Deep Thoughts

Okay, maybe not too deep, but something that popped into my head...

How many people, if they were truly honest with themselves, would say that an accurate answer to "what did you want to be when you grew up?" is "envied?"

What a Week

It was a rough week last week. I just got through what could be the most difficult Opinion I've ever worked on, and frankly, I'm exhausted.

Of course, I don't get to take a break because there are other Opinions that need working on.

Not that I'm complaining about having work. It beats the alternative.

Still, I could use a day off. Not that I'd know what to do with it.

Sorry, just a little rant. Trying to get it out of my system before getting back to the grind.

Time Time Time, See What's Become of Me

I miss blogging. I really do. Of course, most of the folks who I usually read/posted with no longer blog, which detracts some from the enjoyment of blogging, but I do like getting a few moments to put some random gibberish up on the screen.

I've unfortunately not been able to find a whole lot of spare time, recently, given the activity in which I find myself mired. Work has been very busy, and the children are involved in their extracurriculars, band, gymnastics, martial arts, etc.

I've also been active recently in Taekwondo. Learning the patterns, challenging myself to become at least a little healthier (or less unhealthy, perhaps?) has been really beneficial.

Unfortunately, all of these other things, plus housekeeping, cooking, caring for the dog, etc. means that I have less time to get in here and post random thoughts. I suppose the only real harm there is that they get bottled up in my head, but that really doesn't do much damage...

At any rate. I miss blogging, and I hope to be able to find a few moments every couple of days to throw something up here.

Wine

I started drinking wine about 2.5 years ago, after my wife and I enjoyed our trip to Italy. Great time. I never spent too much time on wine prior to this... my previous experiences with wine were that they were too sweet (white wines that I'd had), or they made the area at the back of my jaw hurt (red wines).

I have since learned that there really is a difference between the grapes, and the region where the grape is grown. I won't go into details, because I'd fudge it all up, but in a nutshell, I find that I really like a good red wine with lots of fruits and low on the tannins. My current red of choice is Inferi. It's a Montepulciano d'Abruzzo, from Italy. The flavors are full and have some oakiness to them, which helps make it a really smooth drink. In addition, there are a couple Spanish wines that I find I really enjoy, as well. Real de Aragon is a nice bargain with good flavors and low tannins (that's what made my jaw hurt, I've learned), that pairs well with lots of food. I love this as a table wine. I've also found that I enjoy Marquez de la Concordia Crianza, which is also a very nice to drink wine. Lately, I've picked up a couple bottles of Cubo, which is a tempranillo from Spain that also works really well...

I don't drink often, but I do drink about once a week. I find that enjoying a movie and a nice glass of wine is a good combination as I get older.

Long Weekend

Technically, not for me, as I'll be working Friday and Monday, but for the family. The wife will be taking a girls' trip to Vegas with her best friend and a couple other ladies, leaving me alone with three kids.

Now the question for me is, how does one spend a long weekend alone with the kids? There aren't exactly any family-friendly movies out that we haven't already seen, and I don't know how excited I am to spend the weekend at home trying to keep them satiated.

I suppose I could take them to the Zoo, or the Aquarium, but I'm not a big fan of either of those. Maybe I should take the kids to Sea World. They'd probably enjoy that, but I don't know if I could handle 3 kids alone at the park.

Taxes are paid, so we are no longer swimming in wealth, but we've still got a bit packed away, which is nice. I guess we'll just make sure we get out to eat once or twice and try to make the most of it. Perhaps a trip to the national forest is called for.

What Makes a Hero?

I was reading on another blog that I occasionally frequent, and there was a question that was posed in one of the posts, "does serving in the military make you a hero?"

Being a lawyer, my first answer was, of course, "it depends."

But then I thought about it. Timothy McVeigh was in the military. So was the defendant in the Fort Hood shootings. PFC England. Bradley Manning. Countless military members have been convicted and sentenced for crimes committed during service and after service. I had the duty of being a prisoner escort as one of my supplemental duties in the Air Force at my last duty station, and among the drug users and rapists that I escorted, I also had the chance to pick up an Airman who had been convicted of possession and distribution of child pornography while on a military base.

I have a hard time considering these individuals heroes.

But perhaps these are the exceptions that prove the rule? So I looked at the question a little more abstractly. By mere act of service, does that make one a hero? I mean, in reality, you become a military member by (1) Passing a physical, (2) signing a contract, and (3) making a promise (an oath of enlistment is little more than a formalized promise). Does satisfaction of those three elements in and of themselves qualify someone a a hero? Does it take something more, like successfully completing boot camp? Is there a lodestar service term that qualifies one as a hero, such as 6 months or 2 years, or 4 years?

I served 8 years in the Air Force, and by most accounts, without distinction. I struggled with my weight, however, I was promoted to Staff Sergeant in advance of the average. I complained, a lot, but I did my job, usually satisfactorily or better, depending on the day. I volunteered when I felt the urge, but I never consistently went above and beyond. Does the fact that I received an honorary discharge make me a hero? I sure don't feel like one, and I'd venture to say that the majority of men and women with whom I served felt or feel the same way, both about me and themselves.

I don't know what makes a hero. Perhaps it's all a matter of perspective. Interesting question to consider. Military members are people who volunteer to go into harm's way, sacrifice their Constitutional rights, and do so for pay that civilian counterparts would scoff at (I was offered a contract job when I separated that would have paid - to start - about 3-5k more per year than I made as an NCO, with full benefits). Is it possible that "the military" is heroic while the individual members need to be considered on a case-by-case basis?

Ponderings

Bragging on My Boy

So my oldest is 13. We refer to him as "the Boy." Good kid, sharp, mostly responsible, though can be a bit stubborn from time to time.

At any rate, we knew he was a sharp one from the beginning (all of my kids are pretty sharp; I think it comes from their mom's genes). We got some confirmation when he was added to the school's gifted and talented programs in elementary school (GT), and was placed in Pre-AP classes upon entering Jr. High.

This year, he was asked to take part in the Duke University Talent Identification Program (TIP). This meant that he got to take the ACT, and based on his scores, he qualified to take part in the summer program, which means The Boy is going to College for a month this summer.

We are quite excited for him. He'll be sending in his applications for classes this week, and when he's done, we'll get to figure out where we'll be sending our hard-earned money and our rather sharp young man for the summer.

I'm not sure how many kids get to take part in this every year, but I know I was never afforded the opportunity, so I'm very excited for him.

Good Ole PNW

So I'm writing to y'all from the beautiful city of Lakewood, Washington... the land of Koto Teriyaki. And where your inimitable author matriculated from high school (yes, I had a permit for that).

It's been nice so far, visiting the family. Today we drove down to Mt. St. Helens, drove up the highway a bit so we could find a wilderness park from which we could gaze upon the direction where we'd see the mountain had there not been Washington State Cloud Cover blocking all vision in all directions from January through the third week of August.

The kids enjoyed it nonetheless, as we drove into the blast zone (the part of the park where the eruption reached). Great times were had by all enjoying the snow, the scenery and their dad freaking out driving over bridges that weren't quite secure looking enough for dad while passing over chasms over 600 feet high.

I was disappointed that we didn't get to see the mountain, but I can't say that I'm entirely surprised. I did hope that by getting up closer that we'd at least be able to see something of the mountain, but we settled for Toutle River, seeing the blast area there.

Such a good time. We enjoy the quality time with the family, and the strawberry rhubarb pie was better than I thought it would be, so it's win-win.

Monday, Monday

We're heading off to Vacation in a couple days, so I figured I'd take a moment before getting down to work for the day and post an update on here.

After more or less ignoring the blog for the better part of a year, I figured it was about time I started putting something on here, though I'm fairly certain Bruce is the only one who still reads it, and he doesn't appear to have a blog of his own anymore.

I found that I got myself a little too involved in politically-oriented posts before I took my break, and I think I'm going to try to make a conscious effort to do less of that on this blog and be a little bit lighter in fare here.

I hope y'all (Bruce) don't mind.

Vacation, All I Ever Wanted

In about a week, we start our spring break vacation. For the second consecutive year, we will be flying back to where we went to high school and the better half went to college.

We like the PNW, though we will be saddened some that some of our blog friends have left the area. I am not opposed to living in the greater Texas Gulf Coast region, per se, but there are times where I do think it would be nice to have family somewhere relatively nearby.

It'll be nice, though. Our week is more or less packed, Aquarium, Ferry, Volcano, Crossing the border, Public Market, etc. It should be fun, but I somehow think we'll be more tired when we're done than we were before we left.

And it'll be nice to eat some good Asian restaurant food

Due to the High Demand

I present you with two (2) pictures of your inimitable blogger in action at the 28th Annual Unified Tae Kwon Do Invitational Championships. I'm the guy who looks more like a marshmallow. The first image is from my first round match, which I lost, and the second image is from my second round match, which I won.

Cheers.

Vignettes

Every now and then I go out and do stuff. Most recently, my youngest son (the Apple) and I participated in our first Taekwondo tournament.

The Apple signed up back around October or so, and really took a shine to it. After he'd been in it a couple months, he told me he wanted me to take it, too... and who can say no to their youngest child when they ask you to sign up and do something with him? So about the middle of January, I took my first class.

We did all right in the tournament. The Apple finished fourth in his group for his patterns, but unfortunately lost in his first round match for sparring and did not place there. He's a bit skittish about sparring, and since he's a bit short, standing back does not help him out.

I placed second in my group for patterns and surprisingly finished third in sparring. I say surprisingly, because I've not sparred before, and due to the low number of participants in my age group, I was paired up against individuals with significantly higher level belts than myself.

All things considered, we rather enjoyed ourselves. It was a good experience that I am sort of looking forward to repeating.

Advice for the July 2011 Texas State Bar Exam Takers

Reposted from June, 2008, but still pertinent.

It's almost July; the exam is coming up in about a month. Some of y'all may be getting stressed, particularly about practice exam/simulated MBE scores. First off - the simulated MBE is to give you an idea of what the exam is like and to kind of remind you that this is coming up. Keep studying your rules of law, and you will be fine.

Remember, the exam is there to test how well you can spot issues, state the rule and apply it (this is your IRAC in action). You have to be able to keep your thoughts organized - take your time and let the answer come out. Don't panic. So long as you've studied, you should be fine. The exam is designed to be difficult, but passable. The idea is that you need to put in the effort to prepare for it. Remember that, and remember that you already learned most of this in law school and you're just refreshing your mind while studying for the bar, and you should be fine. You still need to actually study, though. That part is tough to pass by...

I can't tell anyone "how" to study for the bar exam. Everybody learns their own way. I can tell you what worked for me, if that gives you a launching point for your own preparation after BarBri ends.

Photog and I studied together. We went to BarBri together, then went to the school and studied together. One thing that helped us was that we were able to find a room where we could speak to each other without worrying about disturbing others. This way, we could go over practice questions and exams and discuss the answers to reinforce what we were learning. We actually chose the International Law Society office at STCL because we knew we would be able to study and still have things to take the focus off our stress.

We would start the day by doing about 30-50 multiple choice questions, either from the Barbri software or questions from other exam sources. We would read 10 questions, we would both come up with answers individually, then we'd share our answer. If the answers did not match, then we would "sell" our answer to the other before we checked the answer (on the software we usually did this one question at a time). After we checked our answer, we made sure we understood the reasoning for the answer, particularly if we got it wrong, or if we got it right but only because we guessed the correct letter. Attention to detail counts here. Read each word in the question and answer. Then we'd take lunch.

After the MC questions, we would start on the essays (should be the yellow book). Again, we'd read a question, come up with an answer, explain the rule of law, and support our position. For these, we usually were pretty close with our answers, but our reasoning might differ slightly, except in the situations where we simply had no idea about the topic of the question (this will happen - make sure you make note of it and keep going - don't get bogged down). We would do this for 3-5 hours, usually getting through 3-6 essays (don't worry about speed, which will come, worry about getting the rules down). Then it was time for coffee and coca-cola breaks.

Then, depending on our energy level, we would consider going over the Procedure and Evidence questions - you want to do these a couple times, just to make sure you're comfortable with the questions - there's a limited number of questions that they can ask, so you should have little trouble getting these in your head.

One of the things that we had to do was keep something around to occupy ourselves - we had toy swords and a Nerf ball that we would bat around, and a yardstick we would balance from time to time. I find that I need to keep active while I'm studying, it helps me focus. This is certainly not for everyone and if you are studying with anyone, make sure that your study partner is of similar activity requirement.

Finally, keep your sense of humor, don't get discouraged - you know the information, you just need to practice getting it out. Like I said before - the exam is there to challenge you, not to try to fail you. If you ever need any bad jokes to ease the stress, I may know one or two.

Hi Debbie

We should do lunch.

Rewriting History

I have posted once or twice before on the First Amendment, particularly on the concept of religious liberty. It's been some time since I really got deeply involved in the concept, and I'm not likely to do so today, but let's gloss over the basic premise here real quick.

The first Amendment provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Practically, this means that if you choose to practice a religion in this country, you are free to do so, and if you choose to not have a particular religion or religious doctrine foisted upon, you have that freedom as well. Over the years, this First Amendment has been found to apply not just to the Federal Government, but also to the states, incorporated through the 14th Amendment.

There have been a few Court cases that have provided some (not crystal) clarity on the meaning of the First Amendment, including the oft-cited (by me) Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U. S. 602 (1971) which explains how a proposed act would not be violative of said Amendment: (it must have) 1. a legitimate secular purpose, 2. a pimary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and 3. the statute must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.

Additionally, we have Justice Black's explanation of the First Amendment in Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U. S. 1 (1947), in which he states,

The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect "a wall of separation between church and State.

beyond this we have a few other cases that touch on the First Amendment, see e.g. Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992), Santa Fe ISD v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (2000), and Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97. One of the best resources for studying the history of 1st Amendment Religion Clause history is Kitzmiller v. Dover Area Sch. Dist., 400 F. Supp. 2d 707, which I encourage those interested in Religion Clause issues to read at least once.

Now that I've gotten the brief history that I said I wasn't going to get into out of the way, let's get to the crux of this post. What I'm looking at this morning is a quote by a member of the American Family Association, who has claimed recently that "Islam has no fundamental First Amendment claims, for the simple reason that it was not written to protect the religion of Islam. Islam is entitled only to the religious liberty we extend to it out of courtesy. While there certainly ought to be a presumption of religious liberty for non-Christian religious traditions in America, the Founders were not writing a suicide pact when they wrote the First Amendment."

If we go back and look at the legislative and Court history, we can see very easily how wrong-minded this notion is, but in order to combat untruths like this, we need to explain a lot. This is what makes untruths so dangerous - they are quick soundbites that (may) seem to pack a good amount of information in them but the explanation afterward takes so much longer to get through that people don't want to hear it.

I don't begrudge people their opinions, but before spouting off on those opinions, particularly of Constitutional Matters, I wish people would do their homework.

Abusing Open Records to Attack Academic Freedom

I am a little reluctant to repost this as I don't want to appear as though I'm taking sides or steadfastly agreeing with what he says, but if we presume for the moment that he is speaking the truth, then I agree that using FOIA as a sword with which to intimidate those who by your perception have insulted you is wrong on many levels.
Abusing Open Records to Attack Academic Freedom

Tuesday

So I've been back to work for a bit more than a day now. I need to note that I don't particularly mind my work - It's a bit tedious, which is fine for me, and detail oriented, which I don't mind, necessarily - transactional work is more my cup of tea than adversarial work.

However, I do miss an office. I miss having people with whom I can interact. Frankly, I miss having friends, both work and personal. Virtual commuting doesn't do much for cultivating camaraderie, and socially, my wife and I aren't exactly good fits within the local community. While I was already a bit of a centrist, which doesn't always bode well in a solidly red district, my marriage has certainly moved me more to the left (I still am not a Democrat, but I'm starting to wonder if I will end up one). I get a little concerned with some of the conversations I hear in the neighborhood and at the church we had attended for some time. We stopped after the pastor exclaimed his fondness for Glenn Beck on the pulpit - we figured that was a signal that this church and our philosophies weren't a good match.

Anyway, I keep my ears open and look for something else that might pop up, but I think I'm getting to the point where I'm pigeonholing myself. Ah, well. That's what happens, I guess.

Vacation

We just spent a week in Washington State for Spring Break. It was nice to get out of Texas for a bit, and while I spent a good portion of the time feeling anxious, stressed, or driving the car with anxiety or stress, it did appear that everyone had a good time.

We managed to take the kids fishing for rainbow trout, which the Boy thought was rather tasty. We also went to White Pass to do some sledding, and I was tempted (a little) to try my hand at skiing again - I went once about 18 years ago and dislocated my thumb, but had a great time. We took the kids to Seattle and saw Pike Place Market, the fishmongers, got some good (or so my wife says) coffee, bought some good smelling tea, went to the Seattle Center, Gasworks Park, the U, and a few other things here and there.

The wife really wants to move back up there. I'm not quite as enthusiastic, but inasmuch as I love my wife, I'll go where she wants. There's pretty good fishing and hunting up there, and my friends are all still there, as well.

I did have quite the bit of fun showing the posse a little bit about wine, and they seemed to have a good time with it as well.

Now we just need to get the wife a job up there (Bruce, Microsoft needs more admins), and maybe find a way to finagle admission to the UW MBA or LLM program for myself so I can look attractive to area employers.

Pro Union

(Cross-posted at Vim and Vinegar)

I was born in Michigan. I have family members who have worked at various points in the past with various different Unions. While I would not call myself a "Union Man," I do believe that I have a sympathetic ear to Unions.

I remember reading about the AFL-CIO, Samuel Gompers, and all sorts of information regarding the creation of Unions in school, and I always took it as a given that the presence of Unions was a good thing. I have believed, and still believe that there is an inherent benefit to the strength of our country that is provided by a strong Union infrastructure.

I am writing this in Ulysses-style, so I doubt I will make a terribly coherent, compelling argument in support of my position, but I'll shoot for it nonetheless.

in the 1800s, we saw the age of Robber Barons and tycoons. We saw a whole lot of money and opportunity go towards the richest of the rich while the poor, the immigrants, the women, and the children would toil for 12-18 hours a day for subsistence rations. It was a vicious cycle wherein the rich got richer while the poor could barely stay afloat.

With the advent of collective bargaining, Unions created a situation where individuals could negotiate for improved conditions - standard workweeks, more pay, benefits, job security, etc. The result was an era of unprecedented growth for America. Productivity soared. More people had more money, the rich were still fabulously rich, people were able to start doing things such as take vacations, buy luxury items, which further drove our economy, creating more wealth. We became the industrial power that was the standard for the world in the 20th century. It strikes me as no coincidence that the areas that saw the strongest growth in the 20th Century were the ones that had the strongest Union presence.

Now, while I believe that a strong Union is necessary, I believe that a Union can be too overbearing. I think that there have been times in the past few decades where Unions have made demands more to justify the continued presence of the Union than to protect against an actual or potential harm. Such overreaches can weaken the benefit Unions provide by providing an argument against the existence of said Unions. So, to a certain degree, I believe that Unions need to be a strong, silent presence, except when truly needed (a difficult task, I'm sure).

We're in a position now where I think the benefits of Unions can be made apparent once again. We have seen an increase in income gap between the richest Americans and the middle class (whose salaries have grown in relation to inflation in 30 or so years); we're seeing record numbers of families below the poverty line, we're seeing politicians and pundits arguing in favor of stripping/scaling back benefits for the majority of Americans (see Social Security) while arguing strongly in support of continuing tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the wealthiest Americans.

Corporate America has the bullhorn. They control the message, and they shout it loudly and often. I am pro-Union, because I believe that the working American needs a collective voice for the long-term benefit of our country and our way of life.

Misinformation Central

Disclaimer - I don't dislike Bill O'Reilly. I think he's about as fair as you get on Fox News, and he admits to a conservative bias. I'm not particularly a fan, and I don't regularly watch his show, but I saw this link on Salon.com and checked out his interview with Glenn Beck, who I do not like. I'm amazed that people follow this guy's ramblings, or that he has any fan base whatsoever. Everything in the world is tied to some socialist/communist movement designed to take down our countries, even here in America.

Now, the one source Beck provided in this interview was to what he termed the "One Nation" movement, which he claimed was a collection of the Unions and all the socialist (or was it Communist?) organizations in America trying to bring Fundamental Change to our way of life. The link he stated on the interview was to here. I took a chance to check out the link, and it turns out this website is "English for the Children," an organization in favor of Proposition 227.

I just don't understand this guy's draw.