Sunday, March 30, 2008
Best case scenario: You get away for a few days, until someone recognizes you and turns you in.
Worst case: You get tackled by a donut-loving Farva with his trusty German Shepherd. Squishing and pain ensue, perhaps with permanent bite scars, along with that "resisting arrest" charge added onto your "pot possession" or "going 55 in the 54." Is it really worth it?
No matter what happens: zip your lips. You have the right to a lawyer, and however nice the cop might seem, shutting up until your lawyer gets there is the best solution.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
People have different preferences when it comes to laptops, and I got a lot of advice to buy a Mac or Dell. But I've had HPs all my life, and they've never given me any problems. I stuck with what I knew worked for me. It'll take a year or so to determine if I made the right choice, so we'll see.
The new one is also a lot prettier than my old one. Look at the cool design! I have to confess, that was a selling point. I am a girl, after all.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Prom. Prom!? Prom.
Next week is law school prom. Technically, it's called the "Barristers' Ball," but in reality, it's prom all over again. Yippee -- I wonder if my date will stand by me in public if I wear a poofy pink dress and tiara. Probably not.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Ann Althouse asks.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Someone who was certainly not surprised by Spitzer’s fall was Jason Itzler, erstwhile self-declared King of All Pimps. The now-41-year-old but still endlessly openmouthed Jason, whose exploits at his pricey NY Confidential whorehouse were previously described in this magazine (see “The $2,000-an-Hour Woman,” July 10, 2005), knew right away, before it came out in the press, that the Big Spit was a regular. “When I was in the business, if you had someone like him, you’d comp him. You comp him and comp him again, all the while jumping for joy because a client like that is like having the ultimate ‘get out of jail free’ card. But there’s a point you can’t comp him anymore. He’s using too much. You’ve got to begin charging. So if Spitzer was paying, and paying that much, he had to be serious addicted.”
It certainly raises interesting questions.
Secrets of the Megapimps [NYMag]
Sigh. I guess I'll have to learn. Any little tricks that people have to share would be appreciated.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
The game was postponed, but resumed about an hour later. MS State ended up winning. (Boo).
Tornado Trashes Atlanta [CNN]
There are about 5 guys in my living room, and even though the entire bracket is already released online, they refuse to look at it. They say it's "all part of the fun" to string out the bracket revelations.
I'm too impatient for this. I'll stick with my instant internet-only bracket.
The most recent installment of our good natured war of the blogs involves a post I wrote for Above the Law teasing a "lovely Canadian professor" at my law school for pronouncing "substantive" as "subSTANtive." The next con law class period, he handed me a printout from a Canadian dictionary showing that his pronunciation was, indeed, correct.
One point for Prof. H.
Regal me with your tales of white beaches, blue waters, and pina coladas until the sun comes up. Or console me with your similar workaholic spring break.
Friday, March 14, 2008
I'm just learning a ton with ATL, pushing boundaries, and having a great time. I see good things in our future together.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
My understanding as to not ending a sentence with a preposition was that the rule originated in Latin - where the preposition must be followed by the object in order to be correct. I'm ambivalent about the rule. I think the rearrangement of words to avoid such is a neat trick that shows off one's verbal acrobatics, but also generally unnecessary to clarifying one's meaning.Thanks, G.
"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."
Is this racist? Is pointing out someone's race racist? Is pointing out someone's sex sexist?
UPDATE: From the comments:
Pointing out race isn't racist, claiming someone is where they are BECAUSE of their race is potentially racist.
"I try to make people heckle me so I can engage them and preach to them," he said. "It's more fun for people. It's good to act a bit dumb sometimes. It's good to make statements that are politically incorrect."
The article doesn't talk about anyone challenging the preachers' right to preach, but it does describe some disagreements and times of tension that the preachers caused.
Alex Perkins, a senior majoring in theatre, said Venyah's tactics go too far.The preacher singled out someone in a crowd and called him "you homosexual." Just because Jesus did something, it does not mean that you have the authority to do it. Thoughts on this?
On Monday afternoon, Perkins asked Venyah a question. Venyah started pointing at Perkins, referring to him only as "you homosexual." Perkins said he became irritated and asked not to be pointed out, but Venyah told him to be quiet and shouted that homosexuals were taught by Satan.
"I find that incredibly offensive," Perkins said. "I think [Soulwinners is] just as militant as [Armstrong] is, but more offensive."
Venyah said he did Perkins a service.
"I just told him the truth," he said. "It's not Christ telling men to have sex with men, to masturbate, to drink alcohol. That's the devil."
Freedom of speech probably covers this type of behavior, but I'm not sure about that. Simple ethics -- respect for others -- would seem to prohibit it.
On a federal wiretap.
Isn't that how you caught all those Wall Street crooks? Shouldn't you know that when the transaction is shady, you shouldn't talk about it on the phone? Lastly, should you be inclined to tangle with prostitutes in the future, Randy Moss has some advice for you:
"Straight cash, homey."
Also, Spitzer's escort really, really "loves" who she is.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
When I first saw this story, I thought he was being nailed for participation in the money side of the ring. The guy is already Governor of NY, but money is a universal motivator. "So what?" I thought. "He got greedy and got caught."
But the story is much stranger than that. It's being reported that Spitzer met with a high-dollar prostitute in a DC hotel. Why would he pay for sex? He's in a position of power, there HAVE to be other women who want to sleep with him for free. Of course, adultery wouldn't make the situation any more morally acceptable than prostitution. I'm just talking about whether or not his decision was rational.
When I voiced this opinion to my friend Gloria, she reminded me that the prostitute was likely under a contract that would bind her to keeping silent about the affair for the rest of her life. Most likely, Spitzer didn't pay for the sex -- he paid for discretion.
I'm sure a good lawyer could turn that into an argument and get Spitzer off (in more than one way).
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Our Evidence professor gave us one such speech today. In particular, he told us that we should try to make friends who aren't law students or lawyers. He ended the talk by telling us that, if we need to, we should go see the campus counseling services.
The first suggestion -- to make non-lawyerly friends -- is probably wise. Everyone needs good influences, right? The reminder about the counseling services just strikes me as funny. Also funny: that the people who are making our lives so stressful suggest that we go to Jamaica for spring break. Sorry, professor, I'll be too busy working on the brief to go to Jamaica this year. Gee, thanks for the suggestion though.
Sigh. Maybe next year.
In law school, the discussion is very different. The students are very, very reluctant to state opinions, and when they (we) do, it's like tiptoeing. Of course, this makes sense in an environment like law school, where people are excessively aware of peer approval.
But it's also counter-intuitive in at least one sense. When we're talking about less emotional issues, the debate is more heated than it is now, when the subject is extremely controversial. Yet the abortion discussion is like pulling teeth to get students to contribute.
Another observation: People tend to mimic the speech that they're exposed to. Since we're reading and discussing abortion cases, words like "conception" and "termination" are being used as they relate directly to the actual abortion procedure, but people are also unconsciously using them to mean other things ("My conception of this idea involves...").
Sunday, March 09, 2008
Stephen A. Crockett (Jr. [Shouldn't there be a limit for the number of name-parts you can use in a byline? I'm thinking 3. Four is just gratuitous.]) feels you too. Even though his name is annoying and distracting, the man can write. If you're a Wire fan, check out his series eulogy. It may make you feel a little better.
Saturday, March 08, 2008
Here are the complaints that I think have some merit:
- Over-posting on frivolous news items.
- Under-posting on substantive pieces.
- SEN...you're cute. Stick to that.
- Lat - Hopefully, today the last day of Take Your Kid to School Week. Get off your ass and work.
I bet that guy would make a good wife-batterer.
Among the battering of ATL commenters, I also received the best compliment I've ever been given:
Sharon, I didn't even realize it was you posting and not Lat today on AboveTheLaw, particularly since it is Thursday and I thought you'd be posting on Fridays. The fact that I didn't notice that it was you today shows how seamless the transition was and is between you and Lat. Kudos to you!This last compliment was posted anonymously, but I'd like to know who wrote it. If you feel like revealing yourself, my email address is Ijudgeyouwhen AT gmail DOT com.
On another note, it is very telling that all the bitter people who wrote nasty comments last week have suddenly disappeared on AboveTheLaw. A sign of acceptance for you from the male-dominated New York crowd that primarily posts there. That level of acceptance is not easily accomplished by a Southerner in the span of one week. For example, every time that Billy Merck pops his head up, a pack of people will instantly write about how much they hate him in a dozen different ways.
Good work, Sharon!
Thursday, March 06, 2008
That’s right, people. Kentucky Law’s lockers are unsafe. A tipster forwarded us the email that Associate Dean Bakert sent out today warning students not to keep books in their lockers until the security threat is addressed. There was a lock on the locker in question, but the crafty thug apparently broke it.
We know those law school books can be expensive, but they are not the things that a proper gangster steals. You can’t even brag about that, player.
We can think of some creative things the students could keep in their lockers instead of books. Like, you know, snacks and stuff. To our resourceful commenters: what helpful items would you suggest Kentucky’s law students keep in their lockers instead of books?
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
In response to a question about interesting experiences while living in the White House: "You know, when I stopped drinking, I stopped seeing ghosts!"
"We hang influential Presidents on the wall in the Oval Office and I've got Lincoln up there. I mean, I hang 41 in my heart, but Lincoln's on the wall."
"That's the great thing about America, you can worship however you want. Whether your Jew, Christian, Muslim, Hindi....Vegan, whatever!"
On what he'll do after his term ends: "I'll probably make some speeches, if they're paying, of course. I've got bills to pay!"
"My buddy Clay [Johnson] came into the Oval Office and said, 'I can't believe we're here, and what's more, I really can't believe you're here." - W's Yale University roommate.
She's talking about the Justices' demeanors, telling how Chief Justice Rehnquist would cut off lawyers in oral arguments as soon as the red light came on. I can imagine that gruff, daunting man startling little lawyers at the end of their time, totally cutting them off. Hey, those are the rules.
Now she's talking about the interactions between Justice O'Connor and CJ Rehnquist, about how the CJ struggled to stay on the court until the very end of his life. Greenburg is casting this in a good light, saying how the CJ overcame these great odds, beat thyroid cancer, and came back to the Court. But do we really want to encourage the justices on our highest Court to continue serving when they're not really in shape to make their best decisions?
I've heard this argument about TVs in the Court. The argument is that if we allow TV coverage, the justices' conditions will be highly public. If their mental acuity is slipping, it will be more apparent with TV coverage than by just reading their opinions (which are mostly written by clerks, anyway). If their physical movements are scrutinized, it will encourage them to step down sooner if they need to. While this might sound heartless, it's a good argument for quality control of the Court. We want SCOTUS to make lasting, credible decisions, so we should encourage conduct consistent with that.
Greenburg is almost done speaking. I'm impressed by her speaking style, but I wish she had spoken more about the mechanics of covering the Court. She mostly told anecdotes about the interactions between the president and the Court and between the justices. She's done what I'd like to do -- turned a law degree into a writing and speaking career -- so I wish she'd spoken more about it. But she does have a book to promote. She has an authoritative speaking and writing style, and she has a blog (yeah!).
Conclusion: I don't know that I'll buy her book, but there's a copy on reserve at the library that I'll check out. If you're interested in the recent history of the Court, you'll probably be interested in her book.
UPDATE: Now she's answering questions. Prof. Horwitz just asked a question about reasoning in decisions, and how that compares as an influence in decisions compared to ideology. In journalism, with those who have a law school background, is there a greater respect for meticulously reasoned decisions over decisions influenced mostly by partisanship?
She's responding to the question, but she's talking about the justices, not journalism. She says that the conservative justices seem to be more resolute, that they hold that they absolutely made the right decision in every case. She's talking about Bush v. Gore, and she says the liberal justices remain convinced that the Court never would have heard the case if the parties were reversed. The liberal justices think the conservative justices are partisan, surprise surprise. I wonder if they ever, you know, flip a coin. Sometimes it seems like it, huh?
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
"These writers, despite the famed interconnectedness of the web, seem uncommonly starved for connection."
The currency of blogging is links. I link to you, you link to me, we comment on each other's writing. It's constant interaction, perpetual peer review. Books cannot link (in the same sense). The reason that blog posts collected in a book seem "starved for connection" is that the material was never meant to go in a book. When you take something out of the environment it was made for, depends on, and made IN, of course it seems incomplete.
Final pet peeve about this review: the pretentious use of "Y'all" to detract from the form of writing. Ugh.
As I'm reading more of her pieces, I'm getting more excited to hear her speak. She's done what I want to do -- she turned a legal degree into a writing career. I just might be the gunner of her talk tomorrow.
"I didn't!" I protested. He laughed it off, then asked what NIU was. I should have linked to an explanation of the NIU tragedy, but I really didn't want to link Prop.Prof Krier's joke to such a tragedy. The Joke was a joke, and it served a good purpose. It was effective, it didn't waste much class time, and it put us all back in a mindset to be serious.
I explained the NIU tragedy in class today when Prop.Prof asked, and I'll link to it in this post. I just wanted to make it clear that those were totally different incidents, very very dissimilar. I mentioned the NIU thing to show my appreciation for Prop.Prof not being overly-politically correct and stuffy, like some professors would have been. Here's the NIU link.
I don't think this is like reading Sparknotes instead of Hamlet in high school because Sparknotes is easier. If I've already done the reading, reading a supplement isn't cheating. What say you?
Monday, March 03, 2008
I resolved a Bank of America issue over their chat just now, and it took probably 1/4 of time time I would have spent on the phone.
REPLY: to the comments on the laptop post. While I recognize the advantages of a Mac, the problem is that we take exams on a Windows-based platform. People with Macs have had all kinds of problems, and I'd rather stick to a PC for that purpose. Any advice on PC? What RAM and memory specifications are up to date? I'm partial to my HP, but open to suggestions.
[SHOOT! Spell check doesn't cover the title, apparently. Go ahead and judge me.]
What are current specifications for laptops? Like RAM and memory. I researched these things last time I bought a laptop, but I have no idea now.
- I need it to be light
- I've settled on a 14'' or fewer screen
- Word and OneNote
- Preferably, NO AOL applications. They're too hard to get rid of and useless for me.
- Also, I'd rather have Windows XP, but everyone is selling computers with Vista. Is it worth it to find one with XP? I have Vista on this machine and I don't like it, but that may be because this computer is slower. I might like it on a faster machine.
I did all the usual phishing checks -- the website was really Facebook, the email was really from Facebook, etc. So somebody was really trying to hack my Facebook account. I wonder what types of changes they would have made. It's kinda scary to think about -- a TON of my pictures are stored on Facebook.
Note to self: back up Facebook pictures.
Last week we had a particularly brutal class. It was obvious that only a few were prepared, and those who weren't prepared were drilled into the ground, head first. It looked like it hurt. The class ended on sort of a tense note, and we all just wanted to leave.
Cut to the next class. Prop.Prof comes in and apologizes. He says that he's only hard on us because he respects our ability to do the work. He mentions the fact that he's new to Alabama (he came from Michigan) and maybe we do things a bit differently here, and he'd try to conform to the level of politeness that he sees in Alabama.
Student A, who only has a reputation for being a super nice guy and very hard worker, stands up.
"I don't know what you're thinking up there, but where I come from we treat everyone right. You're talking down to us right now, and I don't want to take it anymore."
Student A shuts his book and stomps out of the room, saying "I'm not going to take it anymore." Stunned, everyone looks around for a clue about what we should do.
Prop.Prof: "Well, if anyone else feels the same way, go ahead and leave."
No one moves. Prop.Prof starts teaching again. A full two minutes of awkwardness later, Student A pops his head in the door and says "HA! It was all a joke. Prop.Prof Krier was in on it!"
My thoughts on this: It was a brilliant strategy to build goodwill for Prop.Prof after we had such a brutal previous class. If he's cool enough to play a joke on a whole class, he must be cool in other ways.
Other thoughts: After the NIU thing, there were probably better words they could have chosen than "I'm not gonna take this anymore." Also, the whole class disturbance thing could have been frightening.
Full disclosure: I wasn't there. I'm just hearing this second-hand and describing it based on my knowledge of the people involved.
In the end, nothing bad happened and goodwill for Prop.Prof Krier is restored. So, good work everybody.
Saturday, March 01, 2008
Arguments in Drudge's favor:
- News is news, and it's all fair game.
- We read websites because we want to be informed as soon as possible. Drudge gets readers because of his willingness to report what others won't, so anyone who reads Drudge is sanctioning this type of disclosure.
- Slippery slope: if there are no journalistic standards, the news may as well be tabloids. Don't we want our news from quality sources?
- The ultimate line in the sand: when the information could put lives in danger.
- CNN, BBC and other respected news sources had agreed on not reporting the prince's location.
These are my thoughts on it. I think there are good arguments on both sides. See if you can come up with better ones.