The Binjo Ditch Rules

I've been pretty fortunate with my blog so far. I haven't had to deal with trolls, and the number of spams I get has been rather low. However, I know that there are folks out there who enjoy spamming and trolling, and I know people hard line on issues. I do it myself. I firmly believe we need to remove Kim Chong Il from power in Korea. I am unwavering on that.

There are other things I'm not so steadfast about, and I enjoy hearing all sides of an argument. As such, I have decided to start my version of "the rules," with which I expect my visitors to comply.

1. Speak your opinion. This is a blog. I post because I want to hear what you think. I often find it easier if I take a position on an issue than if I try to write from a neutral spot. That's my writing style. If you agree, great. Tell me what you think. If you don't agree with what I write, great. Let me know what it is you disagree about. I can't develop a well-formed opinion if I don't hear all angles.

2. Consider, for a moment, that you might be wrong. I do this constantly, because I fear that by not doing so, I have admitted defeat. I was given a mind. I get to think, to reason. Part of reasoning is realizing someone else has a valid point.

3. Be civil. This should be a no-brainer. Every society and every major religion throughout recorded history has some version of the Golden Rule. The relative anonymity the Web provides should not shield someone from their obligation to remain civil. I have no tolerance for trolls. I have no patience when it comes to people trying to start a flame war. Spirited debate is a good thing; angry retorts aren't.

4. Have fun. I am not a pundit; I have no agenda (save my stance on North Korea). I am not a wordsmith. I claim little more than to be a diversion to the rest of the day. I want to bring topics that people can think about, laugh about, and talk about.

5. Tell your friends. This is not a hard and fast rule, and there's an asterisk to it. I don't advertise. I don't solicit hits. I enjoy hearing from all people, and welcome everyone. So, if you like what you read, tell someone else. Maybe he or she will like it, too.

Those Darn Activists!

They're at it again. I can't stand those judges, always getting in the way of Congress; legislating from the bench. Tom DeLay is right. We need to keep them from intervening in the realm of Congress.

My beef this time? The Court is declaring what isn't free speech absent Congressional clarification.
According to the link, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (those darn West Coast folks) handed down a decision that a prisoner who offers to kill a judge in exchange for money has no protection under the First Amendment.

Specifically, Judge Carlos Bea found that a prisoner's statement "that he wanted to target a judge and 'string the motherf...er up and cut her throat, his throat, and make it like a copycat so that people would do the same thing,' combined with an offer to provide weapons and money reward, can reasonably be interpreted as a serious expression of intent to harm."

Now perhaps I'm naive, but I didn't realize there were caveats to free speech. Next thing you know, people who exoercise their liberties to use cars that aren't being used by others will have to spend time in prison.

I seem to remember Congress threatening to get rid of the 9th Court of Appeals at one point if they didn't straighten up and fly right. This is authorized under the Constitution, Article III. I think it's time we did that. Behavior such as this, undermining Congressional Authority is reprehensible and this would send a message to everyone.

(No topic)

I'm tired. I'm stressed. I have insomnia.

So of course, I sit here pondering, and will share with you, my adoring fans, a quick insight into the inner workings of my mind.





I don't have any inner workings of my mind.

Wednesday is Haiku day!

Mister Rogers was
a little creepy if you
ask me, those sweaters!

Feel free to join in

Leaving children behind

In recent national news, Connecticut is the first state to formally challenge the No Child Left Behind Act that President Bush signed into law in 2002. The idea behind the act is to increase teacher and school accountability for education and encourage programs that provide a solid base of education for all children.

I don't like the No Child Left Behind Act. I think it's the Federal Government using Federal Funds to compel the states to do its bidding; something frowned upon as I understand South Dakota v. Dole (483 U.S. 203). The Act also diverts federal funding that otherwise would go to support the No Child Left Behind Act and funds that the Schools had received prior to its enactment from the schools to form "Charter schools," which appear to be federally funded private schools, and thus don't have to meet the same criteria that public schools must meet.

I'll be paying close attention to the developments here.

Don't let them win!

Heather has her part in starting a phenomenon, and I feel it my duty to promote it. The name of the game is "If _____, then the terrorists win." It's that simple. Take the mundane hypothetical, and answer it with "then the terrorists win."

If I chew any more gum, then the terrorists win.
If my son fills his diaper one more time, then the terrorists win.
If the the square of the hypotenuse of a triangle is equal to the sum of the squares of its two other sides, then the terrorists win.

Catchphraseology should be a required poli sci course.

Grow up

I'm currently a second year law student. I'm a father of three with a wife who works full time. Prior to starting law school, I served 8 years in the Air Force where I learned a foreign language, fought in a war, helped save countless lives, and trained over 50 successors. During that time, I also finished my undergraduate degree, one that I had all but abandoned by quitting school to work full time prior to enlisting. In other words, I worked to be where I am, and I still have a long way to go to get to where I want to be.

This semester, I'm taking a Saturday class, Consumer Transactions. It's actually more interesting than I'd first imagined a class about DTPA to be. During the break, I overheard another student, a 20-something, talking about how it doesn't matter what he's doing, or how well he does, because the school means nothing to him, and the education is "just another thing." This statement brings me to the point of this post.

If you can't give a reason for being in law school, any reason, then you need to quit. You need to go and work for a living and find out what it is you want. Otherwise you're wasting your time, your classmates' time, your professor's time, and everyone who has supported you during your education, not to mention over $60,000 of your own money. If you've not workedyet, and don't know what it is you're missing, and don't appreciate what you're getting, then go and learn. Earn some money, learn about yourself.

And if you're one of those career students, who has never had a job that lasted longer than a summer, you're either in school because you're privileged and just checking all the boxes until you move into the family business or you're a coward. Yes. A coward. It's time to be responsible. Get a freaking job. Earn your keep. Be the adult you claim to be. If you haven't been able to do that through high school or college, then grad school won't give it to you either. Quit bitching about what's wrong with the world and be a part of the world. Better yet, to help you grow up, there's this thing called the military. They have an excellent program that pays you to grow up. You'll learn responsibility. You'll learn to depend on yourself as well as others. And more importantly in this day and age, you'll learn about loss, about sacrifice, about what it means to be a part of something more than just yourself.
And perhaps, after that time is done, you'll understand a little more why going to law school matters. If you are unwilling to do that, then shut the hell up and quit wasting my time.

Say it Ain't So, Dick!

Don't tell me that this is the best justification you can come up with for continuing this war!

"Every man and woman who fights and sacrifices in this war is serving a just and noble cause. This nation will always be grateful to them and we will honor their sacrifice by completing our mission," Cheney said during a speech in Springfield, Mo., to the 73rd national convention of the Military Order of the Purple Heart.

That's right. I don't care how many people have to die, we're going to honor those who have given our lives by finishing this war. That has to be one of the stupidest justifications for continuing a war I've ever heard.

Joe Gandelman at The Moderate Voice sums it up as follows:

Our view (and TMV has supported the war): if this is the new argument that'll be used to sell the war, it's doomed to failure. Officials didn't argue in the World War I, World War II, Korea or even Vietnam that the wars needed to be fought to victory to honor sacrifices soldiers already made in those wars. Leaders relentlessly hammered away at the larger missions. Sometimes these arguments failed (as in the case of Vietnam). But arguing that because young Americans have died in Iraq already the U.S. needs to stay there and face increased casualties will not — to be blunt — sell. It could actually backfire. (There are much stronger and more convincing arguments proponents of completing the Iraq mission can make).

I have to agree with this sentiment. This sounds like gambler logic to me:
I know I lost $5000 at the blackjack table, but I'm going to keep on betting until I break even. Not good policy.

*** UPDATE ***

President Bush on vacation in Idaho told a VFW in Idaho on Monday that if we pull out of Iraq now, we will be dishonoring the memory of all Americans who fought and died in the pursuit of freedom.

Think about that for a minute. If we withdraw from a nation we invaded for the express purpose of deposing a leader who had chemical and nuclear weapons that he didn't have despite the fact that he said he didn't have them, then we dishonor ALL AMERICANS who fought and died.

Those who stormed the beaches in Normandy are dishonored. The Marines who battled in Iwo Jima. The 101st at Bastogne. Eddie Rickenbacher. Alvin York. The 54th Massachussetts. Robert E. Lee. Ulysses S. Grant. Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys. The Men at Fort McHenry. Chesty Puller. John Levitow. The list goes on and on. We would dishonor them.

I firmly believe we need to see our way through this. Regardless of how we got to where we are, we are in a position where we must press on to the end of the tunnel. But I think these recent statements by our CINC and Vice President are callous and wrong. I don't believe we should evoke the memory of men who responded to overt agression when we were the aggressors. That is a disservice to our forefathers and the men and women who wear the uniform today.

Church and State

"Asking a biblical scholar if the Bible should be taught is like asking a chef if he likes to cook. I think students are well served to have familiarity with the Bible, and I think it's important to our cultural literacy. I also wish students got more exposure to the diversity of religions - in America and around the world. Now, more than ever, we need that."
Doctor Mark Chancey, biblical studies professor at Southern Methodist University's stance on Bible literacy courses in public schools.

Whether the Bible should be taught mightn't be the inflammatory issue it can be viewed to be. At the simplistic, it's simply an historical text, full of accounts, history, legend, and life lessons. As far as historical accuracy goes, it's a little off. Jericho didn't fall at the time listed in the Bible, but my history books have all been updated due to inaccuracies in the past. Why carp? It's not textually factual. Well, that's a matter of interpretation, don't you think? Is the Garden of Eden really being blocked by a flaming sword? Or is that flowery license to indicate that we're going to have to toil for our lives? Did Elijah really get swept to heaven in a flaming chariot? Did Jesus really miraculously get 5 loaves and 2 fishes to feed 5,000, or is it more like Stone Soup, where people started sharing what they had been hoarding? Who knows? As far as books go in Western Civilization, the Bible has had more impact than any other. Look at other significant documents used in schools, the Magna Carta, the Mayflower Compact, Homer's Odyssey (also a history book) - They are all documents that shaped western culture, to include American culture, over the last umpteen years. As far as that goes, logic would dictate that it's an important document as well, and thus should be included in curriculum.

The problem, as I see it, doesn't come from using the Bible as an historical document. that would be easily justifiable. The problem stems from the fact that it's not considered historical to contemporaries, rather, it's considered religious, something that the Odyssey is not. That's the difference. Were it possible in this country to include the Bible as a text, it would probably be OK. However, you can't bring the Bible into classrooms without the appearance or actuality of people preaching one religion over another. You bring the problem of different interpretation. You bring the problem of alienating non-Christian children. Like it or not, in this country, incorporating the Bible in school presents the image of favoritism of one religion over others. Our country has more or less adopted the doctrine of separation between Church and State. You can argue until you're blue in the face whether that should or should not be based on the writings of the founding fathers; I don't care. The fact remains that that is how we have run things.

Since that is the case, the possible solutions, as I see it are:
Teach the Bible in an elective class
Don't teach the Bible at all
Teach a world religion class that gives equal face time to (at least) the major religions, including, but not limited to Christianity, Judiasm, Muslim, Buddhism, Confuscianism, and Hinduism

I still think religion is a personal thing, and that it's ultimately up to the family to choose how and to what extent a child should be exposed to it. Religion isn't like Vitamin D, where you need to have the government provide milk at school to ensure there's enough. As such, I believe that it behooves us in this society at this time to refrain from providing Biblical studies in public schools.

For those contemplating a career in law:

I give you a glimpse of my reading for the day*:
Sec. 61. Gross Income Defined.
a. general definition. - Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items:
1. Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items;
2. Gross income derived from business;
3. Gains derived from dealings in property;
4. Interest;
5. Rents;
6. Royalties;
7. Dividends;
8. Alimony and separate maintenance payments;
9. Annuities;
10. Income from life insurance and endowment contracts;
11. Pensions;
12. Income from discharge of indebtedness;
13. Distributive share of partnership gross income;
14. Income in respect of a decedent; and
15. Income from an interest in an estate or trust.

That's right. Income means income. Woohoo! I'm so glad I came to law school to learn that!

* The following supplied by Selected Federal Taxation, Statutes and Regulations, Selected and Edited by Daniel J. Lathrope, 2006 Edition.

Nothing but a waste of time

However, if you have the time to waste, I recommend checking out the Dialectizer. This wonderful site comes from Thomas by way of Bookworm, and is a great little diversion from the ordinary. Simply enter your blog name (or mine) and you can read your blog in a variety of dialects, including Swedish Chef and Redneck. Enjoy!

Wednesday - haiku day

Houtson is too hot
Tar bubbles just like Melmac
But there is no ALF.

Time won't let me

Leap year happens every fourth year, except on the century, where it happens every fourth century (there was no leap year in 1900, but there was one in 2000). This occurs because the earth doesn't revolve around in 24 hours. It actually takes 23 Hours, 56 minutes and 9.4 seconds, give or take. This is a result of the Sumerians(?) who developed the 24 hour system not being able to use the atomic clock to accurately gauge how long it really took, presumably because the battery was dead. At any rate, they had to guess. And like most men, when they guessed, they weren't quite right. However, to their credit, they came remarkably close - even with modern conveniences, my wife can't get to a 9 a.m. appointment before noon (j/k).

Anyway, what I want to know is, since a unit of time is arbitrarily assigned (a second doesn't have to last the amount of time a current second lasts), why can't we adjust the gauge of time so that 24 hours is a day, as opposed to a day plus a little bit?

Famous Last Words

"It's beautiful over there." - Thomas Edison
"Monsieur, I beg your pardon." - Marie Antoinette (as she stepped on the executioner's foot on accident)
"I am not the least afraid to die." - Charles Darwin
"John Adams still lives." - Thomas Jefferson (unaware that Adams had died earlier that morning, July 4, 1826)
"I am about to, or I am going to die: either expression is correct." - Dominique Bouhours (grammarian)
"I'll be in hell before you've finished breakfast boys, let 'er rip." - Black Jack Ketchum
"Turn up the lights, I don't want to go home in the dark." - O. Henry
"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something." - Pancho Villa
"I knew it. I knew it. Born in a hotel room and, goddam it, died in a hotel room." - Eugene O'Neill
"I want that fifty bucks you owe me, and I want it now." Carl "Alfalfa" Switzer

Oh, that Congressman DeLay

He's at it again, attacking judicial activism at his Justice Sunday II brunch. The purpose of Justice Sunday, established by theFamily Research Council, is "to educate voters on how the courts affect the every day lives of Americans." at the speech, Congressman DeLay reminds people that "All wisdom does not reside in nine persons in black robes. The Constitution is clear on the point that the power to make laws is vested on Congress."
And, he's right. Article I vests the power to write laws on Congress, and even to execute laws over the President's Veto. However, he isn't complete with what he says. You see, Article VI stipulates that the Constitution and ALL LAWS ENACTED PURSUANT TO IT, and all treaties are the Supreme Law of the Land, and are bound to it. It's the Judiciary's role to determine whether a law is Constitutional, not Congress. Think about it if Congress had that authority. "We're passing this law, and it's constitutional. Trust us, we're looking out for you." Yet, this scenario in a slightly different form was suggested by another participant at the speech, Bill Donohue, "unless a judicial vote in unanimous, you cannot overturn a law created by Congress." It's little surprise that the Legislative was the branch that most concerned the founding fathers (see Federalist no. 48).
Perhaps the most disturbing statement in this was provided by Mike Miller, who also attended: "Activist judges we're trying to do what we can to stop that activity. Our laws are based on the Ten Commandments."
Call me crazy, but I thought our laws were based on the Constitution...?

You may not believe this, but

I don't like North Korea that much. I don't trust their leader, and I don't think we should coddle them any more. However, I'm a big fan of reading their propaganda. Imagine my joy, then, when I read the following on Yahoo: Man catalogues North Korea's over-the-top rhetoric. Apparently, I'm not the only one who enjoys reading about our kingpin of evil leader, President Bush. This man used his skills to create a database of KCNA archives. This is great, and something that should have been done much sooner, though, not by me - I have no computer skills. Anyway, you can find the link here, and probably on my links site on the column to your right pretty soon. Enjoy, you sycophantic stooge!

Perspective

When I was in Korea, I had a conversation with a ROK officer. We were discussing the economy of the nation, which was suffering at the time. This was when the country went over its head in debt and required IMF help to get out of trouble, and the won rate went from 800w = $1 to 2400w = $1 in a couple weeks. Anyway, I was having trouble saying economy, and needed his help to get the word, so I asked him what the Korean word for economy was. He told me "Economy means kyungjae." That threw me for a loop, inasmuch as from my perspective kyungjae meant economy. We were talking about the same thing but it looked completely different. So, my suggestion for today is that the next time you talk about something, you think about whether you are talking about economy meaning kyungjae or vice-versa.

Another black eye for the U.S.O.C.

They're at it again. This time, however, it has nothing to do with venues, events, or doping athletes. Nope, this time, it's all in a name. Make it one word, rather. Olympics. According to this article, the U.S.O.C. is threatening to sue the organizers of the Ferret Olympics if they don't change their name. The ferret olympics is an event held in Oregon, whose purpose is to raise money for ferret shelters.
The basis for the suit in unlawful use of a trademark. The U.S.O.C. says in the article that it has to ask approximately 50 organizations a year to stop using the word Olympics, and that if they didn't do so, the accumulated effect would hinder what they were trying to do. This makes sense. They have been so fastidious in keeping up their good name, it makes sense that the U.S.O.C. would want to keep good natured organazitions away from the association. Who needs those ferrets, anyway? Miserable, no good critters. All claws and teeth, and they'll sink those teeth into anything they can, either. I recall an event known as "ferret legging" is (mildly) popular in Britain. The idea of that is to take your pants, tuck them into your socks, drop a ferret or two in there, and then cinch up the waist so they can't get out. Whoever can go the longest without taking the ferrets out wins. Oddly, this wasn't in the ferret olympics. You can find more info on Ferret-legging here.

As far as the use of the word olympics goes, I'm actually a little surprised that it is trademarked. Duncan once trademarked the word Yo-yo, but lost a challenge because it was the "only" name for the toy. I know there are other names for multiple-event competitions, but olympics seems sufficiently generic to not warrant protection. Of Course, I would bet that the U.S.O.C. would have deeper pockets than the ferret-olympics organizers do, but I don't know that for sure. Anyway, you won't be able to see the ferret olympics anywhere pretty soon, and that's just sad.

Political Wars

I enlisted in the Air Force in November of 1995. I shipped off to Basic Training the week the government shutdown ended. While there, I received the training so many other airmen received. Once, while we were in the Bob Hope Theatre, someone asked our TIs what happened to us in Vietnam (why didn't we win?). The answer given to us was that there were too many limits placed upon the military by our government. We knew where the VC were, but we couldn't attack them for fear of upsetting the local population and turning them against us. We couldn't invade North Vietnam for a similar reason.
In a recent Newsweek article, Gary Berntsen, a career CIA officer, confirmed allegations given by John Kerry during the election campaign that we had Bin Laden at Tora Bora in December 2001 but he got away in part due to a decision to not send in conventional forces, and instead let local soldiers pursue. He has a book coming out called "Jawbreaker," which is awaiting approval from the CIA (this is standard for intelligence officers who write about events as this), where he criticizes Donald Rumsfeld and the defense department for not giving enough support. This sounds very similar to what we were told regarding Vietnam - politicians and politics getting in the way of the war's objectives.

I know a lot of people disdain the comparisons between Vietnam and Iraq, but there are similarities, especially concerning the approach to the situation. In Vietnam, the plan was to "Americanize" the war - U.S. troops would fight and defend. Then, there would be a transition period, where the Vietnamese soldiers would be trained and brought up to date on equipment and whatnot. Then, there would be a "Vietnamization" of the war, where the Americans would be taken out and replaced by well-trained Vietnamese troops who could take care of themselves and handle their own situation. Compare to Iraq, where foreign troops are occupying while the Iraqi soldiers receive training, after which the soldiers will be gradually replaced by indigenous troops who will be able to handle their own situation. Sometimes the comparisons are inevitable.

Worst Song survey

If you read the post directly below this, you'll find my plan for interrogation, which includes the repeat playing of MacArthur Park ad infinitum. This reminded me of a Dave Barry book I have called "Dave Barry's book of bad songs."
Basically, he took a survey of songs that people couldn't stand. They included Yummy Yummy Yummy, Wichita Lineman, and quite a few more. This leads me to my query for all of you. What are the worst songs you can think of?

Now, there are a few rules to the game. First, rap is out. I know there are some rap songs that have hit a popular vein, but for the most part, they are all indistinguishable from each other. Second, the songs must be at least five years old. Dave Barry used that as his gauge because that was the amount of time it took for a song to be truly loathed.

Now, my top five includes, of course, MacArthur Park, no explanation is necessary. It also would include:
He Hit Me (And it Felt Like a Kiss) - Could you imagine a song like this hitting the charts in this century?
Muskrat Love - The Captain and Tenille at their finest,
Red Red Wine (by UB40) - I can't think of anything more hideous than taking a Neil Diamond song, turning it into reggae as performed by a British band, and then having an unattractive woman in the video, and
I Saw Him Standing There, by Tiffany - This is one of the worst remakes ever made in the history of music. Whoever convinced her it was a hit should be struck repeatedly with paddleball paddles.

The floor is open.

If I were in charge of interrogation

The first thing I'd do is buy a copy of MacArthur Park and loop it ad infinitum over loudspeakers. Then, (and here's where I have to worry about unnecessary cruelty,) I would put the interrogatees on high school bleachers and not let them up until they told us everything they knew. I'm pretty sure my plan is foolproof.

Friday

There are many people in this country, and in this world, I'm sure, who base their life's philosophies on what a television or movie character says or lyrics in a rock song. That troubles me. I've never understood how someone can be so moved by, say, a Pepsi commercial that it would change their life. Real change comes from within. One should draw their philosophy from within, as well. There must be outside factors that help, of course - family, children, friends, etc. But at the end of the day, you need to find a philosophy for yourself.

Wednesday is Haiku Day!

At STCL
Orientation's today
bunch of lost 1Ls.

Audience Participation is always encouraged.

When people suffer under the yoke of tyranny

It is our job to give those people freedom, right? Isn't that one of the reasons we invaded Afghanistan (Come Mr. Taliban, turn over Bin Laden) and Iraq? After all, Saddam Hussein slaughtered tens of thousands of his countrymen. I think that was part of the reason we got involved in Yugoslavia, as well... let those Kosovar Albanians have land that belonged to someone else. (Oh, we'll still call ourselved Yugoslavian, but we're going to have our own language, culture, money, and we won't pay taxes.)

Given our interest in humanitarian efforts to provide freedom, it seems only logical that when we look at a leader who has run his country uncontested for over 10 years, following in his father's footsteps, kills dissidents (read: anyone who says something that doesn't follow the party line), would rather grow opium for black market trade than food for his starving nation, and openly challenges the United States with overt blackmail (We'll quit developing the nuclear weapons we said we'd quit developing 10 years ago for food and oil if you give us more food and oil), we would meet him with idle chatter and sabre-rattling?

North Korea's Kim Chong-Il has seen over 2 million of his countrymen die due to starvation, though nobody in the country is trying to stop him. We claim as a nation to be interested in providing freedom to oppressed peoples, yet we do nothing. It's not like the time wasn't ripe - these people have been starving since at least 1996. Had Clinton taken any action in the 1990's, or GW done anything since 2000 (I know, Bin Laden got us and we had to free Iraq first), then perhaps there would be less death and hatred on the Korean peninsula.

I figure it'd been a while since I posted about North Korea, and y'all were about due.

Another reason to be glad to be an American

You don't have to worry about too much power going to any one branch, like here. In the link, it states that Japan's Prime Minister has called for elections next month in reaction to parliament's decision not to split up the Japanese mail service. Some would call this true leadership. The man saw a problem, asked for a solution. The government rejected that solution for reasons not given, and rather than accept defeat, the man attempts to get new legislators in that will do what he says. Strangely, this sounds a lot like what many republicans are saying the Conservative majority must do here, accept whatever the President suggests, no questions asked, because he's the leader. Fortunately, if they don't do so, the President can't fire them. Also, fortunately, we have an independent judiciary in place to keep tabs on overzealous acquiescance. Leadership doesn't mean "my way is right." Leadership sets an example for others to follow, and admitting your mistakes, or accepting that your solution might not be best.

Family Court

Parents are usually considered to be grown-ups. Even teenage parents are expected to act in the best interests of their children. Unfortunately, that expectation is quite often unmet. In a recent decision on a case of first impression, a Texas court has decided that in the best interests of the child, the court could restrict who could sleep over at a consenting adult's house when his or her child is there.
In Peck v. Peck, the court ruled that the father was not acting in the best interest of the child by sharing his (the father's) bed with another woman while the child was there (in another room, in another bed). During the trial, the court also found that the ex-husband acted inappropriately by "expos[ing] the child to 'several different women in dating relationships.'"

Think about that for a moment. It's not in the best interest of the child to enter the dating pool. Apparently the concept of a "stable family unit" that the monogamous relationship Mr. Peck was in was not in the best interest of the child.

I think that this sounds completely ridiculous, and reeks more of envy or jealousy than concern over a child's best interests. With this ruling, it is entirely conceivable that a divorced person could never date again. With all the studies that show it's better to have a complete family unit than single parents, why would the courts try to prevent relationships from occurring?
And what about equal protection? If it's not in the best interest for a divorced parent, then how could it be in the best interest for a single parent, the unmarried mother or the widower father? Bad decision all around.

More fun with anagrams

I posted a couple months ago with some interesting anagrams (e.g Spiro Agnew - grow a penis). That was fun, but I haven't revisited it yet. With the school year coming up, I thought I'd do a quick one for everyone to add their two cents' in...

Abraham Lincoln - Oh, an ill crab man

Harry S Truman - rash army turn

feel free to make your own here!

Don't change horses midstream

I read the Moderate Voice pretty much daily. It's a good blog with usually well-written posts. Today, I opened it up and read about a recent Newsweek poll indicating the continued decline in President Bush's approval rating in his handling of the war in Iraq. His approval rating is currently 34% according to the poll, and the disapproval rating is a staggering 61%. He then queries what would happen had we known during election 2004 what we know now, would the outcome be any different?

I don't know that the outcome would be any different. Kerry's biggest problem wasn't that he flip-flopped - changing one's mind with new information is preferable to sticking to the same story despite ample evidence that it's incorrect. The problem was that he didn't suggest any alternatives to the current approach. This meant that we could either choose the war as we know it, or risk it all by looking at what's behind door number 2. Monty Hall made a pretty good game show host, but that doesn't translate to good president.

Random Trivia for the Day

In the 19th Century, those who purported to know believed that racehorses could get spooked very easily and thus not race well. They also believed that goats had mystical calming capabilities. It seemed completely logical, then, to put a goat in the stall with the horse prior to a race. If someone wanted to secure an advantage against another racer, he would sneak in and steal that racer's goat from the horse's stall.

From that practice, we get the term "get one's goat."

So THAT'S why I missed the big promotion!

A recent study by Tulane University revealed that women who flirt at work are less likely to receive promotions and raises. In the article, it states that 49% of women surveyed engaged in flirtatious behavior, including crossing their legs provocatively or leaning over a table so men could look down their shirts. These women received two promotions compared to three for the women who say they never engage in such behavior and are most often in the 50 - 75,000 pay range vs. the 75 - 100,000 range primarily inhabited by the non-flirtatious type.

The survey was conducted among MBA holding women from their 20s through age 60.

The women who completed the study also said that women who let men hold doors for them or pick up boxes that aren't too heavy for them are also at risk, because it creates a "benevelolent sexism" in the workplace. Then it says that this is still a good thing that there are chivalrous men in the world.

I don't know what to make of the article. It's interesting to see that women who try to use their "God-given talents" to get ahead don't.

Sports are important to a guy

Some guys are even willing to kill for sports. I've heard of riots in Central America and Scotland over Soccer, I remember seeing the front page of the Detroit Free Press after the Tigers won the World Series in 1984 (ok, I saw the front page some 15 years later, because I wasn't living in Detroit then, but it counts). Sports are important to some men.

If people know how important sports are to someone, and you're the wife of a sports nut, wouldn't you want to ensure he gets to enjoy his sports? Why would you want to cuddle after coitus when the game is on? Let him be. He's deserved it. It shouldn't surprise anyone that this man would strike his wife 70 times with a claw hammer for nagging him to cuddle after sex when the game was on. She should have known what she was in for. Yet, rather than applauding this trailblazer for his new approach to an old problem, trying to fix a system that was broken, what happens? He gets arrested. Tried. Convicted. Sentenced to death. All because he wanted to watch the game in peace. Perhaps we should admire his his resourcefulness, but then again, to a hammer, everything is a nail. Where has this country gone, when a man can't watch a game in peace anymore? What a shame.

Seventh Amendment

The Seventh Amendment provides that the right to a trial by jury of one's peers shall be preserved in all cases at law where the question shall exceed 20 dollars. Apparently, this doesn't mean that the jurors have the right to be informed. In a recent decision in New York, a Manhattan judge overturned a decision where two New York City police officers were acquitted on charges of sexually harrassing subordinates.
From the article:

"Under the facts presented here and the applicable law, this court has no alternative but to reluctantly set aside the jury's verdict," Supreme Court Justice Lottie E. Wilkins wrote in Ryan v. City of New York, 11554/01. "The reading of the dictionary definition of 'preponderance' with its various differences from the definition in the court's charge on the law, creates a sufficient likelihood that the plaintiffs were prejudiced."

That's right. Because the jury tried to determine what Preponderance means in English, they prejudiced the plaintiffs and the plaintiffs were not given a fair trial.

14th Amendment

When W. C. Fields died, he stipulated in his will that $80,000 of his money (which was a lot more back then) be used to set up a private school for orphan white boys, where no religion of any sort was to be taught. The school would not have been accessible to black children, white children with parents, Indians, hispanics, asians, girls, etc. Had this come about, imagine the uproar it would have created. Fortunately, it never came about, and we didn't have to deal with the court challenges or anything of the sort.

For those who are glad that school never opened (as I am), you might be pleased to note that the 9th Court of Appeals recently ruled that a school operating only to educate Hawaiians in Hawaii amounted to racial discrimination and violated the Constitution.

After a brief hiatus, Haiku Day is back

With thanks to Gramma for reminding me.

Classes start next week
For both myself and my son
He's the giddy one.

I wonder how common this is...

We've all seen the drill on shows like Law and Order. The jury comes back and finds your client guilty, so, you, as the criminal defense attorney poll the jurors. They always say the same thing as the verdict, as they usually do in the real world. So what happens when one of the jurors doesn't agree with the verdict? That happened recently in New York, and surprisingly, neither lawyer nor the judge knew what to do. After a quick reference to their Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Court sent the jurors back for more deliberations. Long story short, the accused was acquitted and there was much rejoicing.

I'm reminded of an old Cheers episode, where Frasier was talking about when he was on his way to becoming a Rhodes Scholar, and Woody asked him why when they fixed the potholes, it the blacktop was so much darker than the rest of the street. "I don't know, I missed that day, Woody."
"And now it's come back to haunt you."

Good news stemming from Kelo

Most people in the States are aware of the recent Supreme Court decision Kelo v. New London, where the Court determined that takings by a municipality for use by a private corporation was constitutional under the 5th Amendment. It appears that the ruling has evoked some action by the individual states to keep private corporations in check in light of this ruling.

According to this article, 23 different states have proposed 70 bills aimed at limiting the scope of Kelo. California, the article says, has two bills that would prohibit takings by private corporations. Texas, Delaware, Connecticut, and Minnesota would limit what could be taken under eminent domain.

I've played the advocate a couple times on a couple other blogs, where I've attempted to argue the benefit that comes from the recent ruling, and I can see benefit from it. As the linked article notes, economic development is certainly a function of the community, and in some of the older cities, there simply isn't room for development except in run-down parts of town - there's no space in the city limits for redevelopment. That being said, I don't like the decision, and I'm happy to see some action taking place immediately in the wake of the decision.

Lies, Lies, Lies!

My parents told me that I could be anything I wanted. All I had to do was work hard and I could accomplish anything. I believed them, as any naive child would, and I worked. I tried. I struggled to accomplish my life's goal. I wanted nothing more than to be 6' tall. Here I am, 30 years later, and I'm 5'9". Don't ever trust your parents.

Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest Winner

For the last 23 years, San Jose State University in California holds a contest by the title name, paying homage to Edward George Earl Bulwer-Lytton, who wrote the immortal "It was a dark and stormy night," opening sentence.

This year, the winner is Dan McKay. I won't post his opening sentence here, but you can read it if you click here, which has a link to the Yahoo! post.

In keeping with the topic, I encourage everyone to post their own bad opening sentences here, and I will do the same directly.

A set of Myths agreed upon

The title is how Napoleon once referred to history. I wonder if he had this in mind. According to this link, the Tokyo school board has adopted a textbook that critics say whitewashes Japanese behavior in wars past. The link also says that the employment of this textbook could upset China and South Korea (the victims of the atrocities). It specifically refers to the 1937 rape of Nanking and the employment of Korean "comfort women" from World War II being downplayed.

The more unfortunate aspects of any nation's history is often given cursory treatment, if at all in their textbooks. I remember reading about World War II in school, but I don't remember reading about the brothels the U.S. Army put in place to keep the soldiers placated. I don't remember hearing about the Kwangju massacre from the Korean War. I never read anything about laws that were passed in several states that banned the Romany (gypsies) simply because they were Romany.

China and Korea might get upset about the textbook. That's their right. They can do that. However, it's not their position to educate the Japanese. If they're most concerned with historical accuracy, they need to address it as such. The problem is, these nations have been squabbling with each other for so long, the Croats were still inviting the Serbs over for beer and darts when it started. Changing a textbook won't fix the underlying hostility, rather would simply be a "coup" for the nations that elicited the change.

I don't condone the inclusion of partial truths in a history book. The best way to learn from the past is to know the past, all of it. This means you have to pull the band-aid off every now and again to look at the scab. That is a decision that the Japanese have to make for themselves, just as it is for every other nation. The people of Japan will still be able to learn of the actions; it will just be from other sources.

Four people walk into a Polish restaurant

And leave completely stuffed. I had one of the best meals I've had at a restaurant in years today. There's this place nearby called Polonia that serves some amazing Polish dishes. They have the best kielbasa south of Hamtramck, and their pork meat loaf was amazing. I highly recommend it for those of you in the Houston area, and those contemplating a visit to Houston.

Other good restaurants:
Joe's Crab Shack
Zydeco (greasy spoon, cajun style)
Old Tyme Pit Barbeque (in San Angelo)
Michael's in Monterey
Nam Gang Korean restaurant
and last but not least:
Bubba Gump Shrimp Company in Monterey. But that might be more nostalgia from the good ol' days...

Moving = lite blogging

We're moving this week, which means that I'll not have access to a phone line (not that I do now, thank you, phone company). So, during the next several days, I'll not be posting. This means that Haiku day is going to be absent this week, but it should be here next week!

Wednesday is Haiku Day!

Still!

3 weeks before school
Is the Panic setting in?
Or is it just gas?

Blame it on the Rain

Whenever we get a good rainstorm here in Houston, our phone lines go dead. The complex says it's the phone company, and vice-versa. All I know is that I've not had my phones working since Saturday and it's rather an inconvenience.

On the bright side, I've got my schedule for the semester all sorted out:
Property II
Evidence
Federal Income Taxation
Family Law
Consumer Transactions

This looks to be an interesting semester, though I reckon it's going to be rather busy.
I also expect I'll be heading to a conference in Dallas for Phi Alpha Delta, unless we send someone else in my place.

I've also decided, pretty much, that I'm going to get involved in the Pro Bono Honors Program. It's a 50 hour commitment before I graduate, and no less than 10 hours per semester. I think I can handle that; I just have to find an org. that can match my available schedule. Here's hoping.

In other news, we're going to be moving in a week; more on that after it happens.

The art of deposition

"I'm sorry, doctor, did you say he was shot in the woods?"
"No, I said he was shot in the lumbar region."

"Doctor, how many autopsies have you performed on dead people?"
"All my autopsies have been performed on dead people."

Something I hate more than pointless sequels

I see there's a remake of the Bad News Bears coming out shortly. What a stupid idea. Take a classic movie, and recast it, and then change it for modern audiences. Wait, there's also Willy Wonka, which is starting now. I don't care how good the new one is, it's not going to be as good as the original, everyone sing - Come with me, and you'll be in a world of pure imagination...

It's bad enough when Hollywood is so far out of movie ideas that they rehash them with some differences, like the Mighty Ducks, Little Giants, Big Green, etc. At least there they're attempting to hide the fact that they have no original ideas left. But then they do things like making a half-assed attempt at a movie based on a TV show (Seriously, Jessica Simpson as Daisy Duke?), but then do a half-assed attempt at a movie that was good the first time. Has that ever worked out? Think DOA, Grapes of Wrath, Psycho, even Willard...

And then they complain about how people aren't going to the movies anymore. Give me something worth watching, darnit! You make millions of dollars to write scripts, earn your money.

Drinking and driving - the battle continues

The Detroit Free Press gave information on research they collected in mid May regarding drunk driving incidents around Detroit. They received information on more than 100 arrests in a 4 day period, here. Some of the highlights include:
A woman found passed out at the wheel of her 2005 Chevy Impala, her 1 1/2 year old son in car seat in back. Her foot is on the brake and the car is in drive. Officer pounds on the window; the car moves 10 feet. Driver tells officer she had a couple of beers at a friend's and is tired. She is driving on a suspended license and blows .20%. She has two prior drunken-driving convictions.

A 26 year old woman in a 1992 Mercury Sable hits another car, damaging her own front end. She says she is on her way to pick up her child from day care after drinking at a bar. She blows 0.16%.

A 50 year old man in a 1995 Dodge van is stopped after running a stop sign, speeding and almost hitting a parked car. He says he had a few beers and adds, "Come on, I'm just going home." He blows 0.24%.

A 46 year old man swerved into oncoming traffic in a 2002 Jeep Liberty and repeatedly strikes the curb. One tire is flat. There are open intoxicants in the car. He blows 0.18%.

I don't know any real solution to the problem; I just emplore people to be very careful if/when they drink.

Shark bites aplenty

This season has been rife with shark bites. We even had one in our living room. My son stepped on a shark tooth he got at the dentist's office. Those things are SHARP! He's ok, and fortunately, it was just a tooth and not a whole shark, or else I'd have some words with Jacques Cousteau, telling me sharks live in the water... but I digress.

Anyway, it's been an exciting day!

Wednesday Haiku...

Kermit the Frog is
Sitting at my table now
but he's not eating

Excellent news!

North Korea's Dear Leader, General Kim Chong-Il (The chonger) told a visiting chinese diplomat that he wants a Nuclear-Free Korean Peninsula. This is on the eve of the new round of six-party talks set to start July 25.
This is indeed exciting news, and something that should not be taken lightly. We all know that North Korea has no history of deception or lying to get what they want. I seem to remember an agreement with South Korea a short time ago wherein the ROK agreed to give the DPRK 500,000 tons of rice, just to get them to the 6-party talks.
My guess is that what the Chonger really wanted was a Nuclear Korea, free of the ROK and the United States' influence. However, since he has no food, or energy, he's got to tiptoe the line once more and coddle more goods from his adversaries.
I don't like the idea of giving North Korea any more aid until they show something for which they should get aid. They have lied for 50 years and will continue to do so as long as we, and the other nations involved, keep giving them what they want.

And for those of you with some time on your hands:

Consider this:
The following sentence is true. The preceding sentence is false.

What's in a Name?

According to research by University of Florida economist David Figlio, it could be your academic success. He asserts through his research that the creative names given to African American children could be a reason for their lagging behind in studies as compared to children with more traditional names. The reason, he says, is not because of the names, but rather, it's a result of "the impression [given] educators who - biased by the names' uniqueness and their own stereotypes about parents who would bestow such names on a child - don't set high goals for the children."

He continues by saying that the teachers "internalize black-sounding names to mean the parents aren't educated and as a result are poor." I won't go into too much greater detail here about the article, but I encourage people to read it in its entirety.

When I first read the article, I balked. I thought it outrageous that someone would try to attribute academic success to the way a person is named. And I'm sure many of you thought the same thing. However, when you hear the names Laqueshia, Lomarqutious, or Courvoisier (after the cognac), do you imagine doctors, lawyers, or engineers? Or do you think of people who might get through Junior college, or the DeVry Institute?

I think the article gets it right at the close, though, when they point out that the key to academis success depends on the individual. If you convey yourself as a successful, studious person, then you'll be treated as such, and you will do better in school.

It's an interesting concept, but I don't know how accurate it is. Still, interesting to think about.

Scopes is still on trial?

According to this article by Bill Poovey, he is, or rather, his teaching of evolution. According to the article, Eugenie Scott claims it's more difficult than ever to teach the theory of evolution to American children. It cites Kansas, where school boards can criticize the theory, and also Georgia, where the textbooks had disclaimers that evolution was a theory, not a fact added to the textbooks until a court ordered them removed.

School is a venue for learning, and a place for learning theories, not just concrete facts. I don't understand why it's such an issue to teach the concept of evolution to students. For those who would argue that it's "not the truth," fiction isn't the truth, either, but I had to read "A Separate Peace," "Frankenstein," "Of Mice and Men," "Cry, the Beloved Country," and countless other books in school. Perhaps it would be better if we stuck specifically to nonfiction writing, such as Children are Wet Cement," (a real title).

It can't hurt education to learn that there might be a different way things happen. It is, after all, a theory. (I don't understand the Georgia court decision to remove the disclaimers, either. It's a theory, they just emphasized that.

Sea World

Sea World is fun. We took the kids to SW San Antonio this weekend. The kids love the log flume more than life itself, especially the boy.

For the record, if you ever took a long trip (more than 3 hours) as a child and you're still alive and you haven't done so yet, THANK YOUR FATHER!

Challenge to "Don't ask, don't tell"

If you click here, you'll be able to read about a challenge to the military's don't ask don't tell policy. The crux of the argument is that the policy denies military members "their rights to privacy, free speech and equal protection under the law," according to attorney Stuart Delery.

The policy states that military members can't ask about sexual orientation of military members. It also says that military members that come out of the closet to the military must be separated if they can't promise that they won't participate in homosexual activity anymore while serving.

Now, pardon me if I'm mistaken, but didn't Lawrence v. Texas invalidate laws against sodomy on grounds that homosexual behavior performed in private is a private affair? If that be the case, then there certainly is an argument that homosexuals should be able to participate in homosexual acts while in the military free of criminal penalty. The problem is that from what I understand, Lawrence was in his own house when the police entered on the weapons warrant, and many military members are in barracks, which are military. These military members cannot possess weapons in their barracks, despite a second amendment right to keep and bear arms. I can see a similar argument that says these member contracted with the military to obey military commands (lawful orders), and as such, they are obligated not to participate in acts the military disapproves of.

Freedom of speech: Members of the Military do not enjoy the same First Amendment right to Freedom of Speech that civilians enjoy. In Goldman v. Weinberger, 475 U.S. 503, 106 S.Ct. 1310 (1986), the Court determined that the military is given far greater deference than the civilian sector in regulating first amendment rights (in the instant case, religion) to foster instinctive obedience, unity, commitment and esprit de corps. See Id. at 507.

Equal protection: I don't mean to split hairs, but the military's ban on sodomy applies to heterosexual couples as well as homosexual couples. I don't think there's much to argue there.

There is a Vanderbilt Law Review article on point from 1998 that is worth looking at for you law students and Constitutional lawyers types out there, 51 VNLR 1093.

Now, my opinion on the matter. Right now, the general demeanor of the military is discomfort with homosexuals. I saw it while I was in the military and I hear and read about it outside of the military. This discomfort continues and will continue even if the Don't ask don't tell policy is reversed. That will result in another problem. Because of the underlying discomfort and hostility towards homosexuals, the military members in combat situations could be compromised. Someone might be less likely to protect a gay soldier next to him or her, or might be less likely to trust them (I couldn't suggest why, but it's possible). At any rate, the problem is that it would disrupt the ability for our forces to work cohesively at a time that we are fighting to defend our way of life. While I have no problems serving with gay military members, I can see this as a potential hazard. I would rather see our way through our current situation before adding to the mix anything that can disrupt the continuity.

Tour de Lance

I'm going to catch some flak for this, I'm sure. However, I want to be clear that I'm not criticizing Lance Armstrong alone. Rather, I'm criticizing his team and all the other teams in the Tour de France.
"Lance Armstrong kept his overall lead in the Tour de France on Friday, cruising safely to the finish of a rainy seventh stage won in a sprint by Australia's Robbie McEwen."

I have no beef with Lance Armstrong. I think he's a good rider, and I'm impressed with how well he's done since his bout with Cancer way back when. My problem is that his victories seem less like traditional victories, inasmuch as his teammates play defense and try to slow down the pack and slow down the competition so he can keep his lead. That doesn't seem like real sportsmanship to me. A race should be about the person who gets there the fastest. I don't understand how a race won by a guy whose teammates are there primarily to make sure nobody beats him can count it as a victory. Perhaps the Tour should get rid of teams and turn this into an individual event. Last I checked, there was only on seat on any Tour bike; that should be a hint.

50 years from now, do you want to be the guy who says "I could have won the Tour de France, but my job was to slow down this guy from Finland?" Or do you want to be the guy who says "I tried my best to win the Tour de France, I just fell short."

Swimming

My daughter had a horrible first day at swimming lessons on Tuesday. She fell in the pool once, inhaled water while practicing her stroking once, and then the teacher got distracted with another kid while trying to put my daughter back on the step and missed the step, which resulted in my daughter getting another breathful of water. It was rather traumatic, so I wasn't surprised when she didn't want to get dressed for swimming lessons on Wednesday. After a while of pleading, ordering, and cajoling, I resorted to bribery. "Honey, get your swimming suit on, and you can have some of my Coke," to which she said "OK," and got dressed.
So, I give her some Coke. She drinks it, and says yum.
Then she takes the swimming suit off.

Lesson: be specific with your bribes.

London Underground

At least 6 explosions occurred in the London underground and one double-decker bus exploded this morning. From what I heard on the news, Al-Qaeda has claimed responsibility and said that Denmark and Italy will be next if they don't withdraw their troops from Afghanistan and Iraq.

This is one of the most ridiculous attacks I've heard of. Support for the war is floundering. Attacking one of the participants at home can't do anything but strengthen their resolve. I seem to remember a Churchill impersonator (Churchill was unavailable at the time) saying "We will fight them on the beaches. We will fight them in the streets" or something to that effect.

This attack was senseless.

Haiku Wednesday...

... Seems to be losing
its luster, this may be the
last one for a while.

President Bush promised

From Denmark that he would not choose a Supreme Court nominee based on his or her views on abortion. He said "I will take my time, I will be thorough in my investigation." That is something that I like to hear. One issue is not something we should base our decision of who should serve on the Court on, and it's encouraging that the President wants to interview several people.

Another thing I don't like is the talk of filibustering from the Democrats in Congress, and I don't like the negatives from the Republicans with regard to Alberto Gonzalez because of the perception that he's too soft on affirmative action and abortion. Granted these are two issues, not one, but my same position as above reigns here as well.

And just because I find it humorous (non-sequitur), the article mentions how President Bush lauded the Scandinavian country for sending hundreds of troops to Iraq, with the statement "We share the belief that freedom is universal and we share the belief that in the struggle between democracy and dictatorship you cannot stay neutral." The article, in the very next sentence, says "after lunch with Queen Margrethe and about 50 other guests..."
I find that humorous.

Scalia says

According to this article in the St. Petersburg Times, Justice Scalia is not concerned with the issues of Hindus, Buddhists, athiests, etc. In McCreary County v. ACLU, Scalia mentioned in his dissent that "With respect to public acknowledgment of religious belief, it is entirely clear from our Nation's historical practices that the Establishment Clause permits this disregard of polytheists and believers in unconcerned deities, just as it permits the disregard of devout athiests." (McCreary County, KY v. American Civil Liberties Union of KY, 2005). This from the man who believes Roe should be overturned, even though abortion was legal at the founding of the country. That seems somehow inconsistent to me, but I digress.
His point is that the Founding Fathers didn't consider non monotheistic religions when founding the nation and that the establishment of a religion meant one of Christian, Jewish, or Muslim (although I doubt there were many Muslims fighting in the revolution either, but I'm digressing again).
It would appear from these comments that Justice Scalia would incorporate "Thou Shalt have no other gods before me" into everyday life for all Americans, because that was predominant in America at the time of the founding. I can't comport with that synopsis. One of the great things about this country, and the Constitution, is that it is designed to protect the minorities, even in the religious sphere.
Justice O'Connor actually said "We do not count heads before enforcing the First Amendment." I disagree with the removal of the Ten Commandments on my belief that they are listed as a source of law, not a source of religion, that was not the reason proffered by the State of Kentucky, and the Court reached the decision they did. Even though I disagree with the verdict, I wholly agree with what Justice O'Connor said, and the premise that this country was ostensibly created to allow the practice of all religions free from Government - for lack of a better term - encouragement of any one type (in this case monotheism), then I think Justice Scalia is wrong on this point.

Independence Day

On this day, in 1776, King George wrote in his diary "Nothing of note happened today."
He was wrong, of course, as this was the day that John Hancock signed the Declaration of Independence, with the statement "Now King George can double the price on my head."

Thus we began our lives as a free and independent nation. Happy Fourth of July, everyone.

Dirty Secrets

I have a confession to make: I like watching Charles in Charge. I have no reason for this; it's just wholesome, corny comedy. It comes on Fox here at 3:30 in the morning, which happens to be the time my youngest wakes up lately.

There. My dirty laundry is aired. Now it's your turn.

Justice O'Connor retires

I've got CBS news on right now, where President Bush is currently lauding the service that Justice O'Connor provided during her 24 years on the Court.

He says he hopes to take someone who will faithfully interpret and uphold the Constitution. That's good. He also wants someone "that the American people will be proud of." I would speculate, but I'm not necessarily qualified, but I hope this doesn't turn into a charlie foxtrot.

I didn't realize that Justice O'Connor was born in El Paso Texas...

Interesting

A recent Zogby Poll indicates that President Bush's approval ratings did not improve as a result of his speech the other night. Even more interesting is that 42% of Americans polled said they believe Congress should use its impeachment power if it's proven the President lied about the reasons for invading Iraq.

Here's my problem with the idea of impeachment: it's a horrible thing to put the country through, and at a time when we're split on so many issues, this would just further polarize the masses. The President urged us to look beyond what's happening right now and asked for sacrifice. I don't agree with the invasion of Iraq because I disagree with the rationale. We are there however, and for the run of it, it appears the Iraqi people are going to be better off for it (At least I hope so).

President Clinton should not have been impeached for his acts in the White House; it was something that should have stayed small scale. This is decidedly a more important issue, as it's not about receiving sexual favors, but rather about people dying for what could potentially be a made up reason. This would indicate that if the President did lie, then we should start impeachment proceedings. I personally think that this would be a dangerous attack on the Office at a time when, whether we like him or not, or like what he did or not, we need to support the leader...

Ask not to whom the toll goes...

Congress is currently looking to set up a procedure to encourage privately owned toll roads. The idea is that they'll pass legislature that would allow private comanies to raise up to $15 billion for highway projects using tax-exempt bonds.

When I first read this, I was a little disturbed. After all, the government usually is responsible for building and maintaining roads. The Federal government works the interstate highway system (I think), the states do the state highways, and the counties and cities do their roads.

But, the article explains that some smaller states already do this, as a means of easing their taxes and keep the pressure off the budgets (my interpretation). I can see pros to this, as it would ease taxpayer costs across the board; but it would burden those who use the roads most often.

Probably the biggest argument against it is that the Federal government is a non-profit organization, whereas the private companies would have to stay in business. This could potentially mean a price inflation that we wouldn't otherwise see, but I think in the end, it would cost us less that people fear.

The wife wants some help

In picking out a graduate program online. She's at One Step Sideways and is currently looking into various online MBA or other Master's programs. If anyone has any input, I'm sure she'd love to hear it!

Late haiku this Wednesday

It's 9:20 now
my kids, who should be asleep
Are sharing stories

contributions always appreciated.

The newest activist

What with all the celebrities these days speaking out on the major issues that plague us, a new star has stepped up to fight strongly for what we believe in: Paula Abdul. She's taking on the fierce underbelly of one of the most inflammatory issues of our time, yes, you guessed it, NAIL SALONS!

Apparently, she went to one that used unsanitary equipment and got an infection. Now she is urging the California Senate (of course) to pass legislation that would force the salons to use clean equipment.

I don't want to undermine the importance of clean manicure equipment, but this is a state that elected the Governator because they were all but bankrupt and had no faith in Gov. Davis. There are quite a few issues out there that need to be dealt with - I seem to remember blackouts scourging the San Jose area a couple years ago - before celebrities' nails get fixed. Buy a home manicure set and don't worry about it. There, I fixed it. I'm ready for my check from the lobbyists.

Where your insurance dollar goes

I'm not the only one who's complained about the cost of medical care - insurance costs are too much, etc, etc. But it might not be the doctor's fault, rather, we might blame the insurance companies. For one restaurant here, the Red Onion, it would cost the owner 45,000 a month to cover his employees, and it's not that many people... really. The report on the link above gives cost increases for different families, etc. While these costs go up, the money doesn't go to the doctors. You'll read,

The average doctor gets 18 percent of every dollar spent on medical care. But family practitioners aren't average... [a]nd family practioners in small practices ... are being run out of the business.

The doctor the news interviewed here, Dr. Van Zant, said that one of their major insurance carriers gave them an ultimatum: 25% cut back across the board.

Where does that money go? Apparently to the boss. One of the insurance companies, the one Dr. Van Zant referred to as the "worst payer," is part of a corporation that paid its CEO $46 million in compensation last year.

United Health paid their CEO $94 million ON TOP of his $639 million in stock options.

Affordable health care is available, if companies didn't pay their executives more in one year than most people spend in their entire life.

Yugiyoh, the real meaning is June 25.

Fifty-five years ago today, North Korean soldiers, with backing from the Soviet Union and PRC, crossed over the 38th parallel and invaded the First Republic of Korea. The DPRK soldiers caught the ROK soldiers completely off-guard, and began routing the South Korean army and the few Americans left in country. After three years of bitter fighting, leaving approximately 900,000 Chinese, 520,000 North Korean, 400,000 UN and ROK, and 155,000 US soldiers either killed or wounded, a Cease-fire was declared, with the line being approximately where it was before the fighting began. To this day, no treaty has been signed, and these two countries are still technically at war.
Take a moment to remember those who died protecting those who couldn't protect themselves from the yoke of tyranny.

This just in: Americans oppose the draft.

I thought this was somewhat common knowledge, but the AP decided they needed a poll to determine that this was in fact the case. In said poll, 70 percent of those asked said they opposed a reinstatement of the draft, with nearly half of all pollers being strongly opposed.
Some of the interesting things: Women were more likely to be opposed than men, people over 50 were more likely to favor the draft than younger people, and Republicans were more likely to favor the draft than Democrats. So, a 50 year old republican male is more likely to support a draft that would take people under the age of 28. Don't read so much into that, though. Many of those people were draftees themselves, and they view it as a one's duty as an American citizen to serve their country, and thus would be more likely to support a draft.
I would bet, if you polled military members, there'd be a stronger support for a draft than against, for similar reasons.
The problem is that we are currently in a struggle that is costing American lives and has no visible end, and as it becomes more and more unpopular, fewer and fewer Americans will volunteer for service. This will strain an already stretched military infrastructure even more than it already is.
I can't tell you whether I would support a draft or not. I volunteered to serve, and I think it's important for people to give to their country, but I'm not sure I subscribe to the idea of conscription again. I'm afraid that's the best personal answer I can forward. All opinions are welcome, perhaps I can lean more towards one side of the fence...

As far as the strain on the military... Our President has said we won't withdraw anytime soon, so the relief from that end isn't coming. I suspect that recruitment woes are going to continue as this drags on with no conclusion in sight. Perhaps the only way to ensure a properly functioning military is to reinstate a draft, for the sake of American lives and the continued American way of life...?

Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Strip Malls

The Supreme Court ruled, in a 5-4 decision (with O'Connor as a dissenter, even), that cities and municipalities may take private land for commercial development, with Justice Stevens saying local officials, not federal judges, know best in deciding whether a development project will benefit the community. I have a lot of trouble with this. I am a strong believer in the right to own property, and when I see a government of any size taking one person's property against their wishes when that person is not in default of a loan or something similar, I shudder. This tells me that I do not own my own property, rather I get to stay there until someone with more money and a more appealing plan on what to do with that land comes along and sweet talks the people in power. This was a bad decision.
Prior to this decision, municipalities could only use the takings clause for a reason related to a clear public use, such as roads or schools, or to revitalize blighted areas, the article notes. Now, the city can take your property to open a Wal-Mart, to increase the tax base and create more money for the city, in the meantime, running you out of your home, and destroying all the memories that you and your family built in that little piece of the American Dream. Bad Decision. Bad.

Update:
Bookworm also recently posted on this same issue. Her comments are here.

Burning up the charts

In national news, the House of Representatives passed a Anti-Flag burning bill with a vote of 286-130. You remember flag burning, that issue that has enflamed so many Americans recently, enough that we must galvanize the government to push through this proposed Amendment.

I like what the folks at the moderate voice had to say about this, as well as their quotes by Citizen Smash. Real quickly, they abhor flag burning (so do I) think it's quite distasteful (as do I), but they also disapprove of a flag-burning amendment. The Moderate Voice looks at this as nothing short of partisan politics, a group trying to find an issue they can rally around and cause a stir over - is it free speech, or is it a desecration of an American Symbol? I can't help but agree with that synopsis. I'd not heard much in the news since about this in several years, and can't think of any good reason to bring it up now when there are so many other issues that can and should be handled first.

I'm not really the best one to bring clear issue to this, so I recommend reading the moderate voice's post.

"Congress Shall Make No Law..."

in 1988, the Supreme Court ruled that public high schools can censor and restrict what is printed in school papers. On Monday, the 7th Court of Appeals ruled that Publicly funded Colleges can do the same, effectively restricting the freedom of the college press.

I'm a bit torn on this issue. I like the idea that colleges are venues for younger Americans to learn and discover themselves, and I like that they want to challenge authority. Change doesn't come by balancing the line, it comes by crossing it. If a student wants to publish something inflammatory, I can understand.

The reason I lean more towards supporting the decision comes from a practical standpoint. These schools are learning centers, where young Americans need to learn the skills to succeed in the adult world. With the daily weakening of the value of a high school diploma, a serious college education is more and more important. Schools want to attract strong candidates, and, because they are publicly funded, they have to be answerable to the citizens of their state. In that respect, I find it important that a school be able to have veto power over what a student posts in a school supported forum.

The schools aren't saying that the student can't publish their ideas; the schools are saying that the student can't publish what is deemed inappropriate by the school in the school's paper. The student can still find other ways to publish their wares. Look at Life's Little Instruction Book - it's author, H. Jackson Brown, couldn't find a publisher originally, so he published it himself. It wasn't until some time later that he picked up a publisher. That option is available to a college student, as well. Because I don't think this is an abridgment of Free Speech, I wouldn't consider this a First Amendment Issue, and thus tend to support the Court's decision.

Wednesday, June 22

Adios, MoFo
Is what our governor said
but who really cares?

The right conclusion

The folks in Mississippi got the right answer in their trial against a former KKK member. While I don't disparage anybody for thinking or believing (yes, even thinking like a Klansman is OK), acting on those beliefs when it requires or begets violence against a group is worse than most other crimes. Edgar Ray Killen was convicted of manslaughter, which is not murder, but at least he's going to answer for his sins.
I'm not saying this as powerfully as I could, but you get the general idea. Good Job, Mississippi.

Geena Davis for President

ABC is advertising one of its new shows for the fall, Commander-In-Chief, where Geena Davis plays a VP who takes over the office of the President, thus becoming the first female President. I like the idea, and hope that this is a good show. I fear, however, that it won't be.
Remember back in the mid to late 90s, when Ellen decided to come out of the closet? Suddenly her show, which had been a good sitcom, became all about what it's like to be gay. This is what I'm afraid is going to happen to Commander-In-Chief - the show is going to dote on the fact that it's a woman president, and focus less on a story line itself. That would be a shame.

Good Ideas

Pardon my ire here, but, if we invaded Afghanistan specifically because we wanted to catch Osama Bin Laden, and Intelligence has a good idea where he is, then wouldn't it make sense to send our folks there to get him? Or at least cooperate with that country's government to get the guy? Americans are not just dying every day because of this, but thousands of soldiers are away from their homes and families. We support our troops and thank them for being over there, but our leadership also needs to do what they can to get them BACK from over there, and that means catching the man we attacked a neutral country four years ago to catch.
If he knows, then he needs to let the warfighters know.
If he doesn't know, then he needs to stifle it and keep trying to find out.

One year ago today

I was in the hospital pacing up and down, waiting for my wife to get her epidural. Then, at 8:24 a.m., my youngest son was born. Happy Birthday, son!

The unforseen dangers of sleeping loudly

If you click here, you will get a link to one of the more disturbing stories in recent days. Apparently, a woman got tired of her husband's snoring and, rather than leave the room or deal with it, took the decisive and well-planned approach of stabbing him with a pen. She stabbed him twice, and then, after he fell asleep again (as is wont to happen in the middle of the night), she hit him with a dumbbell.

Now, perhaps you're thinking, well, newlyweds often don't know about their partner's sleeping habits, and maybe he snores REALLY loud. (I've heard loud snoring before, but I've never heard anyone snore loud enough for me to want to stab them with a pen.) And perhaps that would help explain it. The problem is, this woman is 45 years old. The article doesn't say how long they've been married, but the age itself would lend one to think the woman could use a little more sense.

Lord knows if I ever snore, I'd not want to be awaken by a pen in the chest, or a dumbbell to the head.

A prosecutor's dream

I heard on a program, can't remember which news program, but it's not on cable, that when some of the detainees are put on trial, they will be tried with evidence that they will not be allowed to see, nor will their counsel be allowed to cross-examine on. The reason given was that some of this evidence is either itself classified, or comes from classified sources, and if divulged, it could either endanger American life in the field or cause the loss of that source of intelligence.

Nutshell: We're going to try you using evidence you can't see, and you don't get to defend yourself from it.

That just doesn't sound like a fair trial to me. I understand that this is going to be a war crimes trial, and international law runs the show, not American law, but, something stinks really rotten here. If a person is put on trial, be it an enemy or an ally, it seems to be of utmost importance that the person be given the best opportunity to defend himself or herself. Otherwise, the appearance of impropriety at the very least will seep in. Lord knows, if I were to be put on trial for something, I'd want to be able to confront those who accuse me, and know not just what I'm being tried for, but what types of proof they have...

A hollywood ending.

This is an example of what I dislike about Hollywood. Apparently there are talks going on concerning a movie deal with the "runaway bride." The woman fakes her own kidnapping, breaking a few laws in the process, and yet she gets to profit from the whole situation. Welcome to America. It's kind of like that stupid family in the 90's who took a shortcut after all the warnings and road closures told them not to and then they got stuck in the snow and lost a few toes due to frostbite. They got a made for tv movie starring Doogie Howser and several million dollars from it.
The secret to success in America isn't hard work and dedication a la Horatio Alger; it's doing something so phenomenally stupid that people are willing to shell out millions of dollars to tell it over and over again.

Eat Fresh?

In my neverending quest to get back into fighting shape, we decided to eat out for dinner tonight. We chose James Coney Island because it met my son's strict criteria. 1. It had balloons. 2. It was open. Case closed.

Wednesday, June 15

One thousand classic
recipes in a cookbook
and I'll eat just eight

Contributions welcome!

All right, I'm officially sick of hearing about the Michael Jackson trial

Not that I wasn't sick about it before, but now that the verdict has come out, it seems to be the only thing the news can talk about. He's a singer. He was charged. He had a trial, and was found not guilty. That SHOULD be the end of the story. Instead, we have roving reporters going to shelters throughout Houston saying "we just hope that victims of child molestation don't stop coming forward." Well, I hope so, as well. However, in this case, it appears the victim lied about being molested. Unfortunately, for a lot of people, even though he was acquitted, Jacko is going to be as guilty as OJ.
The case was going to be a difficult one for the prosecution. It turned out to be too difficult, and thus he walked free. There is no need to post news crews over at his ranch to report on how tired he is.
People have talked about how if it was a poor man, the outcome could have been different. Perhaps. I'm sure, though, that there wouldn't be such a media frenzy if it were a poor person. Shut up and find a new flavor of the week to cover.

What kind of friend are you?

Warren Buffet once asked a woman who survived Auschwitz what kind of person she'd consider a friend. The woman replied: "Would they hide me?"

I've been meme'd

So I'll give my answers:
(1) Number of books I own: I own about 100-150. I don't buy a lot of books, and when I'm done, I like to donate them or let friends have them to read.

(2) Last book bought: The last books I bought were for my wife; Tom Robbins' "Fierce Invalids Home From Hot Climates" and Marian Keyes' "The Other Side of the Story." The last book I bought for myself was Sun Tzu's The Art of War as presented by Ralph Sawyer.

(3) Last book I read: The last book I finished was probably Mitch Albom's "The Five People You Meet in Heaven," but I'm currently reading the aforementioned Art of War, and Federal Income Taxation, Examples and Explanations, riveting stuff.

(4) Five books that mean a lot to me:
a. King Bidgood's in the Bathtub is probably a favorite because my daughter (age 3) is "reading" it daily, as did her brother when he was 3.
b. "Tuesdays with Morrie," it's just a fantastic book.
c. "The Two Koreas" by Don Oberdorfer. This chronicles the situation on the Korean Peninsula quite well, and helps explain my concern for the region.
d. The Sun Never Rises: a Rainthology - This is a collection of short stories and poems written by my mom's writing group; I'm proud of her for getting herself published.
e. I Had Trouble In Getting To Solla-Sallew, by Dr. Seuss. It's not his best selling book, nor is it his most famous, but, the message is clear: You can't run from your problems, you have to deal with them sometime.

Now, I'm supposed to pass this on, but I think instead I'll leave it open here for everyone so inclined to post on. Thank you Bookworm for tagging me!

Thou shalt not...

I saw on the running foot under the news this morning that the Supreme Court may soon reach a decision on whether or not the 10 Commandments can be displayed.

This has become a bit of a hot issue for so many people. I personally don't see the big deal about having a collection of laws posted at a courthouse. Would people complain if someone posted a copy of the Rosetta stone at a library?

Some say that it's a symbol of Judeo-Christianity. If you think it is, then perhaps to you it is. To some people, Ashlee Simpson is a talented singer who entertains with her powerful vocals. That doesn't make it a truth, it's just a truth from one's perspective.

I also wouldn't object to a courthouse posting Hammurabi's code, Draco's laws, laws from China or India or the Quran, whatever. So long as they are laws, then it should be ok.

Useless trivia of the day

The word avocado comes from a native american word that means "testicle."

Oh, the humanity!

I get done at the Y and decide to take my kids to the Golden Arches (despite my better judgment). We go through the drive through, and the kids get happy meals with apple juice. My son wanted Sprite. I ordered the apple juice anyway, since it's marginally better for him. He got mad and started a temper tantrum with the words "This is the worst day of my entire life!"

How I wish my worst day was not getting the drink I wanted with my happy meal.

Wednesday, June 8

Bittersweet turnips
lashed out angrily at five
drunk rutabagas

no title

Well, I had my first job interview in about 13 years yesterday. I thought it went fairly well. The lawyer with whom I interviewed was rather nice and approachable. I didn't get the job, though. I'm a little bummed, but not really surprised. I'm glad for the opportunity to interview. Still, it would've been nice to get the 15/hr that he paid. Anyway, I'm going to play the bummed man for a little bit, and then get back on the bike.

Opinion Day

Yesterday, the news rang out that the Supreme Court outlawed medical marijuana - to some a blow to states' rights, to others a blow to legalized pot.

The opinion question today is, should marijuana be legalized or not? I think it's safe to say it won't be made legal anytime soon, but still, input is encouraged.

Pistons in the Finals!

I said it at the beginning of the playoffs, Pistons and Spurs in the finals. Pardon my gloating, but I'm so rarely right with my predictions that I have to relish the rare occasion where I'm right.

There are going to be plenty of people who will say that Detroit doesn't deserve to be in the finals. Tommyrot. If they didn't deserve to be in the finals, they wouldn't be in the finals. Injuries happen in sports; that's one of the reasons they require physicals. It's a shame that Dwayne Wade was hurt, but, that wasn't the fault of the Pistons, and it wasn't guaranteed that the Heat would have won had Wade been 100%, anyway.

At any rate, these look to be an exciting finals, with the Detroit "We won't work our hardest until we're discredited in the media some way" Pistons and the San Antonio "Manu's got the hair, Tony's got the tongue, and Tim's the coolest big man outside of Detroit" Spurs.

Sequel Me This

Bambi is on TV tonight. Disney's classic motion picture. I don't care for it myself, but my kids love it. They like all Disney movies. And I admit, the art is phenomenal, artists working on miniature cels for months on end just to put something together that would look nice on screen, very impressive.

However, Disney has this weird thing about it. It seems to believe that if one movie was a timeless classic made 50 years ago, then a sequel made now will generate a ton of money, regardless of the story, much like a Vin Diesel movie makes money even though he has no discernable talent. And of course, it makes money.

Here's my problem. The artists that made the first Disney movies were artists. They created classics. These movies are appreciated as much for the animation as they are for the (generally) child-friendly stories. Every time they make a sequel of one of these movies, they tear away at that magic that made the original so special. I don't care what happened to Cinderella after the glass slipper fit, the story was great with "And they lived happily ever after." Same thing goes with Bambi. There's absolutely no reason to make a sequel based on these characters.

Perhaps I'd gripe less about this if the sequels were even marginally watchable, but do you remember anything good about Jungle Book 2? I didn't think so.

Disney, stop it. Keep the good things good. Don't cheapen the stock with watered-down money-grabbers based on the same characters and nothing else.

What's the Korean word for Dinosaur-sexer?

The term for Chicken-sexer is Byungaree Kambyolsa, which doesn't do a lot of good for the following article, here. The link will tell you that researchers have found a medullary bone inside a dinosaur skeleton, which apparently is a calcium deposit created by egg-laying creatures such as birds. The deposit is used to help make the egg shells hard, which is unique to birds.

So we now know that there is a dead female Tyrannosaurus Rex at a museum at the North Carolina State University. I will sleep better for knowing that!

Prick them, do they not bleed?

Remember President Bush? He's the guy who invaded Iraq because we "know they have nucular (sic) weapons" when they didn't? This is the man who says he will champion diplomacy with North Korea because the other option is military. Interesting, no?

North Korea recently said that VP Dick Cheney is a "bloodthirsty beast," and is using his comments that the Dear Leader, General Kim Chong-Il is irresponsible as a reason to stall in the 6 party talks that have been stalling for eons. "What Cheney uttered at a time when the issue of the six-party talks is high on the agenda is little short of telling (North Korea) not to come out for the talks," an unnamed North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman said, according to the state-run Korean Central News Agency, according to what I picked up Here. This country is like a 5 year old who doesn't want to go to bed. They will pretend to do what you want, and then, right when you think they're behaving, there they are in the playroom with their toy rockets; only, in this case, the rockets aren't toys.

If we're so deadset on diplomacy, as we have been with other countries that have called us the enemy by name, then perhaps we need to use a little, uh, persuasive diplomacy, to get them to talk... Perhaps they'll understand something a little more persuasive than us giving them gas and food (thanks a lot, Bill).

Of course, North Korea is different than Iraq. They believe in their leader religiously, and because of that, they are willing to die to protect their utopia. Plus, the country is largely mountainous, with caves everywhere. It would not be a conventional war whatsoever. And then, of course, there's the problem with China. If North Korea attacks first, China doesn't get involved, but if we, or the ROK, or whoever, attacks first, then China will view it as a threat and would likely come to the aid.

Things aren't going to change in East Asia. We have too much at stake in China, South Korea, and Japan's economies to risk a war that would kill any of their markets. We'll probably keep saying nice doggy and trying to keep the DPRK on the back burner for as long as we can.

No EU for now?

bookworm posted the other day that the French rejected the proposed EU constitution. Of course, people who pay more attention to current events than I already knew that, but the Dutch rejected it as well, which is news today, so I'm not that far off!

Like Bookworm, I'm glad they rejected the Constitution, because I see a united Europe as a potential threat in the future. The one thing that the great (pejoratively speaking) leaders wanted was a united Europe, Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, et al. They failed through use of force, and it looked like diplomacy might succeed where the sword failed. The problem that a unified Europe poses is that they would immediately become a superpower, and the squabbling between the states would be no different than New Jersey bitching about all the pollution coming from New York, or Ohio's constant complaining about it's inferiority as compared to Michigan. That means that they could concentrate all their resources on external affairs.

Granted, I don't have the knowledge base on European happenings that I do Northeast Asia, I do, however, think that this rejection is a good thing.

It's Wednesday!

Dew on morning grass
The vague scent of honeydew
And of two wet cats

Hit me with your best shot!