princess's teachers last night. The school, in its infinite wisdom, thought it would be a good idea to have an assembly beforehand. So, some 800 people crammed into a room with a sign posting max occupancy at about 620. Since there weren't enough chairs, about 500 people were left standing, trying to listen to the new principal and her spanish translator over the din. This half hour assembly then released all the children and families to mob around the school trying to find classrooms while looking at the 3 bulletin boards next to the cafeteria that had the classroom assignments for the students. We also got to buy all the school supplies for the year (113 dollars for two kids, not including school uniforms. So much for free public education) and lug those around while trying to keep track of which three kids belong to us.

The daughter was excited to see her classroom. Her teacher is young (younger than I), and has a baby of her own. She seems to have the right personality for teaching kindergarten, and seemed friendly enough. The Princess even has a friend from pre-k in her class, so she's got a head start in the friend department - not that she needs any help in that vein.

The Boy will have three teachers this year, plus teachers for art and music. His second grade teacher was "promoted" this year, so she will be teaching third grade science, and then he has a math teacher and a language arts/social studies teacher. I actually kind of like the idea of teacher "specialties," even at this young age. I think the teachers should be able to be a bit more effective.

All in all, the kids seem to be a bit excited about school, including the Apple, who was practicing being the hall monitor, I think (or he was in training for the indoor track and field world championships). I think this year should shape up to be a good one, especially since I won't be a student along with them.

Now if only I had a job (three rejections this week, but at least they got back to me). Anyone need a landman or an assistant general counsel for a school district?

Random Trivia

A pound of feathers weighs more than a pound of gold. Really

Clutching at Straws - Another Historical Rewrite

I watched part of the President's speech today, but I was not really surprised by what I heard.

The President's foreign policy for the past six years has been one of "if I repeat it enough, it will become true." This policy has been applied to his attempts to label his legacy, as well. President Bush invoked Korea and the difficulties Truman faced in 1950, noting that history has been kind to the ex-haberdasher, implying that he is the Truman of the 21st Century.

This is a nice idea, but it's intentionally incomplete. President Truman is remembered fondly in relation to Korea because history proved his claims accurate. North Korea invaded the South with the approval of China and the Soviet Union (indeed there were Soviet pilots in the air over Korea during the war). The U.S. intervened with the approval of the United Nations. The attack was part of a larger plan to spread Communism.

History has not been so kind to the President's rationales for invading Iraq. First off, we were the aggressors in Iraq; we were not defending an attacked state. There were no WMDs being produced, and none found of the vintage claimed. The Saddam-Al Qaeda link was refuted. There were no plans to invade the United States. The Iraqi people did not view us as liberators (at least, not in the long run), and the country was not ready for democracy. In short, the similarities are skin-deep.

The President also made comments referring to the need to fight the terrorists in Iraq, lest we fight them here. This is a rather disingenuous statement, in my opinion. As noted in the preceding paragraph, the ISG and CIA found no link between 9-11 and Saddam Hussein and no terror threat from Iraq, at least, not until we liberated the country and provided what terrorists we now face there. The President also (during the part I watched), while referring to the terrorists, made no mention of the insurgents or the Iraqi military who have been fighting us - just a coincidence, I'm sure. I recognize that it would be ludicrous to think that our President would actually come out and say "I'm responsible for a complete mess in Iraq, but unless we stick to it, it's going to be even worse. I need your help to try to fix what I've broken," but that's exactly what he needs to do. Trying to paint a picture that glosses over his errors in judgment (such as not listening to his Generals, such as Shinseki who stated the need for 5-600,000 troops to secure victory in Iraq) only shows his contempt for the sensibilities of the American People, including the families of the soldiers fighting the insurgency he created.

Like I said, I didn't see the whole speech, so maybe he did throw in a mea culpa, but I somehow doubt it. Instead, he wants to pretend he is what he isn't - a Great Leader, a man with the statement "The buck stops here" on his desk, Harry S Truman. Instead, history is more likely to view him as a different Democrat from the 20th Century - Lyndon Johnson.

Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness

In a novel approach to prosecution, the D.C. Court of Appeals has ruled that witnesses have the right to review their grand jury testimony in ongoing investigations. Not surprisingly, the government is opposed to this. They claim that by so allowing, it gives witnesses a chance to derail investigations.

The concept behind the ruling, though, is a little more simple than that. It gives the witnesses a chance to see what they said and to limit perjury. Additionally, it will encourage witnesses to be more willing to testify, as they will not be burdened by the spectre of a prosecutor who will use the threat of perjury to intimidate said witness. In the interest of justice, this decision is a particularly good one, and I hope the court refuses the state's request to review this en banc (the D.C. Circuit, from what I remember, is generally government-friendly and hard on "crime"), as this seems to me to be the best choice in a system where the defendant more often than not is presumed guilty.

What's a little promotion among friends?

I read, sometimes. In the past three years, I haven't read for pleasure a whole lot, but I have gotten a few books in (currently Scorched Earth, in the past To Kill a Mockingbird, Sherlock Holmes, The Art of War, Democracy in America, The Five people You Meet in Heaven, etc.). In law school, you just have too much other reading to do to worry about getting in leisure reading. A friend of mine, however, managed to get through a book in law school - as in, he got his book published. According to one reader of this blog, the book is a page-turner - you can't put it down.

Being that he's a friend (we studied Civ Pro and Corporations together, among other classes), and being he is a good writer, I want to recommend The Ghosts of Varner Creek, by Michael Lee Weems. It's good fiction, well written, by a good guy. Can't beat that.

Hearts and Minds

Every day we hear new reports from some officer, general or otherwise, some politician, some DoD or Executive Branch spokesperson who speaks as though he or she has some great insight as to the situation in Iraq. That's all fine and good, but as many (including me) have said before, these people aren't the ones on the ground in Iraq. To get a better picture of what the soldiers in the field think and see, it doesn't help to have DoD PR release statements and PR interviews that are selected and screened. The best way to do it is to hear soldiers speak candidly, as these Specialists and Sergeants did recently. (Hat Tip, Vim and Vinegar)

It's easy to see how people will be able to point to things and say "these are just democrat talking points," except, the information is gleaned firsthand, from the field, from those who speak with and see the situation in Iraq. The quote people with whom they've spoken ("we need security, not free food"). They see history being repeated (a la 1920), not being rewritten. In other words, these are people who know the story and who share their opinions (and at risk to their careers, for putting it on an op-ed with their names on it), and that is what the people need to hear.

And, we're back!

It was a nice trip. I prefer the midwest to the stifling heat of the Gulf Coast. And it was a nice drive through rural Arkansas we took today. We decided to take a little detour on our drive home and do something site-seeingly. The great thing about Arkansas is that they have all the things a real state has, plus something rather unique in the United States. We took the kids to dig for diamonds at the Crater of Diamonds State Park. It was only about an hour and change off course, and we only stayed a couple hours, but long enough to annoy Surly Old Guy, who threatened to have the Apple removed from the park for touching his dirt (I'd like to say there's more to this story, but really, that's about it. The Apple touched the dirt in SOG's bucket, which he was going to pan for diamonds, which he wasn't going to find in there - it literally was the dirt the Apple grabbed). We found a bunch of Agate, a couple quartzes, small quartzes, like tiny, and a few something else, but nothing worth keeping, really. It was fun, though, and something the kids will remember for a while, and which I'll never forget. But I don't think I'll go back. It was a neat one-time thing, and I don't really have the patience to pan for the hours those serious folks do.

Then it was back on the road. As beautiful as Texas is (there, I said it, can I never say it again?), it's a freaking pain to drive on highway 59 at night. There's no lights, there's few towns, there's a ton of trees on either side, so you get lulled into a highway hypnosis state, and the State, in its infinite "wisdom," decided to pave the road with coarse gravel, which has a nice loud effect to go along with the constant vibration for 120 miles that had my hands numb by the end.

And, now we're back in Houston, where we get to start worrying about whether or not Hurricane Dean is going to run up on us. I will fill my car's gas tank tomorrow on the way home from the Y, I think, just in case.

Now, it's time for the sack.

Believe it or not, I'm walking on air

We are about halfway home. We've reached Little Rock, Arkansas, the greatest city in the greatest state named Arkansas.

The Princess and the Apple are currently running around the hotel room being super-heroes ("I'm super-power! I'm up in the clouds!").

The Boy is playing the DS, which he'll get to enjoy for about five more minutes before he turns it off for the night.

We had a great trip to the heartland, and while it will be nice to get back to the Great State, I think I'm more made for the middle America than I am for the South. I felt a bit more comfortable up there. That, and it was nice to have family nearby. The cousins were great fun, and it was really nice to see the brother and sister in law. I think next time, we'll try to be a little faster about a return trip. Five years ages people a lot...

I'll write more tomorrow, I'm sure. Enjoy!

Sheepskin

In three days, it will have been three months since we graduated. Diplomas have yet to be received. I appear to be the only person who thinks about this, which leads me to believe I shouldn't worry about it, but three months seems quite a long time.

Classic films

I've mentioned before how there are some songs that shouldn't be remade. I feel the same way about movies. Nobody would seriously consider remaking Citizen Kane, Gone With the Wind, Glory, or The Sands of Iwo Jima. And I thought most people had learned their lesson with the remake of Psycho. However, leave it to those wishing to reap a profit without thinking of something new. The report is out that Warner Brothers will be remaking Enter the Dragon, Bruce Lee's best film.


I'm pretty sure if people could reimagine Whistler's Mother, they would, if they thought someone would buy it. But that doesn't make it right.

Definitions

I'm a day late on this post, but it's because I'm on vacation.

Apparently, the Bush Administration is planning on labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps as a Terrorist Unit. This would allow Washington to target the unit's financial resources and business units.

This is a sneaky move, but one that Congress granted the President with the vaguely worded USA PATRIOT Act. Fortunately, if you're the President, there is no way to define what is a "terrorist," leaving the administration the wiggle room to define it as they see fit ("I don't know what a terrorist is, but I know it when I see it").

This is not surprising from anyone who sees this administration as one that seeks to spread democracy around the world, akin to Trotsky's view on spreading Communism. The problem, as we've seen with Iraq, is that we cannot foist a system of government on a nation that is not ready for it. It's no different than the drug addict going through rehab - it won't work until the person is ready to change. All this act will do is create a little more hostility against the United States in a region of the world where we need as little added hostility as possible.

Wednesday is Haiku Day

The Princess saw a
Cow giving birth and said "The
Cow pooped a baby."

It was a special moment.

A Peaceful, Easy Feeling

It's been a nice few days in the Midwest, a quieter, more deliberately paced environment. I've enjoyed the days we've been here so far. On Sunday, I made Bulgoki for the family (The cousins and Aunt and Uncle came over); it was quite a hit from what I could tell. Yesterday was more of a turndown day, just kind of sitting around doing nothing. And today, we took the kids out to Amish Country, Arcola, IL - the Broom Corn capital of the world. There's an Amish museum there, where the kids got to see all things Amish. We also drove out to Sullivan, where we picked up some good old Amish cheese and some blackberry butter, which the kids are looking forward to spreading on their bread in the morning. We finished the day by eating dinner at Chicago's pizza. I'm not a big fan of most things Chicago, but they certainly do know how to do a pizza right. We ordered two larges for the family of 7, and left with a full pie left between the two.

Tomorrow might be another slow day. I think we're going to get some cracked corn and go feed the ducks, then take the kids out to the park to run around and get good an worn out. Several hours of driving today killed any aspirations of taking a day trip to see the Arch in St. Louis.

Still haven't made it to Steak and Shake, but it's definitely on the agenda.

Now it's time for some sleep. Talk to y'all later.

The Crossroads of America

Well, after two days of driving, one lost Buddy, a stop in Bill Clinton's birth town, some Arby's, and more Coca-colas than I've consumed in two weeks, we are at the in-laws. It's been a long trip, and the last four hours have been more or less unwind time. I'm too tired to sleep right now, hence the blogging. I must say, it's nice to be out of Texas for a bit - everyone needs to recharge from time to time.

We're going to spend the week with the grandparents, maybe see a couple sites, and then get back home, back to job hunting, and back to weather hotter'n a two-bit hooker at a Baptist BBQ.

Enjoy!

No Child Left Behind*

One of the problems with being an unpopular president, is that anytime anything connected to the executive branch looks hinky, you take the blame. Much like the popular president who gets to take credit for the good things coming out of executive branch agencies.

The current issue lies with the President's threats to veto the State Child's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Coincidentally, shortly after his threat to veto, four regional directors of the Department of Health and Human Services (where I once had to show my military ID in order to use the restroom) issued copycat letters spreading apparent misinformation about the program (link is from the Huffington Post). The letters misstate the effect of the law and spout similar concerns expressed by President Bush. The idea seems to be to frighten people into criticizing this bill that would provide health insurance for children who can't otherwise afford it.

I prefer to operate under the ounce of prevention concept, that providing insurance for children will result in better treatment for those children, which will make for healthier adults who will be able to work more, have fewer ailments, contribute more to the economy, and ultimately save money. That's not a big price to pay, IMO, for the potential future payoff.

God and the Military

The First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

In the military, there are chaplains of different faiths that provide services for the military members. This is viewed as necessary to avoid the unjust denial of religion to active duty members, while avoiding the compelled attendance issue that could be seen as coercion to a particular religious tenet (that, and the military offers chaplains of any number of faiths; I've seen Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, and even Muslim services).

The military also has a policy of not allowing its active duty members to appear in uniform at rallies, speeches, or anything else that could give the impression of military/government endorsement of said issue. One of the most recent examples of this occurred earlier this year, when the Marines threatened to downgrade a Marine on the IRR's honorable discharge for appearing at an anti-war rally in a stripped down uniform.

Imagine, then, what the military would do when faced with the issue of seven military members appearing in uniform in a Christian fundraising video. Faced with the very clear aspect of seven military officers, including four generals, in uniform, in video, to raise funds for the Christian Embassy, clearly endorsing one form of religion over all others, apparently oblivious to the First Amendment and the Military's restrictions, the military opted to, and I quote, "consider appropriate administrative action." Amazing. Scapegoating a Private, swift justice. Cover up a potential fragging, rush to the scene. Violate the First Amendment and Epperson's "Wall of separation," then we'll "consider appropriate administrative action."

Laughable. Perhaps most damning is the statement of one of the officers, who felt he had done nothing wrong. Apparently, he figured since the Christian Embassy has worked with the Pentagon before, working with them was "a sanctioned or endorsed activity." Apparently, he is unaware that as a government agent, he is not supposed to endorse one religion to the detriment of others. But what does he know? He's just an officer in the military. They aren't expected to think, or anything.

Let's be clear about something. There is nothing wrong with these people being Christians. There's nothing wrong with them supporting their religion. I have no issue with them helping this organization. The issue occurred because they appeared in uniform, and the lack of action to correct this endorsement/First Amendment violation is what is wrong.

Sometimes

Sometimes, there is nothing more tasty than a nice glass of really cold water.

Wednesday is Haiku Day

President Bush passed
His physical. When will he
Report to Iraq?
(For the record, I had similar gripes about Bill Clinton requiring Anthrax vaccinations of all military members, but not getting any himself)

As always, I look forward to your suggestions.

Your First Step to Get God Back in Your Public School

According to this LA Times Article, this is what graces the front page of the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools.

The debate has been going on for a while as to whether or not courses on the Bible should be allowed in public schools. Many people view any attempt at getting a Biblical studies program in school as a state endorsement of Christianity in violation of the First Amendment. Others view it as a necessary step to provide Biblical education to flesh out a student's education. Still others view it as their duty to ensure that our nation doesn't get swept from this planet by the rule of godless heathens (the ACLU), who will stop at anything to kill religion in every way, shape, or form.

I don't have an issue with a comparative religions class in public schools, and think that philosophically, it is a good idea. I also don't have an issue with a biblical history class, with some caveats, such as a requirement that it remain secular, that it be a true elective (i.e. nobody will feel compelled to enroll), and that it not promote any one denomination's view on Christianity. I think, given the extreme difficulty over the years in trying to come up with a program like that, system wherein the Bible is not taught in public schools, leaving the religious decisions up to the parents, is the best policy.

However, I recognize many view any attempt to keep public schools a venue for ALL Americans to learn without feeling unduly coerced to participate in a religious mantra of which they do not adhere as an assault on Christianity, and by extension, an assault on that individual. I think this is narrow minded and faulty logic, and I think the subterfuge involved by Fundamentalist Christians runs afoul of what they claim to believe.

One friend of mine stated it best, and though I can't remember quite how he said it, it went something like this (I'm going to write this as best I can). Fundamentalist Christians have gone to a point where they have denied not only their intent, but have out and out lied, and diminished what they claim to believe because of this cause. They want the Bible and God brought back in public schools so everyone can receive their Christian education, but in doing so, embrace theories that detract from the omnipotence of God and the righteousness of their beliefs. They claim that courses such as Intelligent Design allow for "something, not necessarily God" that puts everything together. But that's not what they believe. Yet, for their desires, they will pitch it as anything just to potentially sell it. They abandon their beliefs for a short term gain, and that's wrong.

I know he can restate it better than I did, so if you come on here, go ahead and restate what I'm trying to say. It was very good, and something many people probably haven't considered. Certainly not the folks in Odessa, who sent an e-mail celebrating when they got the Bible course in school: "take that, you dang heathens!"

Check out the article, good writing.

Will work for food

Well, we only have 13 more weeks until we find out whether or not we passed the 2007 bar exam.
But, since I consolidated my loans, my grace period is gone, which means we get to start paying back now. This is painful enough, but when I still don't have a job, it makes it that much more difficult. We are looking at the budget, and things are going to be a little tighter than normal now.

The catch-22, of course, is that in order for me to get a job, I have to be able to go to interviews and go to work. In order to go to interviews and go to work, I need to be able to pay for daycare, which we can't afford because I don't have a job.

Still, I'm sending out resumes. I put out about a dozen last week, and will probably put out another 12 this week. The Career Center at school is not worth going to. Last time I went in there, I was told "with your grades, you need to find someone who will pay you and stay there." I was not happy. I'm still not happy; I'm stressed, tired, upset, and frustrated. And rather mad at our career resources center.

News Flash!

According to the latest research, programs that teach abstinence only do not decrease the HIV infection rate, or the rate of unprotected sex, or even change the initiation of sexual activity.

Now, I sort of thought that this was something to file under the "duh" category, myself. But apparently there are those who believe that "just say no" works. Apparently, these people think that by telling a teenager to not do something, that teenager is going to not do it. What sharp people these are. These people also operate under a presumption that the whole world is just like their little corner of it, and that nobody has it any worse off than them, except for the poor choices those others have made, such as to be born in rural Thailand or Uganda. You see, they should know to say "no" to unprotected sex, because we teach them to say no.

I'm all for teaching your kids to wait. But you have to plan for contingencies. You teach children to swim so that they don't get hurt playing near water. You teach children about venomous snakes so they know which critters to avoid. You don't just say "stay away from snakes." An ounce of prevention, and all that.

I'm going to go file this back in the "duh" category.

One State, Under God, Buddha, Allah, Vishnu, et al.

What is it about fundamental Christians that they are so weak in their faith that they feel it necessary to try to work religion into every aspect of everybody's life? Is their grasp in their faith so tenuous that, like an alcoholic or a smoker, they need to encourage others to share in their acts?

Texas has a law now that requires students who attend public schools to recite the Texas Pledge (first off, how many states even HAVE their own Pledge of Allegiance: 4 besides Texas) with 4 extra words: One State, Under God. Apparently, this is to remind our students that our state is one state, under God. I don't understand the need for this, other than to pander to the religious base. But, while this may be considered a Lemon Test violation of the First Amendment (Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 1971), it is what follows next in the Houston Chronicle article linked above that looks more clearly to violate the First Amendment.

According to the article, the students are not *required* to recite those four extra words. Rather, students who object to saying the pledge or making the reference to God can bring a written note from home excusing them from participating. In other words, what this law does is compel the invocation of God by all students in Texas, be they Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Wiccan, Zoroastrian, or whatever. And in order to not participate, what they must do is bring attention to themselves by presenting a written waiver from home. This is nothing short of state sponsored coercion of a religion more on all students in Texas, compelling them to stay in line and follow the status quo, lest the students be alienated for thinking differently. For those who are unaware, State Sponsored Coercion of religion in public schools is also unconstitutional under the Coercion Test (from Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577, 1992).

If one disputes the intent of the law, one need just listen to the statement of State Representative Debbie Riddle, who claims it had always bothered hoer that God was omitted in the state's pledge: "Personally, I felt like the Texas pledge had a big old hole in it, and it occurred to me, 'You know what? We need to fix that. Our pledge is perfectly OK like it is with the exception of acknowledging that just as we are one nation under God, we are one state under God as well." Read differently, what Ms. Riddle says, essentially, is, "I am a Christian, and I want everyone here to follow what I hold dear and do what I want to do." This is not representative of the concept of a representative democracy, and it surely does nothing to look out for the minority from the oppression of majority.

This law was unnecessary. The phrase was unnecessary, and the compelling nature of the phrase does little more than lead toward situations not unlike Sante Fe ISD v. Doe, which resulted in a very real witch hunt for the (use your own expletive here) who objected to the recitation of a prayer at school events. While those individuals may very well have lynched the heathen who disagreed with their God, it's unlikely that objections to the new phrase in the Pledge would do so. Instead, I think we'll see a "kinder, gentler" form of hatred manifesting itself against these children who dare to believe differently.

Parenthood

I get to be a stay at home dad this week and next week. We don't have the money to put the kids in daycare, and I'm not employed, and after a summer of seeing the kids for about an hour a day, it's a welcome change. We've been pretty active the past few days; we go to the park in the morning, then while the Apple is taking his nap, I do a little housework, which has been piling up over the summer.

It looks like we're going to be able to take a vacation this summer. It'll be nice to get out of Texas for a week. The wife hasn't had a break in 3 years, so she is definitely overdue. The Boy and the Princess have not been out of state since 2002, and the Apple's never been out of Texas, so it'll be a nice change for them. We're going to drive (yes, road trip with kids. I'm already getting my dadisms ready) up to Indiana to visit the grandparents. it's only about 950 miles, so it shouldn't be too bad. Being dad, I am comfortable with driving past landmarks without stopping ("look kids, there's the St. Louis Arch, and the Ozarks, and the Mounds!), so I should be able to get there in about a day and a half, accounting for stops for the kids and wife, who, despite my pleas to the contrary, insists on having a bladder. Anyway, it's going to be nice to take the kids on a trip, and eat at Steak and Shake once again.

Wednesday is Haiku Day

"Impeach Bush!" some shout.
But, is incompetence an
Impeachable crime?

As always, I look forward to your contributions

Unbelievable

President Bush better Call an emergency meeting of Congress to have them put together an eleventh hour bill for him to sign banning this: Hollywood plans on controlling the pigeon population by placing The Pill in their bird feeders.


I must say, I'm shocked and appalled by this disgusting behavior by the citizens of Hollywood. They should not be interfering in Nature this way. What they need to do, if they want to control the pigeon population, is not through birth control, but to teach them abstinence. Because Abstinence teaching is 100% effective in removing unwanted pregnancies from the population. This abomination must cease. I, for one, will write my Congresspeople and DEMAND they take swift and decisive action on this potentially divisive subject.

Iraq Wins Asia Cup

In a bit of good news coming from Iraq, the Iraqi National Soccer team won the Asia Cup, despite being quite an underdog.

President Bush did not say that this was evidence that the surge was working, though I wouldn't rule his making such a connection out. Or his suggesting that this is a major victory on the War on Terror.

Other things that aren't Bush's Fault

I had a little fun yesterday pointing out all the BDS stuff that people use to accuse President Bush of being a bad president. But I forgot a couple.

It's not his fault Al Qaeda took advantage of the Iraq invasion to rebuild its strength.

It's not his fault he invoked the law of war (military order #1) and then tried to say he wasn't bound by the constraints of the laws of war.

It's not his fault his Social Security reform platform stunk.

It's not his fault he couldn't convince anyone of the logic of his immigration reform platform.

It's not his fault Karl Rove is implicated in so much scandal.

It's not his fault he has no clout anymore due to his complete lack of credibility.

It's not his fault the details surrounding Pat Tillman's death were held back to capitalize on the high profile sacrifice while those in charge knew of the cover-up.

It's not his fault Alberto Gonzales' testimony doesn't match up with others', making it appear as though he is lying.

It's not his fault so many people in his administration have such horrible memories when it comes to key conversations they had that just happened to revolve around criminal behavior.

It's not his fault that people tried to rewrite history. And it's not his fault he chose Veteran's Day, 2005 to attack those who he says were trying to do so, dividing the country even more.

And, of course, it's not his fault he spent 20% of his presidency on vacation.

The thing is, President Bush was not lying when he said "I'm a uniter, not a divider." I've never seen more of America opposed to one President's policies, actions, statements, and positions than I see now. Most of America is in agreement - President Bush is the worst president this century. See, you just have to pay attention to what he says and what he does. President Bush has definitely united this country.

Bush Derangement Syndrome

One of the favorite lines of the 20 something percent of Americans who still support President Bush like to spout out against anyone who dares to question the Dear Leader is that those who are questioning the Decider are suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome, or BDS.

This is because nothing that has happened in the past six plus years are President Bush's fault. We need to remember this.

It wasn't his fault that No Child Left Behind ended up leaving hundreds of thousands of children behind, what with test scores being lower, discipline being worse, and fewer funds going to activities that could keep those children active, engaged, and interested, or counselors to identify the problems students are encountering outside the classroom.

It isn't his fault that God speaks to him and guides him in his decisionmaking. That should go to show the infallibility of his plans and decisions.

It wasn't his fault that the military "found" a tape of a guy who looked like Bin Laden in 2002 discussing Al Qaeda's role in 9-11 (though he does get some points, because it turned out whoever he told to make that tape was right, ultimately).

It wasn't his fault that Iraq didn't have WMDs, wasn't involved in 9-11, or most of the other justifications for liberating those people, so that they never have to worry about violence on their streets again.

It wasn't his fault that he staged a round table discussion with officers to look like it was a genuine discussion with troops about the goings on in Iraq.

It wasn't his fault Donald Rumsfeld criticized one of his troops for daring to ask about going to war ill-prepared with the now-famous "you go to war with the army you have, not the army you wish you had."

It wasn't his fault Terri Schiavo's husband did have the right to make the decision he did and the President couldn't stop it no matter what he told Congress.

It wasn't his fault he said you always err on the side of life, and then declined to send aid immediately in the midst of reports that there could be overtopping of the levees in New Orleans after Katrina. "You're doing a heckuva job, Brownie!"

It wasn't his fault the Iraqi soldiers didn't stand up.

It wasn't his fault the insurgency wasn't in its last throes, as Dick Cheney suggested.

It wasn't his fault the Mission Accomplished banner hung directly behind his head so everyone could see it. They should have known the banner referred to the ship, and not taken the implication that the banner referred to Iraq.

It wasn't his fault the tapes of Abu Graib got out.

It wasn't his fault people don't like the idea of their phone lines being wiretapped without a warrant, or that the pesky 4th amendment still exists.

It's not his fault that Alberto Gonzales went to John Ashcroft's bed while Ashcroft was heavily sedated to try to wrest an OK to go ahead with said wiretaps, then justify it by saying "there are no rules."

It's not his fault Libby was arrested, indicted, tried, and convicted with regard to the Valerie Plame affair. It's not his fault Libby's sentence was commuted - oh, wait. Yes it was.

It wasn't his fault the AG fired seven prosecutors for not going after democrats fast enough, or (gasp!) for daring to go after Republicans!

It wasn't his fault the presidents before him did not make quite as much use of the signing statements as he did. Seriously, didn't they realize that they could keep themselves from being held accountable to any kind of law by simply saying it doesn't apply to them when they sign it?

And, of course, it's not his fault that the democratic majority in Congress, elected as a result of America's disgust with the Republican Party, dare to choose their own path instead of blindly following the orders of the least popular president in 35 years.

Seriously, people. Give it up. You're making America weaker, and your traitorous behavior emboldens the enemy.

New Tactic from President Bush on TSP

Since he cannot go back to warrantless wiretaps without the Republican majority in Congress to shield the administration, President Bush has apparently decided to take a new approach to encroaching upon our civil liberties. Apparently, it's time to update FISA. From the AP, via Yahoo!: "President Bush wants Congress to modernize a law that governs how intelligence agencies monitor the communications of suspected terrorists. 'This law is badly out of date,' Bush said Saturday in his weekly radio address."

President Bush then explained why this law needed updating:

Bush noted that terrorists now use disposable cell phones and the Internet to communicate, recruit operatives, and plan attacks; such tools were not available when FISA passed nearly 30 years ago. He also cited a recently released intelligence estimate that concluded al-Qaida (sic) is using its growing strength in the Middle East to plot attacks on U.S. soil.

This is, of course, a serious issue. However, the President is notoriously silent as to HOW Al Qaeda managed to regain its strength, namely the misguided, poorly planned, underprepared, misrepresented invasion of Iraq, which has drained our resources in a police action. Remember, the Iraqi troops were being trained in 2004 and were almost ready to take over security of their nation. But, instead, 3 years later, instead of fighting the "entity" known as "terror," we are still trying to clean up the mess we made in Iraq. In other words, President Bush's actions made America weaker, and now he wants a revamped law that strips more of our civil liberties (an encroachment into our 4th amendment protections) to "fix" what he jacked up.

Let's see what, exactly is outdated about FISA. The law requires a FISA judge grant the warrant as long as the allegation is not deficient. This is not a probable cause requirement; it's a "are all the spaces filled in and are there no typos" requirement. In other words, as long as the agency requesting the warrant fills it out right, it cannot be denied. In the history of FISA, over 96% (and possibly higher, but I'm not going to do the calculation right now) of the applications have been approved. But that's not all. The law also allows for the intelligence agencies to collect intelligence through warrantless wiretaps even WITHOUT A WARRANT. From the language of the Act:

[W]hen the Attorney General reasonably determines that (1) an emergency situation exists with respect to the employment of electronic surveillance to obtain foreign intelligence information and before an order authorizing such surveillance can ... be obtained; he may authorize the emergency employment of electronic surveillance if [a properly authorized] judge ... is informed by the Attorney General or his designee ... and if an application in accordance with this subchapter is made to that judge as soon as practicable, but not more than 72 hours after the Attorney General authorizes such surveillance (emphasis mine).

In other words, surveillance can be done without a warrant for up to three days, before an application for a warrant which cannot be denied due to lack of probable cause (a 4th amendment requirement) must be asked for. Yet this is insufficient to fight the war on terror that took a backseat when the President sought to fight a war that need not have been fought, at least not when we did. Rubbish.

Fair and Balanced

The Apple had a fever this morning, so I couldn't take him to daycare. Fortunately, I am unemployed, and officially no longer studying for the bar exam, so I was able to stay home and keep an eye on him, give him tylenol, etc. We went to the Y this morning, because I needed to get back to working on getting back into some sort of shape. While I was on the elliptical machine (THE best exercise machine ever made), I listen to the various televisions that are on through my earphones. First, I listened to Fox News. The lady on Fox News used a segue similar to this:

"this may be the season of vacation for many of us, but one group that isn't taking vacations is Al Qaeda. A recent report shows that Al Qaeda may be preparing to make a summertime attack on the United States. All this going on while the debate continues on whether or not we should be allowed to wiretap terrorists."

In about 15 seconds, she spat out exactly what it is about Fox News that so many people don't like. Start with a veiled threat ("We're taking our guard down for the summer, but the bad guys aren't"), then explain how the threat applies to us ("They may be preparing to do something someday") and then tied it to a Neocon talking point, with a remote implication that those who oppose warrantless wiretaps support terrorists, even though the wiretaps are not being used exclusively to listen in on TERRORISTS, but whoever the CinC determines may be a terrorist, or may be supporting or connected to a terrorist, without, apparently even a reasonable suspicion standard, let alone probable cause.

This is not "fair and balanced" reporting; it is scare tactics with an agenda. And the worst part about it is that agenda has an end aimed at limited the liberties of all Americans in the name of security. That just scares me.

Invitation to July 2007 bar examinees

I know a bunch of you are going to find your way to this blog via google or whatever. I wonder, what did you think about the bar exam? Did you find it overdifficult? Did it seem easy? Somewhere in between? What were you thinking during the various sections? Did you cram during lunch?

I enjoy hearing what other people think. I look forward to hearing from all of you.

Bar Exam

The Binjo Ditch has completed the July 2007 Texas Bar Exam.

I'd like to say I kicked the Bar's tail, but that's not entirely the case. There were parts of the exam where I felt very comfortable with the answers I was giving. However, there were parts where I'd read a fact pattern several times and still not have any of the words stick in my head.

The analogy of the bar with a marathon seems to be quite appropriate. After about 30 minutes on the multistate, you stop worrying about what the rule of law says, and instead look to see which answer seems most plausible. On many of the questions, you look at the answer choices and say "none of those are the right answer," and you're right. Then there are questions so obvious you look at it and think you must have gotten it wrong because it couldn't be that easy. Finally, there are questions that you look at and say "choice A is so obviously wrong. It doesn't even belong in the answer choices. Why is it there? Is this a trick question? Is that really the right answer? (expletive deleted)!"

The essay was not much different. I got done answering the morning session, looked at my first essay answer, couldn't figure out what the topic was, decided I had the best answer I could think of, finished up, then in the afternoon had two questions on the topic that I thought I'd answered with my first essay in the morning. That's not a good feeling.

Fortunately, you can miss an entire essay and still get enough points to pass the bar. Additionally, I didn't feel like I lost it. I did my best; I prepared the best I could, and that's about it. I think I did ok; but we won't know until November.

Anticipation...

Choosing my religion

I was raised Methodist. My parents were Methodist, and we went to a Methodist church every Sunday. I knew that we were Methodists, because that is where we went, and I knew that others weren't Methodist, because they went elsewhere.

As a child, I believed that everyone worshiped their own way - hence the numerous churches. I don't know if my parents told me or if I just assumed that people made their choices and that was all right with God because he listened to us all as we were all his children, but that's what I grew up believing. I don't know that I ever thought that those whose faith differed from mine were "wrong;" I just thought their faith was different.

Perhaps that was one of the intangible benefits of growing up Methodist - that you are encouraged (or at least not discouraged) from questioning faith, or asking about how things come to be. In my experiences since I left the nest, I have encountered scores of people of different faiths. Some of them believe similarly to me, others believe that the only way to worship God is to do so "their" way (i.e. they are right and I am wrong). It's interesting to me to be a part of an adversarial conversation where I don't believe the other to be "wrong" while they believe me to be.

I don't think I'm better than those who believe differently than I. I don't think they are better for thinking I'm wrong. After all these years, the one thing I am most convinced of is that God encourages us to find our own faith, and to adopt that manner of belief that best supports them.

Friday Night Lights

But not the football kind.

We're going late again tonight, to make sure that we are OK as far as this stuff goes. We're going to go over Criminal Procedure tonight, I believe (though it might be civil - I have to check the books again).

We have four days until the bar. I think everyone in the family is looking forward to coming out of this tunnel, though it would be nice to have something other than just light at the end of it. But we'll worry about that after next Thursday.

Wish us luck - we're almost there!

Can't make these things up

This statement left me speechless. I wouldn't even know how to respond to it, it seems so... well, read for yourself:

Tom Delay: "I contend [abortion] affects you in immigration... If we had those 40 million children that were killed over the last 30 years, we wouldn't need the illegal immigrants to fill the jobs that they are doing today. Think about it."

Wednesday is Haiku Day

One Week to study
Before the big test of tests
Then sleep all week long.

Delays

I should be studying right now. I probably should be looking up Guardianships, since I didn't get to that last night.

Instead, I have spent the better part of the last 90 minutes dealing with an Apple that came home from daycare this evening with headlice.

Why is there a bullet in my leg?

Click here for Veterans' discussions about Iraq.

Not Insomnia, Yet

It's Saturday night.

I spent the morning trying to learn Texas Real Property, which, to paraphrase my Evidence professor, is like trying to nail Jell-O to the wall.

Then I take the kids to the Y with the wife after the Apple takes a nap. We get done there, buy some dinner (Chinese at Empress Chinese on Long Point - try it, good stuff, good price), get home and eat with the family, all the while trying to not yell at my children because - and follow me closely here - they were acting like children.

After dinner, I had parenting I could have done. I had laundry I could have done. I had dishes I could have done. Most importantly, I had studying I SHOULD have done. Did I do any of that? No. I went to my room, turned on Scrubs, and proceeded to watch the rest of Season 3 on DVD. The whole time I was watching it, I knew I should be getting up, but I couldn't.

I froze.

I didn't leave the room until about 20 minutes ago to see if the Tooth Fairy had left a Susan B. Anthony dollar for the Princess, who lost her first tooth today, and to get myself some water.

I'm rather upset with myself right now. I can justify absentee parenting when I'm studying, and I can justify not studying when I'm parenting. But I did neither. I sat in a bed, in a room, while my wife took care of everything else. She doesn't deserve that. I need to make use of the time she's giving me to study, so that I can get my 675. Scrubs won't help that.

The funny thing is, I couldn't even really enjoy the show, because I knew I was wasting time, and that was 4 hours of studying I'm not going to get back. I promised myself yesterday I was going to take it light today, but I should have done more than just 4 hours of Real Property essays.

But, it's too late to undo that now. Tomorrow, back to the grind; estates and guardianships, Con Law, and Crim Pro, and Texas Civil Procedure. Wish us luck.

Insomnia

It's after midnight. I started the day at 6, getting up with my wife, getting the kids dressed, in their swimming suits, teeth brushed, hair combed, and out the door to daycare. Then I came back home, kissed my wife goodbye, hopped in the shower, got myself clean and shaved, complete with razor burn, dressed and out the door.

Got to school at 9. Did 40 questions - 20 Tort, 20 Contracts - we got 33 out of 40 right, though I missed about 3 more because they were questions my study partner knew that I didn't. Then we ate lunch and my study partner, Aaron, another friend, Debra, and I started up on Business Associations. I know jack about Corporations, other than you have to give 3 days notice for an organizational meeting after you form the corporation by filing with the Secretary of State. I know a bit more about agency and partnership; I just hope it's enough for the Bar. After 4 hours of studying that, we took a break so Aaron and Debra could have some Starbuck's, while I sort of stared into space for a bit, to let the previous several hours of essays and outlining soak in. Then it was back to school, where Aaron and I got to study Texas Criminal Procedure and Evidence by going over last Spring's MPT (Multistate Practice Exam). We finished up around 8, at which time I got back in my car and drove home, where the wife had gotten the children showered (they had splash day at daycare, so they really needed a bath), but none of them were in bed yet, because they have this thing where if one of them is still awake, then the other two must also still be awake, and they can't fall asleep until the other two are asleep. So I help the wife get the kids' teeth brushed and shuffle everyone off to bed.

Now I go downstairs to check my e-mail and just kind of enjoy the silence (and eat dinner - bbq = good). The wife comes down with me, which I'm thankful for, because I needed some non-study company (anyone who has ever been married and studied for the bar knows what I mean). Then we went back upstairs to watch my birthday present (Scrubs, season 3). We watched a couple episodes then tried to go to sleep. A short time later, it's midnight and I'm still wide awake thinking about all the stuff I still have to learn to take the bar and what we need to go over tomorrow and then what we're going to cover on Sunday when we do a full day again instead of the abbreviated day we're going to take tomorrow.

It's not that I don't think I can do this; in fact it's the opposite - I know I can do it if I just work a little harder. It's just a question of getting myself to focus enough to do that little bit harder. It also means that I have to ask my family to be that little bit more patient with this for that little bit longer, which makes it more difficult on everyone involved. Then I top everything off by being up at midnight thinking about all the things I have to worry about and the thing my wife worries about and the things that worry and stress my children and, well, you get the idea.

I've never encountered anything as mentally taxing as the Bar. But I've never felt like I was more ready to do what it takes to ensure that I pass something as I am with the Bar.

I just need to find a way to control my stress and my temper and focus on getting the knowledge down. And getting myself some sleep.

Harry...

From Gramma's blog, I found out that I'm:


Which HP Kid Are You?

Random Trivia

Moose are very nearsighted.

If only...

United States intelligence indicates that Al Qaeda is has rebuilt to an operating capability it has not had since just before the 9-11 attacks. The intelligence report says that Al Qaeda has been gathering strength along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

It's tragic. If only there was some way we could have had more forces available to fight this war on terror. If only we could take several hundred thousand soldiers from one nation and use them to fight a war declared by our Commander-in-Chief.

But, we fight with the army we have, not the army we wish we had, to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld. Of course, that seems somehow less effective a defense when the army we had was taken away from our total strength to fight in a war that needn't be fought at the time. A war that now has the administration referring to every act of insurrection against our "liberating" forces as Al Qaeda - which, incidentally, is the organization now as strong as it was in 2001, according to our own Department of Defense.

Fortunately, Al Qaeda's days are numbered. We were told two years ago that the insurrection was in its last throes, so they should be throwing in the towel, soon. We just have to be patient, and not set any arbitrary dates for defeat. Then we can finish what we started in Afghanistan, and then Osama Bin Laden better watch out!

Tag

I was tagged. I was actually tagged a couple weeks ago by Bookworm, but forgot due to my copious studying. I then had my mild panic attack the other day and got tagged again by Jae. Since I'm trying to stave off going back to study some more (8 hours of going over a multiple choice test, woohoo!), I figured I'd take a moment to answer:

The rules are simple…Each player lists 8 facts/habits about themselves. The rules of the game are posted at the beginning before those facts/habits are listed. At the end of the post, the player then tags 8 people and posts their names, then goes to their blogs and leaves them a comment, letting them know that they have been tagged and asking them to read your blog.

So, here goes:

1. Thing - My wife and I met in 1987 on my third day in the Mann Jr. High Advanced Studies Program - ASP. She was in 9th grade; I in 7th, and our teacher, Mr. Shelton, assigned us as writing partners. 14 years later, we got married - my wife and I, not Mr. Shelton and me.

2. Thing - I drink Coca-Cola. A lot. Much more than I should. At least once a year I try to quit, and succeed for a day, maybe two. I think the most I have gone in the last 10 years was a week. I also refuse to drink Pepsi. If I'm at a restaurant that serves Pepsi, I will have root beer.

3. Thing - I am a veteran. I received a medal for my service during Operation Allied Force. This is significant to me, because I feel like that's where I really did serve my country.

4. Habit - I'm a nail-biter. I have been my whole life. It's chronic, and gets worse when I'm stressed, which is probably why I have no nails now.


5. Habit - I'm superstitious when it comes to sports. When I played softball/baseball, I wouldn't walk on the chalk in the basepaths. When I play tennis, if I have a very strong serve, I will repeat everything I did for that serve, including position, until I don't serve well (often, the next serve - I'm not a good tennis player). When I bowl, if I get a mark, I won't look at the scoreboard until I don't have a mark. If I get a strike, I will also return to my previous seat and sit in the exact same position and not move until my next turn - if I get another strike, then I will repeat that, until such time as I don't get a strike.

6. Thing - I speak Korean "fluently." I put the fluently in quotes, because even when I was "fluent" in Korean, I had difficulty carrying on conversations that went beyond normal chit-chat. I still believe that I could pick it back up pretty quickly if I really wanted to, being that it's the vocabulary I've lost, not the rules of grammar.

7. Thing - My birthday has something in common with a convenience store chain.

8. Habit - Before taking a test, I drink a bottle of orange juice. When I was in Physical Science in 9th grade, we were studying the scientific theory, and the example in the book used orange juice, and the results of the testing showed that people who drink OJ on the day of a test scored 2 to 3 points higher than those who didn't. Now it's become a superstition.

Now I'm off to study some more. I've not included the links of those I'm going to tag, and I won't tag 8, but, for those of you who are interested, go ahead.

My taggees are: Mom, Cassie, Kir, Nuje, Just Wondering, and RHM (because I know you aren't doing anything important right now - j/k)

Stress

I'm starting to stress a little. We did the PMBR simulated MBE today, and I got 100 right. When I took the BarBri simulated MBE 2 weeks ago, I got 101 - I'm going backwards when I should be improving.

Perhaps the exam was more difficult, but still, I think I should be doing better considering the amount of review I've done...

I'm stressed again.

Fair and Balanced

I was watching some political talking heads program on Fox this morning. The show itself was all right, I didn't it really slanted right as far as many think, except for one part. One guy, in discussing the commutation of the Libby sentence, in the same breath, connected it with the terrorist attacks in London and suggested a justification for the warrantless wiretaps, inviting a debate.

I have a piece to say on that issue, being, 1. the Fourth Amendment still exists, 2. there is a legitimate means for the Executive to obtain warrants with little to no probable cause (indeed the FISA courts are, by law, not allowed to gauge the substance of the FISA warrant applications, rather can only check to see if there are no procedural irregularities), and 3. the President has yet to show that using FISA, which allows for warrants AFTER THE FACT is unduly burdensome to such a point that it would justify violating the Supreme Law of the Land, other than to say "trust us."

I'm sorry, but the President, has burned through all his trust; there needs to be some substance to support it. Referring to all acts of insurgency as "Al Qaeda" without any evidence connecting them to Al Qaeda is not the way to do it. The attacks in London are evidence that wiretapping can be used to limit potential threats, but it does not suggest that I need to forfeit my right to be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion. And to the guy on Fox (I don't check any of their names), if you are so sold on winning the war on terror, enlist. Do your part. Don't tell me what rights I need to give up or defend against having stripped from me.

Sorry, I'm tired and grumpy.

Wills

As I study more, I need more sleep.

We've been reviewing wills today, though we have yet to do any essays for Wills.

In Texas, holographic wills are recognized under certain conditions. Additionally nuncupative wills are recognized for limited purposes, but not for real property. For Real Property, a person may have a proxy signature, though, if the circumstances allow it.

Ratatouille

I took a break from studying today after doing 50 Torts questions (35/50, so I'm right on pace). We decided to take in a movie, so the wife and I took the kids to see Ratatouille. The Boy and the princess have both been to movies before, so I more or less knew what to expect from them - The Boy, being 8, knows how to sit through a movie, while the Princess does well for a while but gets a little antsy near the 2/3 mark (though not today, she was very good). But the Apple had never been before, so I was a little concerned about how well he'd do.

As luck would have it, the movie was nearly sold out, and the only place we could find four seats together were in the third row from the front (except for the front row, which is not happening). This did indeed turn out to be a good thing, because there, the screen is so big, especially to little kid eyes, that the Apple was completely mesmerized. Throw in a tub of popcorn the size of his torso and costing about a quarter of the Gross National Product of Belize, and you have a happy kid.

The movie was very good. I will stop short of calling it great, because while I was thoroughly entertained and the story progressed well (it's evidence that deliberate pacing is not completely dead in Hollywood), there were a couple things that seemed less... "likely." Still, it was the first movie I've seen this year that I thought was worth paying admission for, and the kids really liked it - the Princess's favorite part was the cartoon before the feature, which was quite funny as well. The Apple loved "the movie!" And The Boy liked when the people saw the rats.

Very Good, not Superb, but right up there with Pixar's other offerings. 8/10

Bar Reviewing, Part III

We are doing Torts questions today. After one of the answers, the explanation for why that was the right answer and the others were wrong came up on the screen. One of the wrong answers mentioned Palsgraf. I remember reading Palsgraf in law school, but I didn't remember the case at all. Go figure - I forgot a case I read 3 years ago.

BTW, Palsgraf deals with the limits of negligence. But I'm studying so I won't go into any more detail.

Saturday Morning

I woke up to The Boy's alarm at 6. He set the snooze, twice, so I got to hear the alarm three times total. Yay.

The princess came in to show us that she got all dressed and ready and aren't we proud of her? Of course, but we'd be even more proud if she did this on school days vice Saturday.

The Apple comes in next telling me I need to get up (to which the wife laughs quietly). He needs to "munch some popcorn! Come on, daddy!" He then proceeds to grab me a shirt and shorts so I can go downstairs with him.

I get downstairs, make breakfast for the apple while the other two kids are taking turns on the DS. It's almost seven now. If it were a weekday, we'd be on schedule for daycare departure, which for whatever reason is a struggle to do on weekdays.

Then I had to clean up the cat poo on the landing, and change the litter box. So much fun. Next were the dishes, which I washed with much aplomb, including the coffee pot, so that I could make coffee for my dear spouse who slept in. She deserves it, inasmuch as I'm going to be studying for the bar yet again.

Bar study is not as much fun as it sounds. I'll go over the test after the exam.

Time to get back to work.

Crim Law Today

50 questions on Crim Law - I'm shooting for 35 right. Cross your fingers - here we go!

Stress

Why did I sign up to take the bar?

Frustrating day.

Bar Reviewing, Part II

I'm frustrated.

We went through some K questions earlier - We hit about 60%, but I think we learned a bit from what we missed.

Then we started going over Secured Transactions and Commercial Paper and UCC.

I got the Secured Transactions questions right, did OK on the UCC, but completely missed the answers for commercial paper, which is the class I actually took. I cannot for the life of me remember covering indorser's ks at all. I did do all right with the presentment warranty, though I struggled with the articulation (I hope that will come with practice).

One day half done. 19 to go.

On Commuting Scooter Libby's Prison Sentence

I've gone to several blogs over the past several days that have addressed President Bush's handling of the Scooter Libby sentence. What I've noticed, mostly from anonymous commentators, because the anonymous usually are the loudest and most ignorant, wishing to spew bile without anyone knowing who they are, is that there are a couple basic arguments that are going through the system in defense of the President.

First - "The President has absolute power to grant pardons." Yes. That is true. Under Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, the President "shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." However, Libby was not pardoned. His prison sentence was commuted. To clarify that he was not pardoned, the president himself has said that he has not ruled out pardoning Libby at a later time. This means, necessarily, that President Bush did not use his Pardoning power. Perhaps is granted a reprieve, but that seems to be more a matter of semantics, and there seems to still be a potentially legitimate question as to the Constitutionality of the President's act, though most people also seem to agree that it is within his power.

Second - "Clinton granted 450 pardons" aka the Clinton did it too defense. I feel it would be remiss to let this defense go without noting that this administration rode into Washington under the premise that it would "restore honor to the White House," that Bush would be a different President, a better President, than Clinton was. It boggles my mind how on the one hand, the President can express a desire to be better than his predecessor while on the other, his supporters insist that people should not criticize his actions because "Clinton did it, too." It rings hollow, and does not address the fact that President Bush is a poor President.

Third - "Congress's approval ratings are worse than the President's. They should just shut up." This is apparently true, according to recent polls. But what it fails to mention is that Congress' approval ratings are as low as they are because, in the minds of many Americans, Congress has not done enough to pull in the reins on President Bush, and they view this Congress as weak in the face of the President. This isn't a dislike of the "Democrat Congress," it's a dislike of the "Do nothing to stop an unpopular President and an unpopular war-stonewalling Congress." Ultimately, the digust goes back to the President.

Perhaps the act of commuting Libby's sentence would not be so difficult to swallow on the premise of the President's explanation if he had used his authority and discretion a little more prior to now. According to the internet research I've done (admittedly cursory), while he was Governor of Texas, President Bush pardoned 19 people, six of whom proved their innocence, something Libby didn't do. He has pardoned 113 as president, as of March 11 2007. All the while, the president has expressed as his rationale the importance of the rule of law and the decisions reached by the people. That is what makes the pre-incarceration sentencing of Libby all the more bizarre and seemingly hypocritical, and reeks of cronyism.

President Bush isn't the first president to be unpopular. He's also not the first president to engage in apparent (or outright) cronyism. That said, it doesn't make it right, and it doesn't do anything but preserve a few popularity points from his base. But, when you're near the bottom, you do what you must to keep from hitting it, regardless of how it looks.

Independence Day, 2007

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariable the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. -Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

Random Trivia

More shoplifters are arrested on Wednesdays in January than any other time of the year.

"I respect the jury's verdict"

That's what the Decider said. Then he said, "But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby's sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison."

Let's rephrase that. What the President said, in essence, is "While I know that the Jury found the defendant guilty, I don't think he should go to prison, because he's my VP's former aide. But, since I'm going to get too much backlash if I pardon him, I'm just going to see to it that he doesn't go to jail. In other words, he's not going to be fully punished for breaking the law."

So, it's easy to see that he respects the jury's decision, so much so that he's going to reverse part their decision. Now, he's not getting off scot-free. He does still have probation, and a $250,000 fine. And let's not forget the damage to his reputation, and professional work in the legal community (why not keep him off the bar altogether?) But, the meat of the punishment is the prison sentence, and to suggest otherwise is nothing short of blowing smoke. What this act by the President does, in essence, is show that he feels his administration is not subject to the checks and balances provided for by the Constitution, and that the People have no say in how his office is governed. "I respect their decision. I considered their decision. They are wrong. Only I know the right punishment." The Decider, indeed. By the people, for the people be damned, this is his show, and he wants to make sure EVERYONE knows it. I for one am disgusted at this. Shame on President Bush.

CROSS POST: Check out Just Wondering's post on Vim and Vinegar - she has another view on this, and is equally unhappy with the result.