CNN Selling T-Shirts?

CNN.com is selling T-shirts now. Check out the little shirt icon by some of the headlines. Weird.

Inadvertently Appropriate

Our first exam is Constitutional Law, on Thursday. I'm preparing for it, and I just ran across a Virginia case that addresses the rights of gay parents to raise children. This is horribly immature of me, but I totally giggled when I saw the name of the case: Bottoms v. Bottoms, 457 S.E.2d 102 (Va. 1995). I hope I get a chance to cite it on the exam.

Newt Gingrich [Hearts] Al Gore

Newt Gingrich is on Al Gore's side for once. Well, kinda. Slate has Gingrich answering questions from readers about global warming. Although Gingrich emphasizes that the private sphere should take responsibility for implementing changes to combat global warming -- as opposed to the government -- it's refreshing to see a Republican acknowledging environmental concerns.

I always thought it was strange how political ideology dictated people's position on a scientific issue. Your politics describe how you think the government should best run (answering the age old question: how can we best live together peacefully?), so it seemed odd to me that being Republican meant you denied the existence of global warming, and being a Democrat meant you recognized it. I'm glad some high profile politicians (and ex-politicians) are changing that.

Gas Prices

How expensive was gas when you started driving?

When I was 16, I drove a 1991 Acura Integra with a tiny tank. I remember paying around $20 to fill it up. I turned 16 in 2000, and this article from that year puts the average gas price around $1.42. The average now, according to CNN, is $3.50 a gallon, and my Explorer costs at least $60 to fill the tank.

What's the lowest price for gas that you can remember?

I remember driving in Georgia with my parents and seeing a station with gas for under a dollar per gallon. Complaining about the current high prices isn't productive, but looking at this in perspective sure makes it tempting to buy a hybrid.

The Severn

Valerie Nebbia, a girl I went to high school with, has written a beautiful description of Annapolis and the Severn river.

The smell - that nearly rotten brackish smell - twists through the stray wisps of my hair as I peddle my Schwinn down past the large water-front homes and through the tall trees to the edge of the peninsula.

Now I see the water-logged stars and breakers go about their usual business. Fishermen still sit with their poles beside them though time nears mid-day and the chances of making a good catch slim rapidly. They hesitate to leave lest the perfect fish should pass and never return.

A blue heron shoots a suspicious eye in my direction and launches in, to safer and quieter ground. This native celebrity has no tolerance for interruptions. You will never find her sunning at the community pool nor venturing out to the super market. No, she keeps to herself and considers it an offense when others do not as well.

In the distance cloudy-white patches of fabric rise from barely visible ships beneath them and labor to pull their vessels against the tide.

I was born out of this river. My hem eternally pinned to its shores by the warning lights that spear deep into its body along every inlet. I am tied to its docks. I am forever bound by this place for it holds captive the root of my peace - an unbreakable chain and the origin of its lock unknown to me to this day.

Whenever I leave, I feel as though I am a ghost, a breathless and inadequate print of my true self. Always the sweet melodies of the Severn call me home. And when I return my heart beat slows and steadies as the water against docked boats in the harbor.

For truly my wholeness is here - my heaven.

Annapolis is one of the three places I call home (along with Tuscaloosa and Charleston, SC). If you're at home around the water, this may resonate with you.

I Like Your Enthusiasm

This is our last week of classes, so students haven't been particularly meticulous about doing the reading. We're just more focused on finals, which start next week. In Con Law, Prof. Horwitz mercifully stopped cold calling students for this week. But his enthusiasm for the material remains. He started class today with this:

"I am SO glad to be here, and I am so FREAKING excited to cover this material!"

Last class, apologizing for being a minute late, he opened with:

"Hey guys, I'm sorry I'm a few minutes late. I started looking in the mirror and just lost track of time."

Free Coffee and Jobs

The law school's career services office sends us emails every day about the treats they're handing out to persuade us to come by their office. Usually, free coffee and donuts are on the menu. We received one such email today, and here was the response I overheard:

"Free coffee and donuts? How about 'free coffee and jobs'?!''

Best. Campaign. Poster. Ever. Period.

Elections for the new SBA members were held last week. Although the rules prohibit most campaigning, the candidates were allowed to submit one-page posters that were hung on a wall in the law school. My hilarious friend Robert, whose poster is depicted in the grainy cell phone picture below, wins the Funniest Flier contest.

















It reads "Robert Wadkins: NOT a registered sex offender." Not only did he win the best poster award, he also won his election. Congratulations, Robert.

Frivolous Classes and Football Tickets

The law school decided that rising 2Ls should register this morning -- the same morning that football tickets went on sale. Now, football tickets might not seem like a big deal to you. If they're not, then you don't go to a big SEC school. Getting football tickets at Alabama is at least as exciting as landing a well-paying summer job, and twice as exciting as getting into the classes that you want for next semester.

The good news: I got football tickets AND into the classes I wanted next semester. The bad news: most of the classes I wanted were frivolous, and although my schedule for next semester is awesome (Sports Law!), I'll end up having a boring schedule in the spring.

Cherry Blossoms, by Ann Althouse

I Love it When Cell Phones Ring in Class

A student's cell phone rang in Property today, and the ring was an old Lauryn Hill song. Unfortunately for the student, but fortunately for everyone else, the phone was buried in his bag and took a while for him to find, while Lauryn Hill loudly played.

The best part, though, was the professor's reaction: he danced! And not only danced, he then told the student "Lauryn Hill? I thought you were cool, man. Get with the times. Give me something good to dance to."

Possibly the Most Disheartening Thing I'll Hear all Day

The first thing my professor in my 8:20 am class said today was this:

"Nothing we cover in this class today will be on the exam."

I even did the reading! Why the heck did I come today?

Affirmative Action

We're doing the affirmative action cases in Con Law this week, especially the U of Michigan cases (Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger). The discussion is much more lively than when we read the abortion cases, which surprises me. Affirmative action is an incredibly touchy area for a lot of people, and in a class of mixed races, it seems like the sensitive nature of the subject would silence a lot of the debate, like it did when we talked about the abortion cases.

There is a big difference in the issues. People who are pro-life view abortion as murder, as the definite ending of a human life. Affirmative action isn't interpreted an issue of life and death. Also, I think we're at the age when it is convenient to be pro-choice. There are certainly some people here who are pro-life, but they didn't speak up, so there may be a general pro-choice consensus that contributed to the lack of debate. The reticence did surprise me, though.

Anyway, I'm glad that reticence has disappeared. It makes for a much more interesting class when people participate.

Creepy Mascots as a Marketing Trend

There's a recent marketing trend in which companies turn their traditionally wholesome mascots into funny-creepy CGI approximations of the old versions. Cheetos did it with their "Orange Underground" campaign, in commercials such as this one, in which the sinister Cheetah encourages a girl to dump the bright orange Cheetos in a woman's white laundry.

Now, M&Ms (I accidentally typed that as M$Ms, which will be the way I refer to them from now on) has done it in this spot. In the M$Ms commercial, a big blue M$M with a chimo -- child molester -- hairpiece sits on a couch in a suburban-looking living room, licking himself. The voice over says "When you're an M$M, you'll really enjoy the way you taste." A motherly looking woman walks in and says, with alarm, "Are you licking yourself?" The blue M$M says "What? What'd you say?" while he continues to graphically lick himself.

If you read Perezhilton.com, you will understand my association of Cheetos with Britney Spears walking barefoot out of a public restroom. Because of that association, I will never buy Cheetos. But I will laugh at their commercials, and I'm on my way to get some M$Ms right now.

I hope this trend continues!

UPDATE: An anonymous commenter has pointed me to the Burger King, who is absolutely creepy. In fact, he was probably the first mascot reinterpreted as creepy. I can't think of an earlier one.

Check out this commercial, the one in which the Burger King peeps through windows.

Strategery

That last post reminded me of my favorite made-up word: "strategery." It came from a presidential debate SNL skit between Bush and Gore, in which the moderator asked the candidates to sum up their platforms in one word.

Mr. Gore: "Lockbox."
Mr. Bush: "Strategery."

Strategic Public Speaking

Yesterday was the moot court competition finale for the older students. Our legal writing class required us (the 1Ls) to attend, and I'm glad we went. We'll have to do our first moot court trial in a few weeks, so it was good to watch one so we'll be familiar with what we're doing.

My father is a pastor and a great public speaker. Unfortunately, public speaking skills do not seem to be genetic. (Neither do math skills.) Watching my father speak every Sunday for the majority of my life has given me a little habit while listening to other people speak -- I notice the differences, the strengths and weaknesses, the tactics of speaking which are effective and which aren't.

I've also listened to Supreme Court cases on my iPod (If you're a huge dork like me, you can find these at Oyez.org). Because you can't see the person speaking when you listen to these, the tone of the person's voice especially important. If the tone is condescending, un-authoritative, or just plain annoying, they're not likely to be persuasive.

The students who represented parties in the moot court competition yesterday were wonderful. It's a very difficult task to stand in front of a crowd -- as a student -- and argue with real judges on legal issues. They had to be prepared to answer the judges' questions quickly, accurately and succinctly. I took some notes during the competition, and here were the strategies that I thought were most effective:

• Anticipating questions and having authorities to quickly cite to back up your own argument;
• An authoritative, but respectful tone of voice. Paradoxically, when an advocate said "respectfully, your honor" too often it came off as patronizing.
• Telling the court how many points you are immediately about to make. If you're answering a question, it helps your answer to be coherent and effective if you preface it by saying "This argument does not hold for 3 reasons." It may seem robotic in writing, but it really helped when they were making arguments yesterday.

These were just my initial thoughts after watching the competition, and I'm sure we'll talk about it in class today.

Fixed!

The Cubs statue's apostrophe is missing no more.

Best headline of the day:

"Real Men With Mancaves"

Well, that's embarrassing.

The Cubs didn't copy edit an engraving, and the missing apostrophe is now immortalized in granite.

[Thanks, Bud.]

"She only drinks Diet Coke and has even admitted she hasn't drunk water in years because she 'hates the taste.'"

Posh, like my mama, doesn't drink water! I think this is so strange. I taught myself to drink water in college, mostly because I was broke and couldn't afford Diet Coke every time I was thirsty. But it's also healthier.

Also, Posh apparently keeps her 24-inch waist by never eating full meals. She only eats snacks -- pretzels and soy beans. That sounds like a sad existence to me. If you're only going to eat snacks, go for ice cream and nuts.

Link Swappage

The Natalie Show gave me this profanity-laced but awesomely emphatic shout out today. My favorite part: the "Did that just happen...?" subtitle.

OneNote

How the heck did I survive without OneNote up until now? It is amazing!

Running from the Cops

Most of you know about my fondness for the TV show Cops. I'm watching it tonight, and here's the big question: What the heck do you hope to gain by running from the cops, especially after the cop already had a good view of your face?

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.

New Computer

My new computer came yesterday! My old one was almost 3 years old, and while it was still in working order, I decided it was time for a new one. Our law school has a zero tolerance policy during exams for technical difficulties, so if your computer freezes and you lose your work 2 hours into an exam, too bad. You don't get to make up the extra time. Knowing that, and knowing how many tics older computers seem to have, I took advantage of an HP sale and bought this new one. It's also 14 inches wide, compared to my old one's 17 inch-wide screen, so the new one is easier to cart around.

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.

Law School Prom

I've written before about how much law school resembles high school. Seriously. We have lockers, there are about 500 students (total), and the gossip rivals that of Sweet Valley High. Guess what other high school tradition we have?

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.

Loaded Question

"So, how do you like law school?"

New Word

Property class taught me a new word today: chary. Try to guess what it means before you read the rest of this post.

Chary: discreetly cautious or wary.

"Do you ever hear about somebody whose life is so interesting that you're envious..."

"...even though you don't want to do any of the things that person does?"

Ann Althouse asks.

Eliot Spitzer's Secrets

Was Spitzer addicted to sex? To prostitutes? Until now, I had the impression that it was a one-time indiscretion. But indiscretions like this are rarely solitary. From an article in NY Magazine:

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]

Deadlines

I'm a deadline-driven person. It helps organize my time when I have a deadline staring me in the face. Consequently, I'm having a hard time getting work done this week (it's spring break for us). How do you work on a paper that isn't due for another 3 weeks?

Sigh. I guess I'll have to learn. Any little tricks that people have to share would be appreciated.

Happy Saint Patrick's Day

Happy Saint Patrick's Day, everyone!

When a Tornado Hits During a High-Stakes Basketball Game

Did you see the game between Alabama and Mississippi State last night? It was played at the Georgia Dome, which was apparently hit by a tornado during the game. The roof was leaking, there were places where the roof was completely torn off, and the structure itself was shaking.

The game was postponed, but resumed about an hour later. MS State ended up winning. (Boo).

Tornado Trashes Atlanta [CNN]

Bracketology

We're watching the parts of the brackets being revealed by ESPN, interspersed by commercials and observations by commentators.

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.

Is anyone keeping score?

Prof. Horwitz, who is also a blogger (PrawfsBlawg) and my con law professor, and I have had a good natured ribbing going on through our blogs. I wrote about how he had a "pimp cane," he replied on his blog and demonstrated that he has a wonderful sense of humor.

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.

Spring Break

Anyone doing something fun for spring break? I'm faking it by working on the book, law school work, and ATL -- but going to the tanning bed and watching basketball in between. At least I'll be a tan, basketballsy-informed workaholic.

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.

Absence on ATL

David (daBossmann) Lat is trying out new bloggers, and wants several to fill in at different points. I don't know right now what my role would be exactly, but I think he has a role for me on the site when things get settled. Something like "Project Chick" would do just fine.

I'm just learning a ton with ATL, pushing boundaries, and having a great time. I see good things in our future together.

On Ending Sentences with Prepositions:

I tend to agree with Gloria:

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.

Prof. H Makes us Laugh

"We might have some visitors during class towards the end of the semester. It may be other faculty, etc. It's all standard stuff. Don't worry about it -- I'll pretend I'm sober, and you'll pretend you're paying attention."

And the Aides Fall

Samantha Power worked for the Obama campaign, and she stepped down last week after calling Clinton a "monster." Compare this to the quote that Geraldine Ferraro, who worked for the Clinton campaign, was forced to step down over today [CNN]:

"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:

RumorsDaily said...

Pointing out race isn't racist, claiming someone is where they are BECAUSE of their race is potentially racist.

Warm Weather Brings the: Preachers?

As the temperature has risen, so have the number of campus preachers. Today's Crimson White has an article about the students who use a little outdoor "free speech area" to preach to students walking by. Some of the group's tactics are fine, even admirable: they read passages from the Bible and talk about them, sometimes encouraging a dialogue. If this helps students make more informed choices, then great. It also encourages debate, which is (arguably) the purpose of higher education.

"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.

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."

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?

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.

Advice for Eliot Spitzer

So, (ex) Governor Spitzer, how did they catch you?

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.

Spitzer Agrees to Resign

Spitzer agrees to resign over his ties to a prostitution ring.

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).

Don't Kill Yourselves (It'll Make the Law School Look Bad)

Law school is mostly a blur of stressful situations and hours spent studying. Every once in a while, however, our professors give a little speech about how much they care about us, and how we should try to balance our lives with non-law school related activities. I think they're worried that someone's going to kill himself.

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.

This made me giggle:

My legal writing professor just (purposely) said "This isn't rocket surgery, people."

Observation

In Con Law we're talking about the abortion cases -- Roe, Casey, Carhart, etc. -- and the nature of discussion is totally different from any kind of discussion that would have happened in college. In undergrad, people would voice emphatic opinions and defend them vigorously. The class would probably run long, and the professor would moderate.

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...").

The Wire

I've become a fan of The Wire this season, and I ended up watching all of the previous episodes during the past six months or so. Tonight is the final episode of the entire show. To any other fans-in-arms out there who are anxious: I feel you.

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.

Ah, Sunday

Sunday used to mean a day off:

And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done. (Genesis 2:3)

I'm guessing that whoever created law school didn't ask God's opinion first.

Reviews on ATL

I read through some of the criticisms tonight, and I think the ATL crowd is the toughest to please out of any blog I've read. That's alright, though. It just means I have to step it up.

Here are the complaints that I think have some merit:

• Over-posting on frivolous news items.
• Under-posting on substantive pieces.

Here are some complaints that just make me laugh:

• 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.

Then there were some complaints along the lines of "You're a girl. You'd make a good wife. Stop trying to do guys' 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!

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!

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.

Whew.

Just finished the afternoon's blogging at ATL. I'm getting the hang of it now, which may just mean that I'm getting better at scanning the news and filtering out which items I have something relevant to say about. My favorite post of the afternoon is below, but check out the rest at the actual website.

Book-Stealing Hoodlum on the Loose at U of Kentucky Law

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?

Busy Day

I'll be blog-sitting over at ATL for a few hours later this afternoon, and tomorrow I get to take over the WHOLE place for the ENTIRE day. What devious things do I have planned? You'll have to wait and see, but I will say this: it involves vodka and verbal rabble-rousing.

I Heart Facebook

Dahlia Lithwick and I are totally Facebook friends now. Yes!

President Bush Gossip

President Bush gave a speech yesterday in Washington, DC for political appointees, and I have a source who was there. As far as I know, there weren't TV cameras there and press coverage was minimal. Apparently the Pres. really let loose and had some super goofy moments. Heck, why not? He doesn't have to run for anything ever again. Here are some approximate quotes from the talk. (Imagine these in a deep Texas accent.)

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.

Jan Crawford Greenburg

Jan Crawford Greenburg is speaking at my law school today, and I'm in the room listening to her now. She is (was?) a legal correspondent for ABC News, and she has a new book out called Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control for the United States Supreme Court (Penguin Press).

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?

"Y'all" Writing

Jacob Rubin critiques Sarah Boxer's blog anthology titled Ultimate Blogs: Masterworks from the Wild Web. Rubin describes the obvious public element of blogging: yes, it really is out here for everyone to see. He gives a mixed review to the actual book, saying that some entries are better than others. I haven't read the book, but he makes one observation that seems absurd that I wanted to address:

"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.

Jan Crawford Greenburg

Jan Crawford Greenburg is coming to speak at UA tomorrow morning, and all the Con Law classes are going. I'm just now reading up on her, but I like her writing style. She has a new book out on SCOTUS, and (my favorite part) she has a blog.

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.

Quote from Con Law, on Exam Taking:

Prof. Horwitz: "Fear organizes and concentrates the mind beautifully."

That's a good way to sum up the feeling in law students' hearts around exam time: fear.

Ohh, snap. Prop.Prof Krier just called me out.

In the middle of Property class, he stopped his teaching, looked around the room for "Ms. Nichols," and asked me why I said bad things about him in this post about the joke he played on the class.

"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.

Westlaw Briefing

What do you think the ethical considerations are for getting your case briefs directly from Westlaw? I read the assigned reading, but I find myself reading the Westlaw brief too to remind myself of the important points of law.

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?

Chat with a Representative

The "chat with a service representative" feature that most websites have now is the BOMB. Just sayin'.

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.]

Advice about Laptops

I'm in the market for a new laptop. I've had HPs for my whole computing life, and I really like my HP notebook that I have now. I've had it for 2 and a half years, and sadly it's getting slow on 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.

Considerations:

• 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.

Virus protection is provided for free by the school, so these are my main concerns. Any advice?

Hackers and Pictures

The other day, I received an email from Facebook saying that someone tried to hack into my account. I had to change my password, because the hacker had apparently been successful.

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.

Jokes Build Goodwill

Prop.Prof Krier has a peculiar way of teaching. His classes resemble math classes, with him drilling the students on the problems from the night before. It gives me panic attacks (not the drilling, the mathematical similarities), but I understand how it can be an effective teaching method.

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.

Drudge Breaks Prince Harry Story

Prince Harry comes home from Afghanistan because the media publicized his location. This CNN article doesn't name the news outlet that broke the story, but Headline News is reporting on TV that it was Drudge.

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.

Arguments against:

• 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.

The Latest Food Recall

Unidentified pills were found in Gordon's fish fillets in PA.

That's a Wrap!

I just wrapped my first day blogging over at ATL. Whew. Blogging for a living is mentally tiring, but I enjoyed several things about it. I got to write about things that I find interesting, and I liked the fast pace. I get distracted easily, so it's nice to have a forum for writing short, direct posts.

The process starts with reading a vast amount of news and commentary, then filtering what news you do or don't have something funny to say about. After you figure out what you can write about, you have to filter it again for relevancy. Then you write the post. It goes like this over and over again, until the day is over.

It was brutal but exciting. David and I did a tag-team effort today, so he could show me how to use the system. Next Friday, I'm doing it all alone. Talk about pressure.

Overall, people have been pretty encouraging, and I'm ecstatic about the opportunity.

ATL Day 1

Here I am, ready for service. I start blogging at Above the Law in the next few minutes, starting with a little introduction of myself. Here are my goals for today:

• Get some notoriety for myself as a writer and for my law school as a prestigious place

• Break some interesting legal news in a fun, accurate way

• Make y'all stuffy lawyers and lawyers-in-training laugh out loud. Entertain the heck out of you, so your billing hours may be lighter for this one day. Oh well, it's a Friday anyway.

I'll try to cross-blog as much as I can, which will probably include links to ATL. Okay, let's get it started in hurrr!

Score!

As you probably know from reading this blog, one of my favorite sources of legal gossip and commentary is Above the Law.

This has been in the works for a few weeks, but now that it's official I get to announce it. I get to guest blog for ATL! Tomorrow! For real! It's a great opportunity for a little 1L like me to have, and I'm very very thankful and excited.

While I can express my wide-eyed enthusiasm on this blog, I'll have to contain it and put on my "this is no big deal" face tomorrow. Hmm.

Who would you pimp for $25 million?

I ask this because Neverland is for sale, and I wouldn't mind having some more toys. I could ignore the likelihood that the previous owner was a pedophile if it meant I could have an amusement park in my back yard. Talk about a chick magnet.

Speaking of chick (or guy) magnets, my college roommate kept assorted video games for the specific purpose of having a pretense to invite dates back to the apartment. The line "Hey, wanna come back to my place and play DDR?" had a surprisingly high success rate.

But back to my original question: who would you pimp for $25 million? $10 million? $1 million? I would pimp both my mom and Gloria's mom for $25 million. Gloria says she'd pimp her own mother for $250,000; my mom is worth at least $1 million. But you might be able to talk me into pimping my brother for $250,000.

William F. Buckley, Jr. died last night.

The founder of National Review was 82.

At least you're not this guy.

Lvl 8 Ogre Seeks Moon Queen

Why are blogs the current shiznit?

I had this conversation with a friend today. I theorized that the constant updating is satisfying, and since people like to know what's going on, they end up checking a blog that fits their niche 3 or 4 times a day. Kristian said it's all about "attainable elitism": since anybody can create a (free) blog, they often do it and write about their field. They get readers, feel important, and keep writing. Since blogs exist in a community, with symbiotic links sustaining readership numbers, bloggers read other blogs and the links keep the cycle going.

Both theories are probably true.

Prof. Horwitz is back! With jokes!

I have a hard time separating my affection for Con Law from my affection for my professor. I hope this doesn't mean I'll enter a legal field that was awesome in law school and not so awesome in real life.

Everyone who works with Con Law is awesome, right? I thought so.

Sitting Strategy

As I've written about before, there's a strategy involved in attending law school classes. If your professor happens to call on you on a day when you're unprepared, the result is an embarrassing barrage of questions like "Ms. Nichols, why aren't you prepared today? Why don't you know this material, Ms. Nichols?"

So we do what we can to avoid that. Part of my strategy is the pre-emptive strike theory, in which I raise my hand whenever I'm prepared so I won't be cold-called on a day when I'm unprepared. But there's also a way to sit that makes you less likely to be called on. Don't put your arms anywhere near your head; don't play with your earrings, don't play with your hair. Keep your eyes squarely on your laptop, and discreetly try to hide your face while effecting a facial expression like you're concentrating.

It works most of the time. If you are called on and you don't know the answer, I really don't know how to advise you. You're on your own at that point.

We're watching Legally Blonde in Evidence.

The "gay scene." (The scene about Elle Woods calling out the gay guy in court; I'm not calling the scene itself is gay. That would be a compliment in my book.)

Classic Quote

"Thank you for not impregnating her." -- My mama, to my brother, about a pregnant girl.

Stuff White People Like

My fellow law student bloggers at All Against All have discovered a wonderfully funny blog called Stuff White People Like. It's written like a textbook describing a rare critter, like a series of National Geographic articles discussing the habits of the Dodo bird. If you're in class and there's a reasonably good chance you won't be caught goofing off, check it out.

"I feel like..."

Pet peeve: When you start an argument with "I feel like..." When you start an argument that way, I'm not listening. I've already concluded that your argument is more about feelings than logic. Stop saying "I feel like" to introduce a discussion of facts.

It's especially aggravating because women tend to use this phrase, and I'm a woman, and they are not representing their sex well. If they have one, they're not representing their client well either.

The (first draft of the) brief is finished!

Thank goodness. Legal writing is my strongest class, but I find it such a chore to do first drafts. My lowest score last semester was on Bluebooking, which is citing cases and authority in the correct form. What can I say? I'm not a details person. This time, though, I Bluebooked the heck out of that brief. If I get a mediocre grade, it won't be because of Bluebooking.

An appellate brief is very different from the inter-office memo that we wrote last semester. Last semester, legal writing was all about being logical and objective. This semester, logic is still a requirement, but we get to write persuasively, and writing persuasively is SO much easier than writing objectively. I think the mind naturally sympathizes with one side or the other, so (if you're advocating the side that you naturally sympathize with) it just makes more sense to write persuasively. It's natural.

This was just the deadline for the first draft of the brief. After our final drafts are turned in (in April), we get to work with partners and present an oral argument for moot court. My partner rocks, and I'm looking forward to that part.

Blame the Brief

Blogging time is sparse until tomorrow after I turn in my appellate brief for legal writing. Blame it on the brief.

The brief also caused world hunger and bird flu and bad hair days. Also! This isn't confirmed, but I heard the brief was Saddam Hussein's mom.

Blame it on the brief.

Slip that in there. Nice.

"Mrs. Huckabee hoisted one of CNN’s 25lb cameras with impressive ease while the former governor of Arkansas dropped to his knees with the CBS producer’s camera to make sure he got the upward angle as she heaved the ball."

I hope CNN producer Alexander Marquardt, who wrote this sentence, is giggling right now.

You want the truth?

Inevitable, but still chuckle-worthy, parody of the Congressional Steroids hearing. Who knew professors could have such senses of humor?

Silly CNN

From a CNN article about John Grisham:

Reviews of "The Appeal" have been generally positive, though some can be reduced to previous assessments of Grisham: fine storyteller but not a particularly good writer.

"The Appeal" is Grisham's newest book. He's appealingly (heh) humble in the article, talking about how he doesn't expect his work to be treated as fine literature. The alternative, he seems to say, is the label "popular fiction." But I don't see the logic here. Is a story not "fine literature" because it's popular? Does popularity negate quality?

I'm not saying that John Grisham is my hero, but "fine storyteller but not a particularly good writer" doesn't makes sense. The medium that he tells stories through is writing. If he's good at telling stories in writing, doesn't that make him a good writer?

Is sexism less offensive than racism?

Should it be?

Prof. Horwitz has a new cane.

And it has FLAMES on it. He's also taken to pointing with his cane, which is exactly what I would do if I were cool enough to have a pimp cane.

He also posed one of the funniest hypotheticals I've ever heard today. It started out with "So Canada invades Vermont..."

Teacher duct-tapes boy to desk.

Except for the impending lawsuit, it sounds like an efficient discipline strategy to me. Duct tape is cheap, and the boy will probably never back talk again.

[Oops. I just read the story and realized that the teacher did it as a joke. Somebody get out the duct tape -- you can teach me not to comment on news stories without reading them first.]

Congress on Steroids

I'm watching the baseball steroids fracas on CNN, and it's giving me the same entertained-but-stalkerish feeling that reading about Britney Spears on Perez Hilton does. It just seems like an inappropriate level of coverage for the subject matter. Why is Congress (and CNN) spending time on this?

Well, I guess the very fact that I find it compelling TV answers both questions. Everybody plays for ratings.

Viral.

I've recently been enamored by the word "viral." It used to have such a negative connotation -- Get a trash can for that dude! -- but now it has a positive advertising meaning. If something, like a YouTube video or Facebook group, goes viral, it means it gets passed along "virally,"and accidental fame results for the person responsible.

Example # 1: The "My New Haircut" YouTube video.

"Excuse me sir, you have to check in [to the hotel]." "NOT NOW CHIEF, I'm in the f*cking zone."

Example # 2:"Shoez"

"Kelly, what are you going to with your life?" "I'm gonna go get what I WANT."

Example # 3: "Balloons"

"Look at me! This is me being SERIOUS!"

I love the warning for this third video. "What you are about to see may be disturbing for people without a sense of humor."

These are examples of the viral power of the internet to spread things that people don't necessarily want share. But we can harness this power to our own benefit, right? For example, The Facebook group (I judge you when you use poor grammar ) has stalled just under 250,000 members. I predict, if every enthusiastic person harnessed the power of their buddy lists and invited everyone to the group, we'd reach 300,000 by spring break. What do you say?

Shame on you, Mike Huckabee.

I loved you back when you had a chance. Not for your policies -- your policies kinda suck. I loved you for your sense of humor. (This man eats fried squirrel, for crying out loud, and he ADMITS it. He deserves some votes for having that kind of cojones.)

But now? Somebody needs to tell you to stop wasting money. Go feed some orphans.

Interview Season

It's on-campus Interview Season, and more than a baker's dozen of my classmates are in suits. Alas, I have no interviews because of the book, so I don't get to officially take part in the fun. However, I have a plan to unofficially have tons of fun with Interview Season.

The plan starts with dressing up -- business dress -- and adding one slightly nonsensical element, like a tiara or nascar hat. Or maybe some brightly-ugly-crazy colored shoes. (I own both a tiara AND a nascar hat, people. Bright, ugly shoes are not necessarily out of place in my closet.)

Be-decked in my business dress and nascar hat, I come to school. Of course, people will think I have an interview, so when they ask I reply that yes, I do in fact have an interview, and then I'll make up a silly name for the imaginary firm that so sincerely wants to employ me. McWilliams & Sonoma, perhaps. Or Bergdorf, Goodman & Galliano. They both want me pretty badly, I think.

Bad ideas.

Our election system has been criticized for being too polarizing. During the primaries, only the most politically enthusiastic people vote, and they're usually not representative of middle America. We end up with one candidate who is extremely conservative, and one who is extremely liberal. But that's not happening this time, and it's shaping an interesting campaign season.

It looks like we'll have either Clinton or Obama duking it out with John McCain for the presidency. Here's my question. Is it a good thing to have two candidates whose positions on the issues are substantially similar, both to one another and to moderates? Or do we want two vastly different candidates to choose from?

I'd rather the candidates' positions be similar. It encourages a deeper discussion of the issues, because if they agree on the surface, they'd have to discuss the subject further to distinguish themselves. Plus, we may even get a president who represents the country's general consensus, not a candidate who represents the most conservative of the Republicans or the most liberal of the Dems.

Although Pres. Bush said some good things about Huckabee today, here's a quote directly from Huckabee that demonstrates why he'd be bad for the country: "If you look at where our votes are coming from, they're coming from the people who are the most conservative."

BAD idea.

Pimp.

Even Prof. Althouse gets in on the newly academically-appropriate word "pimp". Pimp.

Note to Self: "Being slutty" is not an appropriate self-description.

Although I can't seem to find the article online, I was reading something (admittedly, in Playboy) the other day about a Florida law professor beginning his class by having all his students read their Facebook profiles aloud. [Sidenote: I was just informed that Playboy articles are on Lexis. Nice!] What a great exercise! It demonstrates the importance of public speech, and the content of your Facebook profile is definitely public speech.

I wish one of MY professors would do that. I'm shooting for a different career than most of my co-students; many of them are aiming for high-paying jobs a BigLaw firms, which are generally very touchy about their stuffy reputations. As long as I have internet access and a laptop, I'd rather be a low-paid writer living in a cardboard box. My peers have to be exceptionally cautious about what they put on the internets; I'd rather get laughs. Part of what makes writing interesting for me is the balance between serious, quality writing and just plain being funny. Making people laugh often requires irreverence, so I find myself weighing what degree of sauciness is appropriate for the topic I'm writing about.

Facebook profiles are a pretty liberal forum -- you can get by with a lot, as long as it's funny and well written. However, the girl at Florida whose Facebook profile included "Being slutty" as her primary interest probably quickly realized that "Being slutty" 1) wasn't funny, and 2) made her look stupid. I'd bet my siblings that the girl changed it before the end of the day.

The Basics

"This is southern, face it/ If we too simple, then y'all don't know the basics."

-- Scholar and Philosopher Lil' Wayne.

Numbers make me uncomfortable.

Prop.Prof Krier has a background in Economics, and sometimes he writes formulas and numbers on the board to explain things. This makes me extremely uncomfortable. There aren't supposed to be numbers in law school! No, no, no no no no nonono! Wait, okay, let me pull out my calculator. No, slow down! Oh no, I'm hyperventilating again.

I'm not exagerrating; this is my mental reaction to seeing numbers on the board. If he keeps surprising me like this, I might have to fake-faint one day. It might even be a real faint. You're playing with fire here, Prop.Prof. Seriously, don't be so reckless.

In Appreciation

The U of A's Legal Writing department is darn creative. Our big memo project last semester was based on a claim by Guy A whose friend, Guy B, posted a picture on Facebook of Guy A smoking pot. Our professors even made fake Facebook profiles for Guys A and B, complete with a wide-eyed picture of Guy A "smoking the reefer." It was almost fun when we had to use a thesaurus to find different ways to say "smoke marijuana."

Yesterday we were talking about how to be persuasive when we're writing, and our professor made a handout with quotes from the news coverage of the Aqua Teen Hunger Force publicity campaign that triggered a bomb scare in Boston last summer. A marketing firm paid some kids to put little Lite Bright-resembling boxes around cities, and each box depicted a character from the cartoon. We used the news quotes to talk about the strategy of "anchoring," which just means starting and ending sections of writing with the favorable parts of the narrative. Anything unfavorable to your case, you try to "bury" in the middle.

I represented the Cartoon Network's side, and I picked this quote to anchor my ending. From a Seattle police commissioner (the boxes were also found in Seattle, but public hysteria did not ensue in Seattle like it did in Boston):

"This was not something that people should be concerned about. These were cartoon characters, and they were giving the finger."

Voting

I just voted, which always gives me a little patriotic rush of endorphins.

Alabama has a confusing system though, and it's the least strictly organized voting day that I've ever seen. When I looked up my polling place online, they didn't have my address on file. So I called the County Registrar's Office and was put on hold about 6 times before I finally found out my polling place. Luckily, it was close by and not busy, so I cast my vote quickly then went home. It was very un-ceremonious.

But check this out: the Alabama polls closed at 7:00, and now it's 8:00, and it looks like Obama is going to kill Clinton 70-30%. Alabama has its share of racism and sexism, and it looks like we've made some progress on the racist side.

I'm happy with this election. I respect Clinton, Obama and McCain, and their debates will be more substantive than recent past debates (when the 9/11 card was pulled entirely too often). If any of those three win, we'll have a leader who was voted in by non-strict party lines. One thing is for sure: there will be change. I'm excited to see it happen.

Here's CNN's total election coverage. One thing I would urge you to do: go out and vote if your polls aren't already closed. It's a civic duty or just a chance to influence the law. Just do it.
Why not?

California.

My Evidence professor regularly says some pretty funny things. Recently, he's been fond of using California as the whipping-boy for any negative example he wants to make. What's wrong with America? California. Who can we blame SARS on? California. Where do gay babies come from? California!

It's a good conversational trick, too. Whenever a discussion veers towards a controversial topic like religion, politics [badabing!], or anything just plain boring, blame California and move on. People will laugh and the tension of the previous conversation will be gone. They'll love each other again, and you will be revered for restoring good vibes to the party.

StuPIMPdous

It seems like the "pimp" controversy has extended further than I expected. Above the Law caught on and linked to us yesterday.

Law professor Paul Horwitz has "a PIMP cane" (apparently acquired in the medical assistance section of RiteAid). [PrawfsBlawg; Thank You Ma'am]

The controversy has now risen to the status where it needs a name. "PimpGate" sounds too trite, si? You can come up with a better one.

Regular People

Evidence professor, today:

"C'mon now. Think like you did back before you came to law school, back when you still had common sense. Just think like a regular person."

He's right, law school does seem to suck the common sense out of people. Low common sense and a sense of entitlement -- what a great combination. [Insert your favorite lawyer joke here.]

It's final!

I have great news. Today I signed the contract with publisher St. Martin's Press to write a book based on the Facebook group "I judge you when you use poor grammar." It's final! I have a book deal!

Don't worry, mama, I'm not dropping out of law school. I'll just be multi-tasking for a while.

Cheers, everybody.