LawHog

NOM...nom nom

2009-04-13T20:37:00.003-05:00

A part of me wants to think the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) is just some sham group created by some renegade gay rights group with the goal of undermining the anti-marriage equality forces. The other part of me thinks that the right wing fundies are actually dumb enough to come up with this stuff. Let's consider the evidence.

The group's acronym is NOM. Consult your friendly Urban Dictionary.
They are a "rainbow coalition of people" coming to protect marriage.
Just today they launched a new initiative called 2 Million for Marriage a/k/a 2 M4M - seriously.

It just gets better and better. Following the NOM ad, the audition outtakes were released, some of which can be seen here (at least until NOM claims copyright violations - no wonder they don't want this getting out on the net!) Here is Rachel Maddow's take (starts at about 2 mins)...I love this lady!

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

California Prop 8

2008-11-01T19:27:00.002-05:00

I know I can't do much to help from Arkansas but here's hoping there are enough sensible voters in California defeat Proposition 8. This fight may actually be more important than the fight against Initiated Act 1 in Arkansas.

Closed Doors in Benton County

2008-10-26T15:39:00.004-05:00

I know a thing or two about how our leaders prefer to do business behind closed doors. We dealt with that at the University of Arkansas when His Highness, Chancellor John A. White sought to reform the student government. Judge Xollie Duncan ultimately ruled in favor of the U of A, but criticized the approach taken by the university.

Much more alarming that university task forces meeting in private is the prospect of Benton County JPs meeting in private to discuss public business. From The Morning News comes word that Dave Bisbee, a current state senator seeking election as Benton County Judge, supports these private meetings between JPs.

Arkansas law is clear that public business must be conducted in public. Imagine that. Senator Bisbee first stated that he would encourage JPs to meet privately but after being asked for clarification (because of what the law says), he said that he did not want decisions being made in "back room[s]." Which is it, senator?

JP Marge Wolf (R-Rogers) made it clear that the media only gets in the way of our elected officials doing what we elected them to do. From the article:

The media can get in the way of committees' discussions and prevent justices of the peace from mentoring those newly elected, Wolf said.

God forbid the media report on the actions and discussions of our elected officials. We may have our problems down here in Washington County but our elected officials generally understand the law governing the conduct of public business. Take note, Benton County. Arkansans don't like business being conducted behind closed doors. That's why, according to one study, we have the 4th best government transparency laws in the nation.

Vote AGAINST Arkansas Initiated Act 1

2008-10-26T13:48:00.003-05:00

The Arkansas Family Council and its group of extremist Christian organizations is once again interjecting itself into the so-called culture war. As in the past, their goal is to demonize homosexuality but, if successful, the only effect would be to harm the children of the State of Arkansas.

The AFC is behind Initiated Act 1, the text of which can be viewed here, which would prohibit adoption and fostering by any couple cohabiting outside of marriage. Mind you, any single person (gay or straight) would still legally be permitted to adopt. So, what exactly is the point of this? As the Arkansas Times points out, what kind of sex policing will this require the state to do? What constitutes cohabiting and where is the line drawn?

The primary proponents of this measure are conservative Christian groups with no substance to their arguments other than Biblical pronouncements against homosexuality and premarital sex, etc. The opponents, on the other hand, are a powerful coalition of legislators, former members of the state judiciary, child advocacy groups and more moderate religious groups.

A group of retired judges recently signed a statement opposing the measure. The text of the statement is:

"By narrowing the qualifications required of people who seek to adopt children or to act as foster parents, proposed Initiated Act No. 1 would limit the ability of every Arkansas judge to choose custodial parents who would serve the best interests of vulnerable children. The choices available to neglected and abused children and to the judges who must find homes for them are already tragically limited by the children's circumstances. Instead of imposing a blanket rule that would apply to every case, the needs of these children, and the best means of satisfying their needs, should be left to elected judges to decide case-by-case. Any step, such as that proposed in Initiated Act. No. 1, to limit further the options for stable homes for these children would do them grave injustice. It is in the best interests of these children that Initiated Act. No. 1 be defeated."

That group of retired judges includes three former chief justices of the Supreme Court, three former associate justices, four former Court of Appeals judges and some former circuit and chancery judges. Let the judiciary use the power given to it to determine the best interest of the child and not arbitrarily cut out a significant number of perfectly suitable homes.

Some of the other groups fighting for the Act's defeat include the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, the Arkansas Association of Social Workers, the American Academy of Pediatricians - Arkansas Chapter and the Arkansas Psychological Association.

Far more information can be seen at the Arkansas Families First website. Early voting began a week ago and we only have 9 more days until election day. Whenever you vote, think about the children who will be harmed if Initiated Act 1 is approved. Vote AGAINST this measure.

Steve Clark for Mayor

2008-10-12T21:24:00.004-05:00

I have been waiting for a campaign I could become passionate about, a candidate that I could honestly say I fully support, believe in, and would work to get elected. I have been sorely disappointed in the race for President, but I found a mayoral candidate who, I believe, will lead Fayetteville in the right direction. We have experienced a great period of growth, but the ideas of yesterday have failed to continue carrying us forward.

Yes, Steve has a colorful background. What is refreshing is that he does not shy away from it...rather, he wants you to know about his fall from grace and, more importantly, how he has righted his life. It was a long (and sometimes painful) journey, but the fire he has brought to this race show that the passion of the Steve Clark of old is still there, but with age (and more than his share of trials and tribulations) came the wisdom to lead once more.

Visit Steve's campaign site here.

Read a great article in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette about Steve's return to public service here.

The Arkansas Scholarship Lottery Amendment

2008-10-06T21:21:00.003-05:00

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. ~C.S. Lewis

There are many applications of Lewis' wisdom, but none so obvious to me at the moment than the fight being waged against Arkansas' lottery amendment by the Arkansas Family Council.

Arkansas is one of only 8 states that does not have a state-sponsored lottery. Some of the other seven are expected (Alabama, Mississippi, Alaska, Wyoming and Utah). The remaining two are more unexpected (Nevada and Hawaii). I suppose Nevadans are happy enough with tax revenues from Las Vegas.

In any case, Lt. Gov. Bill Halter and friends launched a campaign to establish a state lottery exclusively benefiting education. Jerry Cox and his cronies at the Arkansas Family Council have filed an eleventh hour Hail Mary challenge to the ballot initiative. It was first challenged in the Pulaski County Circuit Court, where the FC lost, and it is now being appealed. I'll go through the three arguments raised by the Family Council and provide rebuttals from the pro-lottery group and some of my own commentary.

I. Omission of Material Provision

The FC's first contention is that the ballot title is misleading fails to tell the voters that they are voting yes or no to repeal an existing constitutional provision and replace it with language permitting the state legislature to establish a state lottery. The basic premise of the argument is that it doesn't tell voters that they have a choice between the status quo (no lottery) or amending the constitution (to have a lottery).

Halter responds, in part, with the first three words of the popular title, which is likely the only thing a voter will read before casting his vote. Those three simple words are "A constitutional amendment..." I realize Arkansas may not boast the most intellectually gifted populace, but really. I honestly can't even wrap my mind around this point.

II. Failure to Define "State Lotteries"

The FC's second point is that because the proposed amendment does not expressly definite "state lotteries" it could open the door to (gasp!) casino gambling. The FC has a bit of help here because of a couple of Attorney General opinions recommending (not requiring, however) that the lottery proponents define the phrase in the text of the proposed amendment. They also cite cases in other jurisdictions in which "lottery" was construed to permit video lottery terminals (New York) and casino gaming (Rhode Island and Kansas).

Halter responds with Arkansas case law in which the Court held, inter alia, that voters "know" what a lottery is. The distinction in that case, as argued by the FC, is that the proposed "state lottery" in that context was readily understood without definition when it was listed along with various other forms of gambling. Halter further argues that when the previous constitutional prohibitions against lotteries were adopted by Arkansas voters (in 1836, 1861, 1864, 1868 and 1874) the voters weren't so unintelligent as to require a definition of "lottery." Additionally, Halter cites the laws of the 42 states which permit lotteries. Only 3 of them contain a definition of "lottery."

III. No Adequate Information About Casino Gaming

The FC's final main argument is that the ballot title does not adequately inform voters about the effects on casino gaming. This contention is beyond ridiculous because the proposed constitutional amendment has no effect on casino gaming. This point is related to point 2 insomuch as, because "state lotteries" is not defined, it must be some underhanded scheme to establish casino gaming in the Natural State. The FC cites the lottery laws of California and Georgia which expressly prohibit casino gaming within the text of the law.

Halter's rebuttal again focuses on the plain meaning of "lottery" and the fact that Arkansas courts have refused to give credence to challenges based on the imagined consequences of a proposed amendment. "No reasonable person would confuse a State lottery with 'casino gaming.'"

Conclusion

From Halter's brief: By authorizing State lotteries to fund college scholarships the people will not be permitting “casino gaming.” Based on the utter lack of support for this argument in Arkansas law, a cynic might conclude that this argument is presented in an eleventh-hour lawsuit in order to grab free publicity and to scare the electorate with a false claim. The Scholarship Lottery Amendment will not permit “casino gaming.”

The Arkansas Family Council plays on the fears and prejudices of Arkansas voters. This was done in the 2004 election with the Marriage Protection Amendment. It is being done again this election with the lottery amendment and the adoption amendment (to be discussed soon). As an attorney, I can admire the legalistic, technical arguments raised by the FC. I think they are utterly without merit, but as a member of the profession I understand the place for such challenges. As a voter and as a libertarian, I want to see the substantive arguments. If you don't want a lottery, challenge it on the merits, let both sides duke it out and let the democratic process work. There is no challenge to the liberty of the citizens of the state of Arkansas, economic or otherwise. This is one for the voters now. So accept your impending loss with grace, Family Council, though I seriously doubt that's possible.

Obama Youth = Hitler Youth?

2008-10-05T21:13:00.002-05:00

I can't say I'd go so far as some by comparing these kids with the Hitler Youth, but good grief these videos are truly disturbing. I know Obama went through a phase of self-deification (and I'm not entirely sure that's over) but this is just over the top.

If... (Weeks 5 and 6)

2008-10-01T22:03:00.004-05:00

I'm trying desperately to catch up but I've said that before. No telling if I ever will. But, here are Weeks 5 and 6 of the "If..." project started by Nick, followed by Jody, then attempted by me here. Nick seems entirely too together, posting regularly and all that. Jody is more my speed, falling behind then trying like hell to make up for the time lost. Anyway, here are the next eight questions...

Week 5

1. If you could inherit a comfortable home in any city in the world that you could use but not sell, where would you want it to be.

Terribly easy question. Right here in Fayetteville, Ark. Granted, it's not as cultured as it could be for a university town but it's just funky enough to make me feel at home. We've avoided much of the sprawl the rest of NW Ark has (thank you to Wal*Mart for being in Bentonville) but the growth has impacted Fayetteville in a good way I think. Plus, doing a search not long ago, I found we hit number 7 on Kiplinger's list of Best Places to Live, Work and Play.

2. If you could inherit a vacation home anywhere in the world in which you could spend one month a year, but that you could never sell, where would it be?

Sounds like an easy enough question but there are so many places to choose from. I'd definitely have to pick continental Europe near the Mediterranean. But do you pick the south of Italy, the south of France, Monaco or Spain? Because of my newfound love of wine, I would have to go with Nice, France. So near the coast, but also within close travel distance of some of the greatest vineyards and wineries in the world...not to mention the greatest food.

3. If you could suddenly possess an extraordinary talent in one of the arts, what would you like to to be?

I would be perfectly content being a badass at the acoustic guitar. I've never been terribly fond of crafts and making things (except money) but I've always wished I could play the guitar. I have a guitar, just not the time involved in learning to play it.

4. If you could be instantly fluent in one other language that you currently do not read or speak, which would it be?

Jody has it spot on by picking Mandarin Chinese, though my primary reason is only an afterthought for him. China is a huge, mostly untapped market and anyone who can handle business dealings in the native language is many leaps ahead of the competition.

Week 6

1. If you could have permanent possession of any single object in the world, what would you want it to be?

I have no clue on this one, actually...if I can be a bit sacrilegious I'd go with the Holy Grail. Partly because it would just be really cool, especially if it was actually Mary Magdalene's body (thank you Da Vinci Code), but mostly because nothing else is coming to mind.

2. If you could have the starring role in one film already been made, which movie would you pick?

Cheating only slightly, I'd pick Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. It's my favorite book series ever and they clearly didn't stop after the first movie. So the starring role in the first means guaranteed employment for at least six more. Plus it'd be really cool to be the guy who plays Harry Potter. I would, however, make the promise to my fans not to appear nude in any plays (*cough* Equus).

3. If you could return for one year to one age in your life, knowing what you know now, to relive that year as you wish, which year would you go back to?

I'd love to relive my senior year of high school. That was definitely a great time in my life - student body president, playing golf all the time and stuff you're supposed to do your last year of high school. Knowing what I know now, I wouldn't have been such an arrogant closed-minded conservative asshole. But at least I've (mostly) fixed that now!

4. If you had to identically repeat any single year of your life to date, without changing a thing, which year would you relive?

I really wish they'd randomize these questions in the book more. I suppose it's done so in a social setting you can pick and choose from related topics. As a lawyer, I can appreciate the fine distinctions between relatively similar questions but it's a bit annoying in the blog setting.

Back to actually answering the question, I can't think of a recent year that I would like to re-live moment by moment without changing a thing. I think I would have to go back further to my childhood. Maybe around 10, the same age as my niece. I catch myself every once in a while telling Abby something like "back when I was your age, we didn't have cell phones." And I get the blurry eyed stare of a techno-struck little girl who has been asking for a cell phone for every Christmas and birthday since she was 7.

Yes, those times were simple. My greatest responsibilities were taking out the trash and making sure my Dad always had a cold beer in his hand. Why do little kids have cell phones these days? They certainly shouldn't be far enough from their parents (or their friends' parents) to need a phone to stay in touch. Just another reason to feel old...

Scary Moment of the Week

2008-09-29T22:32:00.003-05:00

"We're adults. When did that happen? And how do we make it stop?" - Meredith Grey

Since my new place doesn't have the internet yet, I get my online time at Arsaga's. I had an oldtimer's moment today when I was browsing through high school classmates on Facebook. There are 160 of my 400 fellow graduates on Facebook, listed 10 to a page. I figure half of them are now married and at least 2 of the 10 on each page have a kid (or two).

I don't find it so disturbing as odd that I have no desire to settle down at the moment. It might have something to do with the fact that I have no "real" job at the moment. At some point, I'm going to want a house with a wine cellar and a dog or two. Maybe I'll find that special someone along the way. Singledom has its perks, but it does get old after a while.

Ok, enough of the melancholy. I've got to head home to my cable and internet-less house.

After Austin...

2008-09-29T21:02:00.005-05:00

Wow, this weekend was exhausting. More good than bad, but the bad was pretty damn bad. Just for a quick run-through of the trip first.

Thursday night, my friend and I dropped in with a couple of friends who recently moved to Ft. Worth. We hit up a few places downtown, including Pete's Dueling Piano Bar. For the record, it blows Willy D's in Fayetteville out of the water as far as atmosphere and pure talent.

Friday afternoon we left for Austin. Checked into our hotel in North Austin about 5:00 and chilled out for a couple of hours. We headed downtown around 7:00, which was far too early but I wanted to go back to Z Tejas for dinner. It was, as expected, glorious. I also had the oddest drink so far in my life - the Jalapeno Margarita. Tangy, sweet, and spicy all in one heavenly tequila concoction. I must recreate this for future parties.

The first part of Friday night was spent at The Ranch. The only Fayetteville parallel I can make is On The Rocks, and only because of the rooftop bar experience. The Arkansas Alumni Association had one section reserved and it was good to see Razorback fans in the heart of UT country. From there, it was off to East 6th Street and Maggie Mae's. From there, I went to meet a friend from high school in the more colorful 4th Street district. That included stops at Rain and the (apparently) infamous Oilcan Harry's. Quite the experience, I must say...

Saturday was game day...and what a shitty game it was. The Hogs lost 52-10...not a good feeling after coming off a 49-14 loss against Bama. The Longhorns dominated us on offense and defense and I'd say completely demoralized our team. Well played, sir. Well played.

More to come.

Back to Austin

2008-09-26T17:18:00.002-05:00

I'm in Austin this weekend for the UT-Arkansas football game. I fully expect us to get stomped, but I couldn't pass up a chance to visit the area again. I'm here with a few friends I went to school with and we're already ready to get downtown. Updates and pictures to come.

Hooray for Passing the Bar Exam!

2008-09-07T19:11:00.005-05:00

Just a little shout out to all those (and me!) who passed the Arkansas bar exam. It's been a long month waiting to find out the results and congratulations to the passers. Good luck to those who didn't quite make it and I hope to see your names on the list after the February test!

Sarah Palin...really?

2008-09-01T21:10:00.004-05:00

I heard the news about McCain's VP choice, but I didn't have a chance to blog over the weekend. So now I suppose I'll share my initial thoughts about her.

I think she's a sharp lady. To go so far in such a short amount of time takes a tremendous amount of political savvy. I doubt it's as hard to get elected in Alaska as, say, Illinois but Palin really made an astronomical rise to power within her state.

Her personal belief system may help McCain with the far right of the GOP. Even James Dobson, who said he would never vote for McCain - though, as most televangelist types, he was probably exaggerating a bit - called it a good pick. That kind of sentiment on the right makes me want to run from her. On some issues, we agree: drilling in ANWR...hmm, well maybe that's it.

On many more issues, we disagree. Alaska's constitutional ban on gay marriage apparently wasn't quite enough for her, so she has supported a ban on extending state health benefits to same-sex couples. She was a bit too eager to support the teaching of creationism in public schools. She's also a bit too eager to institute the death penalty in Alaska. Perhaps one of her biggest faults is her support for abstinence-only education in public schools. This is especially true in light of the revelation that her unmarried, 17-year old daughter is pregnant. It has been my experience in the past that an event like this can lead a close friend or parent to change his or her views on certain matters. I doubt we can count on that happening with candidate Palin. I hope the media will leave it alone now that the story has broken, but I also hope Sarah Palin will take a lesson from the situation.

Besides disagreeing with her on so many issues, I think the pick was a disingenuous attempt to woo the pissed-off female vote. Ultimately, I believe McCain's poorly thought out strategy will fail. Palin won't win over many of the pro-choice Hillary supporters with one of the strongest anti-abortion stances seen recently. It's probably fortunate that VP candidates do very little to help or hinder the POTUS candidates - both in this race have very obvious flaws.

Finally, McCain's attempt to bring in an outside-the-Beltway candidate also means the experience issue will probably be off the table to a large degree. McCain had a decent argument that Obama had no executive experience, no foreign policy experience and very little experience on the national scene. He ought not raise that again, considering his VP pick was mayor of a small town for a few years and governor for only two years.

Ultimately, the experience factor should matter less than the ideas and core beliefs that drive the policies of a presidency. Sarah Palin's beliefs are less than attractive on the whole. If McCain is elected come November, let us pray that he makes it through to the end.

If... (Weeks 3 and 4)

2008-09-01T19:45:00.003-05:00

So since I have a few weeks to catch up on, I'll try to do at least two sets of questions each week. Thanks to my inspiration for this project from JD2.0 and NickyNax.

Without further ado, Week 3:

1. If you could alter one physical characteristic of your mate, what would it be?

I consider myself lucky not to have to answer this question, as I'm single. Sort of a mixed blessing as I don't GET to answer the question at the moment!

2. If you could dine alone with anyone from any period in history, which person would it be?

Haven't I already answered this? I suppose in the entirety of history, I'd have to pick Jesus. Not so much for the religious experience of it, though I suppose seeing water turn into wine might make me a believer!

3. If you could, in retrospect, change one thing about your childhood, what would it be?

I count myself lucky that I never had to go through a divorce or other terribly traumatic event in my childhood. The one thing that stands out clearly to me is my father's terrible temper. I'm not sure what the root of it was, but he was a very angry man when I was growing up. It only took the smallest thing to set him off. My brother and I reacted very differently. My brother rebelled while I tended to retreat. I'm not sure if it was the age difference (he's 10 years older), or some other factor, but we took very different approaches. Here we are years later and he's mellowed out a LOT and we both have a good relationship with him. It makes me wonder how things might have been different if we'd had the same relationship with him all that time he was so pissed off.

4. If you could have any room in the world become your bedroom from now on, which room would you choose?

This is a really tough question. I've been lucky to travel to several countries in Europe, and one would be hard pressed to find more impressive architecture or interior design in any other part of the world. But would it be terribly wrong if I picked Paula Deen's kitchen?

....and Week 4:

1. If you could change one thing in the world right now, what would it be?

I think Jody has it right when he says he would rid the world of religious intolerance. I would take it a step farther and get rid of organized religion generally. I'm glad this isn't asking for a realistic answer because organized religion will always be a part of our world, and religious intolerance is equally inevitable. So many of the world's problems can be traced to religious roots. Granted, there are many peaceful religions and religions with honorable roots and honorable intentions. This is one, however, that I believe has costs that outweigh the benefits. Don't count me as a John Lennon type...I certainly don't consider "Imagine" my theme song, even for this particular issue, but he might just have a point.

2. If you had to assassinate one famous person who is alive right now, who would it be and how would you do it?

I think the most obvious answer to me is Osama bin Ladin (sp?). As the figurehead for the worldwide terrorist network, his death would not end the problem but I believe it would be a blow to the extremist Muslim movement. We have chased him for years and have come close to capturing/killing him but he continues to elude capture. By hiding I think it shows his cowardice, but to his followers, it seems to energize them in some sick way. It's almost like he is more powerful because he has been in power so long and the United States has not caught up to him. As for the method, I say strap a suicide bomb to his chest and make him wander around an empty field waiting for someone to push the remote control button. Make him suffer the same fate as the developmentally disabled women his group sent into the streets in Iraq, but make him suffer longer waiting for it to happen. This answer could easily be related to Week 4, Question 1 above.

3. If you could permanently alter one thing about your physical appearance, what would you change?

As any of my friends could tell you, I've struggled with my weight for years. I lost about 40 pounds when I trained for the Hogeye Half Marathon a couple of years ago, put some back on (but managed not to go up in clothing sizes!), and now I'm working it back off. I've made it an absolute part of my daily routine to go to the gym after work, no matter what I'm doing later in the evening, to eat better, and not drink as much. But if I didn't actually have to do all that, it would be great!

4. If you could have stopped aging at any point in your life up to the present, how old would you want to remain?

I really feel like I could stop aging at this point. I'm sure I could have said that if I had been asked at any point along the way. There are points in my life that I've been happier, but looking back I realize that everything has brought me to this point. I think some of the things in my life could be better (not being single, etc.) but I know I'm far more mature for what I've been through. I've got a lot of great friends who I would never give up and (kind of) a plan for where I want to go with my life.

The First Rule of Daycare Fight Club...

2008-08-27T22:57:00.004-05:00

Do not talk about Daycare Fight Club.

Here's a story that will make you shake your head...and it happened right here in Fayetteville. From our own Central United Methodist Church. Apparently, some really bright preschool teachers got the brilliant idea to make the kids they were supposed to be caring for fight each other. It sounds like the gig was up when parents started noticing their kids with more bruises than normal?

Some of the changes the church is looking at include "additional teacher training and exploration of possibly installing video cameras in the classroom." Do you really have to train daycare workers not to set 3 and 4 year olds to fighting each other? And the video cameras are a good idea...and probably would have prevented this abuse in the first place.

Wow. Just, wow...

Random Musings for a Wednesday...

2008-08-27T21:09:00.004-05:00

First of all, apologies for my extended absence. More on that below. I was finally inspired to blog again on the ride home from dinner tonight. I've had plenty of time to think over the last few weeks of non-blogging and a few random thoughts popped into my head.

First, I've noticed that every once in a while I'll get super burned out on the internet and my computer generally. It's usually when I've had to spend a lot of time doing something I don't especially like. In the case of my most recent absence, it was the damn bar exam. I won't go too in depth on that subject because I'm sure any of my friends who read this are as tired of hearing me talk about it as I am of talking about it. In the past, this burnout usually resulted from final exam time and it wasn't nearly as long. But it always gives me a good opportunity to clear my head and come up with some new things to say.

Second, I've been doing quite a bit of thinking about the presidential election. I don't particularly like Obama, certainly don't like McCain and had nearly settled on voting for Bob Barr. Over the last month, I've started leaning more toward Obama. For all of his weaknesses, a change from the policies of the past eight years could be a very good thing. John Kerry actually battled back against the McCain machine at the Democrat Convention today - something he probably should have done after the Swift Boat job four years ago. Kerry's speech hammered the dichotomy between Senator McCain and Candidate McCain. The differences are stark and the prospect of a McCain presidency seems to be only four more years of the same. We need somebody who can restore our place in the world - a country that is respected, not feared (or, in some cases, ridiculed).

From my perspective as a future (hopefully) lawyer, the Supreme Court is quite conservative enough. The Republicans have fared well with recent appointments, replacing Rehnquist and O'Connor with Roberts and Alito, appointments that will be in place for many, many years. The next most likely retirements will come from the liberal side of the bench, either John Paul Stevens (age 88) or Ruth Bader Ginsburg (age 75). With Kennedy planted firmly in the middle, if not a bit right-leaning, the balance must be preserved.

I'm also tired of the GOP playing on the fears of Americans. The "Moral Majority" and the conservative right no longer have any moral credibility. A C.S. Lewis quote comes to mind, one that I've heard quoted many times and that is incredibly applicable to the right wing:

Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

Finally, I really want to get back into doing the "If" project regularly. I know I'm several weeks behind so I'll try to catch up over the next couple of weeks. It's good to be back.

To Those Who Supported Me this Summer

2008-08-01T19:00:00.000-05:00

A special thanks to a poster in the July 08 Bar Exam Studying Support Group on Facebook for this. I've adapted it for my situation:

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Family Member, Friend or Acquaintance:

Thank you so much for all your support during these last few months. I know I have been rude, cranky, annoying, and any other combination of terms while studying for the bar. I'm sure you're sick of me whining and reciting legal terms. I really appreciate your patience, tolerance, and understanding.

Most of you know that I took the bar exam this week and, for my sake and yours, I would like you to beg the following of you:

(1) Please don't ask me how I think I did. I don't know. I won't know until September 5 at 4:00 pm. And if you ask, chances are you'll hear "Oh my god, I totally failed... the exam was a nightmare." Or some-such variation. During the month-long wait for the results to come back, there might be tears, panic attacks, nausea, or any other physical or emotional manifestation of total and utter devastation, in which case the "How you did" question becomes moot.

(2) If I express any kind of doubt about the test (which I will) or if I keep wailing that "I know I failed" (which I'll know I did,) please don't say "I know you did great." I appreciate the spirit of those words and the support they are intending but, you don't know. In an effort to make your life and mine better, here are some other good suggestions**:
(a) "I bet everyone feels that way"
(b) "It's a hard test, it's supposed to make you feel this way"
(c) "You did everything you could, all you can do now is put it out of your mind"
(d) Hand the person a drink
**Any of these statements could be altered to have similar meaning and combined for maximum efficiency. (D) is always effective, and the more it is used the better everyone will feel.

(3) Only as a last resort use the phrase "I'm sure you passed." It might start a fight, but if nothing else is working maybe that's what the bar-taker is looking for to vent some frustration!

(4) Please don't ask about career plans or job opportunities. I just finished taking the bar. I won't know whether I have a license for months. Maybe I have something lined up, maybe I don't. Right now I just want a drink. And if I can forget everything I learned or that I just took the bar that would be even better.

Thank you very much for your cooperation.
I hope this advice saves you many headaches, and when I'm a human being again I will do my best to make it up to you.

Lots of Love,
Bar-Taker July 2008

Bar Exam: Day 3...Free at Last!

2008-07-31T12:15:00.001-05:00

Now, I finally get to breathe for the first time all summer. We had four Arkansas law essays this morning: Property, Torts, Domestic Relations/Equity and Decedents' Estates.

We won't find out if we passed until September 5, but all anyone cares about at the moment is drinking and forgetting the torture we went through the last two and a half days.

Bar Exam: Day 2

2008-07-30T18:00:00.002-05:00

Day 2 of the Arkansas Bar Examination - and most others around the country - is comprised of 200 multiple choice questions split equally into two 3-hour sessions. At the end of the day, it feels good to be finished. Remember how you felt after you took the ACT, SAT, LSAT and all those other qualifying tests? Yeah, multiply that by eleventy billion. Yeah, that's what it's like. Emotionally draining would be an understatement.

What's the plus side? We only have half a day more of this godforsaken test in the morning.

EDIT: I noticed on the Above the Law blog post about the MBE that several test takers ended up with a series of 5 Ds as answer choices toward the end of the afternoon. I had 5 Ds in a row and I can take a bit of comfort in the fact that I wasn't the only one who experienced that. Maybe it went better than I actually feel about it at this point.

And it Begins...Good Luck Everyone!

2008-07-29T06:00:00.001-05:00

1 day...

2008-07-28T12:00:00.003-05:00

Applicable law
Formation
Terms
Performance
Remedies for unexcused performance
Excused performance
Third party issues

For anyone who took or has taken Barbri, you might recall with fondness or pure, unadulterated hatred (most likely the latter) Professor Epstein's contracts lectures...all three days of them. After those lectures, I'll never forget Armadillos From Texas Play Rap Eating Tacos, his mnemonic for analyzing contracts issues. Apparently stupid mnemonics are the way to go for memorizing points of law. It's certainly helped me out in other subjects. Another of Epstein's mnemonics was MY LEGS for applicability of the Statute of Frauds (marriage, year, land, executors, goods, suretyship)

Professor Guzman had a few mnemonics for evidence though, as I recall, his handouts called them pneumonics...to introduce evidence of prior crimes, use a MIMIC (motive, intent, absence of mistake, identity, common scheme) proposition, competency of witnesses is judged by the ROTC (recollection, observation, truthiness, communication) standard and prior similar occurences are only "slipped in" by using a DICK (dangerous condition, impossibility, causation, knowledge) exception.

In property, Professor Norvell taught us that the elements of adverse possession could be remembered using HELUVA (hostile, exclusive, lasting, uninterrupted, visible and actual). To create a joint tenancy, you must have intent to create the joint tenancy plus the four unities, TTIP (time, title, interest and possession). I wish there was some kind of mnemonic for the Rule Against Perpetuities, but that is for another post.

I tried to come up with more but I gave up after a while. Intentional torts: BAFITTC (battery, assault, false imprisonment, IIED, trespass to property, trespass to chattels and conversion). Defenses to intentional torts: CSDDNAD (consent, self-defense, defense of others, defense of property, necessity, arrest, discipline). Elements of negligence: DSBCD (duty, standard, breach, causation, damages).

OK, enough for now. I have a test tomorrow.

3 Days...

2008-07-26T22:17:00.001-05:00

I've decided to spend most of these last few days before the test reviewing old essay questions. So I have my MEE essay book and my Arkansas essay book with the "best answers" from previous bar exams. These are just random thoughts I've had going through them.

First, and my favorite part, is that most of the essays tend to have multiple sub-parts. So that gives me plenty of chances to screw up instead of just one or two.

Second, I've noticed that almost all of the torts questions cover negligence. Occasionally there will be an intentional tort, but only rarely. There is often also an issue with minors driving cars - bless kids doing adult activities.

Third, I've always got to be thinking about vicarious liability. If life was actually like bar exam fact patterns, no employer would ever hire another person again. The dumbest people always appear in these questions and almost always end up costing their employers in the end.

Fourth, if there is a trust question on the wills, estates and trust question, most of us are screwed. I'm glad I took decedents' estates and estate planning so I can at least stumble through a trust question. Fortunately for us, Arkansas is still so poor that trusts apparently haven't taken hold well enough to test on the bar exam.

Fifth, the elements of crimes and torts have begun to enter my dreams...I think I'm in pretty good shape for those questions (MBE and essays). Common Law Burglary = breaking + entering + the dwelling of another + at nighttime + with the intent to commit a felony (i.e. theft) therein. I'm not quite as strong when it comes to criminal procedure.

I could go on and on, but I suppose I should get back to cramming. Almost there!

4 Days...

2008-07-25T15:39:00.000-05:00

There is ultimately only one question, often with many sub-parts, when it comes to an Evidence issue:

Is it in or is it not in?

That's what she said.

I'm beginning to hear from everyone who knows the bar is coming up next week that I'll be fine, I'll pass with flying colors, etc. The only people who have any room to talk are practicing attorneys - at least they know what we're all going through, having done it at least once in the past. I'll be heading to Little Rock on Sunday to have a late birthday dinner with the family, then Monday I check into the Peabody and it'll be game time until Thursday afternoon. Hey, at least I'll have a nice room to lock myself in for three days.

5 days...and Happy Birthday to Me!

2008-07-24T09:00:00.001-05:00

I'm really not sure what to think about how prepared I am for the bar exam. I worked the essays from the test given in February of this year and did really well. Which totally doesn't match up with my performance on the MBE questions yesterday. Oh well, I can't do much more than I already am.

It's quite unpleasant to hear about the great summer everyone else is having. Yes, I would like to go to the Naturals game, but I'm stuck in the fascinating world of commercial paper and secured transactions. Yeah, I'd love to play a round of golf, but I can't take 5 hours out of my study day. I'm also NOT glad to hear that everyone is going to the beach this summer! Who's jealous of everyone not taking the bar exam this summer? This guy.

On a brighter note I hit the quarter century mark today. I've got evening plans to go to Bordino's for dinner with some friends and maybe a stop by Willy D's for drinks and a song on the pianos then it's be back to the books. I know this birthday won't be anything like last year, and thank goodness for that! (I was hungover for two days last year) I've also mostly finalized my post-bar trip to Austin for a wedding (and my summer vacation) so if anyone will be around those days or you know the area, it'd be good to know what to do on the non-wedding days. I have a feeling 6th Street will come into the picture.

6 days...and Things That Piss Me Off About the Bar Exam

2008-07-23T12:27:00.005-05:00

Because I currently lack the intellectual capacity to come up with something original today, I'm going to repost an email I received from a friend who is taking the Washington State Bar Exam. I think it fairly sums up a lot of the frustration felt by those of us studying for the bar exam this summer.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Things that piss me off about the Bar Exam:

1. People who don't record their deeds:

Hey. Fuck face. That's a nice deed you got there. Went ahead and bought Stankacre, didya? That's awesome. Owning property is a sign of real maturity. Now, why don't you do us all a fucking favor, and go record the fucking deed.

Right. Fucking. Now.

Don't put it in a goddamn drawer. Don't go off to India for 20 years. Don't leave the deed in your will for dear cousin Victorianox. Get your fat lazy ass down to the records office, and record it before I burn your goddamn house down.

2: Wily property sellers:

Here is a suggestion to those Bill of Rights violatin' petty thug ass clowns, the Police. How about you go down to Doucheacre, and arrest the son of a bitch who sells the same house to 15 different people, over and over. Im sick of this guy getting away every time he pulls this shit, and I'm left to sort out the fucking pieces.

3: 'Known' arsonists

Here's a little tip to all the cretins that keep hiring 'known' arsonists to burn down their cheating girlfriend's house. Why is it, do you think, that he is a known arsonist, you dipshit? He's known because he has been fucking caught before. You don't know who the good arsonists are, do you! Because they have their shit together.

But no, you had to go hire Dusseldorf, or Durango, or whatever D word your fuckwit moron arsonist is named, and now he's gone and burned the wrong house, and left me with a BAR question.

4: People who back out of conspiracies.

Why don't you just stick with it and save us all some trouble, you pussy.

5. Power companies that leave an electric wire live to deter copper theft

While I appreciate your effort to rid the world of thieves stupid enough to try and steal raw copper wiring that's fucking humming and has blue arcs dancing on it, it's just gonna bite you in the ass in the end. Just let the copper go.

6. Fertile Octogenarians

I think I speak for all of us when I say........Burn the witch! Burn her! And don't use a 'known' arsonist!

7. People who use anything more complicated than Fee Simple Absolute in a will

Hey, old man. Either give Horatio your fucking interest in Scroteacre, or don't, alright? Don't condition it on him growing a mustache, or learning to play the calliope, or winning 'Dancing with the Stars.' Don't grant a springing executive interest to Zenobia if she manages to graduate from Ninja academy.

Stop making my life more complicated than it needs to be, you Narcissistic old twat, and stop trying to control your property from the grave in a vain attempt to make up for your feebleness in life.

8. House Painters

Just paint the fucking house yourself, Paulson. Trust me on this one. It's not worth it.

9. Bank Mortgages

Hi there, First National Bank of South Calizonachussettsas. I don't mean to tell you how to run your business, but allow me to impart a bit of sage wisdom.

When someone :

1) named Defaultina McBankrupstein,
2) is taking out her 17th mortgage with you,
3) on a place called Mushacre
4) so she can buy a new hat,

do NOT fucking come crying to me when the inevitable judicial foreclosure sale nets $34, a button, and some lint, all of which are devoured by the banks that are 20 miles ahead of you in creditor line.

And do not ask me whether you are a junior or senior mortgagor, or whether you debt is secured, or some other bullshit I don't understand, because the answer is always the same.

D) You are Fucked. Take it like a man.

10. Wanna-be Burglars

I am sick to death of these slackjawed melon-heads deciding at 2 a.m. that they need to borrow their neighbors wrench, and are sure he 'won't mind' if they saunter on over there in the middle of the night, crowbar the garage open, smash open his tool chest, and 'borrow it.' And then always the inevitable fucking:

Did he commit Larceny/Burglary/Robbery??? Ohhhhh, no intent!

Let him go, boys. Let the man go. So I can throw the wrench right at his goddamn teeth.

Good thing when we are really in practice we will have these special Intent Goggles©, that can magically tell us, despite every bit of evidence to the contrary, this jackass really didn't intend to commit a crime. He genuinely thought that breaking into your neighbor's house, stealing his car, taking a shit on his pool table, and sleeping with his wife were all part of the social covenants between good neighbors.

Seven days...

2008-07-21T17:50:00.006-05:00

With just days until the bar exam, I'm going back over some of the really tough subjects, including the Rule Against Perpetuities. The text of the original rule is nearly unintelligible: No interest is good unless it must vest, if at all, not later than twenty-one years after some life in being at the creation of the interest. WTF were the British thinking when they came up with that mess? A more relevant question, perhaps, is why the hell was it later adopted into American jurisprudence?

Application of the RAP has really screwed over some attorneys in the past. The greatest problem with the rule is that the courts don't apply common sense or even reality to RAP cases. One of the more ridiculous examples is the "Fertile Octogenarian" rule, which presumes that anyone, even an octogenarian (that is, a person between 80 and 90 years of age) can parent a child, regardless of health or gender. RAP cases have resulted in many colorful examples including the "unborn widow," the "slothful executor," "the magical gravel pit," "the slaughter of the innocent" and "the war that never ends." Don't ask me what they mean - I don't know, don't care and am willing to miss any related questions on the MBE.

Fortunately, in its 2007 session, the Arkansas Legislature adopted the Uniform Statutory Rule Against Perpetutities which takes an easier wait-and-see approach along with application of the cy pres doctrine to take some pressure off lawyers who aren't blessed with omniscience.

Unfortunately, Arkansas courts can only apply the new RAP prospectively - meaning the crappy old RAP applies to any nonvested interests created before 2007. That means, of course, that the old RAP is fair game for testing on the bar exam this summer. While that doesn't help me out on the bar exam, I can hope that Arkansas will adopt the California approach to malpractice with regard to the old RAP. In Lucas v. Hamm, the California Supreme Court held that it was not malpractice for an attorney to not understand the Rule Against Perpetuities! That's how bad the old rule is!

Anyway, I best be getting back to Property multiple choice questions...only got 7/18 correct in that last practice set and that's not quite going to cut it on the MBE.

8 days...

2008-07-21T12:48:00.009-05:00

So after taking some time off I think, maybe, that I'm ready to buckle down and get some quality studying done these few days I have left. I tried to study on Saturday and got a little bit done, but ended up watching Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix and several other movies. Which reminds me, by the way that on this day last year Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows was released. Man am I glad it wasn't released this year. Granted, I read it in about 10 hours (after standing in line waiting for the midnight release!) but that still would have cut into some quality study time I'm sure.

So today, I think I'm going over Arkansas Criminal Law Distinctions. I feel prepared (enough) for the multi-state crim law questions (which test the common law) but there will be an Arkansas-specific crim law essay on Tuesday.

Just a few of the differences between common law and Arkansas statutory criminal law are the mental states. Common law uses specific intent, malice, general intent and strict liability. Arkansas uses purposely, knowingly, recklessly and negligently.

Homicide provisions also differ between the common law and Arkansas law. Under the common law, a defendant could be convicted of murder (the unlawful killing of another with malice aforethought), voluntary manslaughter (the heat of passion/provocation killing) or involuntary manslaughter (gross negligence causing a death or by applying the misdemeanor or non-dangerous felony murder rules). In Arkansas, a defendant can be charged with capital murder, first degree murder, second degree murder, manslaughter or negligent homicide. There are multiple definitions for each and I'm supposed to know each of them.

Another important difference is in the Arkansas rape statute. At common law, rape was "forced intercourse by a man on a woman who is not his spouse." This takes me back to a story I heard about a class some twenty years ago in which our very own Prof. Guzman asked a student whether a person could rape his spouse. The student responded: "Well, Professor, when you say 'I do,' you say 'I do' forever." Well, that was the law before logic took hold in our state and the Arkansas Supreme Court held that spousal rape was a crime.

One of my least favorite Arkansas distinctions is the so-called "Retreat Rule." Generally, before using deadly force in self-defense, a victim is required to retreat if the victim can do so safely. Retreat is not required, however, if you are in your home. Note, as the cat to the right has made plain, you may never use deadly force to protect property alone. Well, time to get back to memorizing all the wonderful definitions of crimes.

"If..." Project - Week 2

2008-07-20T00:29:00.006-05:00

Here's Week 2 of the "If..." project, being done by my friend at JD2.0 and his friend Nick. Only 123 more weeks to go from here!

1. If you could have lived through any war in history (without actually fighting in it), which would it be?

As a good Southern boy, I'd definitely have to pick the Civil War. I think the Civil War, along with the Revolutionary War, made the greatest impact on our country. Call it the war against slavery, the war of northern aggression, blah blah blah. In my opinion, it wasn't much different from the colonists fighting the Redcoats.

"But, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."

Looking back, I can't say I'm disappointed in the outcome. As economically disadvantaged as the South is now, it would be far worse as an independent Confederacy. But back to the point of the question, it would have been a very interesting time in which to live.

2. If you could eliminate any one type of insect permanently from the earth, what would you get rid of?

Gnats. All the bug spray in the world can't get rid of those little things. When I played a lot of golf back in the day, one of the golf moms had everyone dabbing vanilla extract behind their ears - some old Southern remedy I suppose. That went on for an entire summer, though I couldn't really tell that it worked.

3. If you had to eliminate a single type of animal forevermore, which would you choose?

I can't even think about spiders without shuddering. I know they're supposedly (for my grammatically challenged friends, you would say "supposably") good for pest control, but they make sprays for those pests and I choose chemicals over 8-legged creatures any day.

4. If you could have an elegant dinner alone with anyone presently alive, whether you know them or not, who would you want it to be?

As Nick noted, this question is not about a romantic dinner - an elegant dinner is entirely different. For something that special I'd have to pick Alton Brown, the Mr. Wizard/Bill Nye/Albert Einstein of the culinary world. I'd love to be able to sit with him over a 50 course (ok, I'd go for a few less I suppose) prix fixe dinner. I've heard about them on the Food Network and I'd love to hear what he would have to say about the techniques used in each course, his expert opinion on each course, and definitely the other amazing conversation I could imagine would accompany the dinner. He's by far my favorite person on the Food Network.

10 days...

2008-07-19T13:02:00.003-05:00

Not much I can add to that thought...

11 Days...

2008-07-18T16:11:00.004-05:00

I'm 11 days from the bar exam, but my attempts at studying haven't been very successful the last couple of days. I decided to just take today off and try again tomorrow. And I have a wedding to go to tonight! Congrats Lea and Todd!

12 Days...

2008-07-17T14:31:00.003-05:00

Apparently, I need to spend another day or two on Commercial Paper and Secured Transactions...

I wish everything was as easy as the "first to file" rule. Looking at the picture, I'm glad I remember that sometimes the secured party doesn't have to file the financing statement...damn exceptions! Maybe the secured party has possession or control of the collateral. Maybe it's automatically perfected and no filing is necessary (PMSIs for example). Or maybe the secured party is still within the four month grace period if the debtor or the goods are moved to a different state. Take that, bar exam!

Bar Exam - 13 days out

2008-07-16T11:59:00.004-05:00

I'm 13 days from the bar exam, sitting in my favorite coffee shop, Arsaga's, studying Commercial Paper and Secured Transaction. Fascinating stuff, I know.

For the Comm'l Paper/Secured Transactions essay, I'm supposed to memorize the following:

2 types of commercial paper
5 parties involved in commercial paper
9 elements of negotiability
4 elements for the Holder in Due Course doctrine
10 real defenses
3 exceptions to drawee liability
1 exception to an exception to drawee liability
16 types of collateral in secured transactions
3 steps to creating a security interest
5 methods of perfection
1 general rule ("first to file" prevails)
10 exceptions to the general rule and a few exceptions to the exceptions

So that can't be too hard, right?

Bar Exam - 14 days and counting

2008-07-15T16:25:00.006-05:00

So I've got 14 days until I take the bar exam. I spent most of this morning reviewing Domestic Relations and Equity, which I feel okay about. Dom Rel covers a wide range of topics but most of it isn't that hard. If I can remember the three types of Arkansas divorce, grounds for divorce and all the property division crap I'll be fine. If there are any questions about kids, I can just BS about "best interests of the child." I really hope equity doesn't show up in the question, but just in case I'm trying to memorize the maxims of equity (one of which was asked about last summer).

This afternoon I decided to switch over and do some practice MBE questions. I did two sets of Constitutional Law and one set of Torts questions. Con Law was by far my worst subject in the practice MBE I took a couple of weeks ago so I've spent a lot of time studying that lately. I got 29 out of the 36 questions correct and got 14 of the 18 torts questions correct. Which sounds great, right? Except that, as I was working through the questions, I didn't have a damn clue if I was choosing the right answer most of the time. I see this as a problem. I just keep telling myself I only need to get two-thirds of the MBE questions right to stay on track, assuming I don't completely screw up the essays.

66.67%...sometimes it seems like such a low number and at other times feels completely unattainable.

If... Going Slightly Off the Beaten Path (Week 1)

2008-07-13T17:31:00.005-05:00

So I came across a blog posting by my friend Jody, at JD2.0, who has started following Nick's "If Project" at nickynax.com. The book, If...(Questions for the Game of Life), is 125 pages long with 4 questions on each page. I'd like to think I could answer the four questions every week for the next 125 weeks and I'm going to do my damnedest to make sure it happens. Maybe I'll find out something about myself along the way - that's a scary thought. As it evolves, I can see myself getting a little deeper into myself - and hopefully the questions will evolve in the same way.

1. If you were to be granted one wish, what would it be?

Man, that's a tough one. At this point in my life I'm hoping for a good job. After seven years of higher education and three years of law school loans, I find myself $60,000 in debt and needing a new car before my current POS completely falls apart. As much as I want to find a good legal job (and I have been applying for several) I suppose I could fall back on my business undergrad degree and give the business world a go. I suppose I've always thought in the back of my mind that it would be nice to end up running a company one day. It's not terribly rare. 10.8% of the S&P 500 companies have an attorney at the helm. Anyways, back to the crux of the question. I really just want a job that will let me have my own place, find and raise a dog, and have enough left over after paying the bills so I can have fun on the weekends. I'm pretty happy with my life right now - great friends, great family and no desire to be in a relationship, though some nights do get lonely now and again. The one thing that is missing is security for the future - that's something that scares the hell out of me.

2. If you could spend one whole night alone with anyone in the world who is currently alive, who would you select?

This isn't an easy question. I'm not easily impressed by people and the ones I want to spend time with the most are my friends. I suppose coming from a legal background, I would really want to spend time with Sandra Day O'Connor. She was probably the most powerful person on the Supreme Court from the late 1980s until her retirement in 2005. She never seemed to have a judicial philosophy and made her decisions on a case-by-case basis. She was accused over the years of being a conservative hack and a liberal baby killer. In reality she was a great moderate, usually falling on the side of personal liberty. It was a delicate position for her to be in, especially as the first woman to serve on the High Court. Anthony Kennedy might have taken her place in the middle but I don't think he'll ever gain a legacy of deciding the great issues like O'Connor.

3. If you could spend one whole night alone with anyone in history, who would you choose?

This was actually an easier question for me. I'd pick my Papaw over anyone else who has ever lived. He died on May 22 after a long battle with colon cancer that eventually spread to most of his gut. His obituary, written by one of my great aunts is here. He was the patriarch of the Sandage family and unofficial handyman for most of Hot Spring County, especially his hometown of Donaldson. I try not to remember the frail man who lay dying in his bed - that wasn't my Papaw. My Papaw was the storyteller and historian, a reluctant leader and an overall good man. My dad told me he took Papaw around every street in Donaldson and he had a story about every street, every house and nearly every family who had ever lived in that town. I know I didn't always realize the impact he had on his community until the funeral, when nearly 500 people crammed into an entirely too small funeral chapel to pay their respects. When I went to the Sandage Family Reunion last week, there was a piece missing that I think everyone felt. But I'm thankful for the impact he had on us and the way he touched everyone he knew.

4. If you could physically transport yourself to any place in the world at this moment, where would you go?

Too easy. Cinque Terre, Italy is where I could live forever. I visited once while on a study abroad trip. The name, literally "five lands" is a trail between five towns on the west coast of Italy. Hiking, laying on the beach, eating and drinking are some of the best parts of visiting. Each town has its own character - each also produces its own wines and olive oils! There is a trail between the towns that starts in Riomaggiore and winds north. The farther north, the more treacherous the trail. It ends in Monterosso, where a beautiful beach awaits. If I could only make one more trip abroad (God forbid I don't have more opportunities), Cinque Terre would be on the itenerary.

Libertarianism on the Rise

2008-07-12T22:03:00.003-05:00

Time Magazine has a great article about the rise of the Libertarian Party (and, in my opinion, the libertarian viewpoint generally). The article gives weight to the very real possibility that Bob Barr could be a spoiler in the presidential race. If he can pull in enough votes from disenchanted Republicans and conservatives, he could very well deliver the White House to Barack Obama.

Depending on your point of view, that could be a long-term disaster or it could be be a wake-up call to the Republican Party. If it serves as a wake-up call, you might see some form of Newt Gingrich's "Contract With America." Even though it's a long shot, I wouldn't be terribly disappointed to see a legitimate third party take some power away from the Dems and Repubs who have shown time and time again that they can't do anything but run things into the ground.

My favorite quote from the article:

Freedom's restoration is the magic moment when the nanny state melts away and you can see the life you were supposed to live before the tax auditors and environmental regulators and drug warriors all came to rope, brand and pen you in for life with their endless rulemaking and intrusions.

That could just be a pipe dream, but the current state of affairs in the American political scene is sad enough to give it a chance.

First Successful Appeal of Designation as Enemy Combatant

2008-06-30T20:58:00.004-05:00

The federal government experienced its first smackdown by the federal courts, Lewis Carroll style, regarding its ability to classify certain detainees as "enemy combatants." The appeal was brought by Huzaifa Parhat, a Chinese Uighur (yeah, had to look that one up) who, after fleeing China, had been living in a camp in Afghanistan. After a U.S. airstrike on his camp, which was purportedly run by a person affiliated with al Qaeda and/or the Taliban.

Parhat faced the Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT), which determined that he should be classified as an enemy combatant. The classification was based on the fact that Parhat was "affiliated" with a Uighar independence group (ETIM) that was "associated" with al Qaeda and the Taliban. The tribunal further cited documents stating that the ETIM was engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, but no supporting evidence beyond the simple assertion was made a part of the record. Parhat contended, and the tribunal did not contradict, that he was not associated with either terrorist group, had gone to Afghanistan solely to join in resistance against China and considered China the enemy, not the US or its allies.

Fast-forwarding through, mostly irrelevant, procedural issues, the Parhat case found itself in front of the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The primary issue before the Court was Parhat's assertion that the government failed to show sufficient evidence that the ETIM was "associated" with the aforementioned terrorist organizations.

The government produced reports, mostly classified, upon which it relied in making the determination that the ETIM was an al Qaeda or Taliban-associated organization. Therefore, the information in those reports was entirely redacted from the published opinion. Lastly, the government produced evidence of statements made by another Uighur detainee (and supported by Parhat's own testimony) that the Afghani government (i.e. the Taliban) had given the camp to the Uighur refugees so they could train other Uighur's associated with the Chinese resistance movement.

The tribunal ultimately found that the evidence simply wasn't there to justify labeling Parhat an enemy combatant. The court was concerned with two assertions made by the government. First, the government's argument that the information contained in the documents was reliable because it appeared in three separate documents. The court's response: "Lewis Carroll notwithstanding, the fact that the government has "said it thrice" does not make an allegation true. The court recognized that many of the reports made the same assertions verbatim, indicating that later reports may have merely been citing earlier ones. Additionally, the court did not find unconvincing Parhat's claim that the source for the information was the Chinese government, certainly not an objective source for information regarding the Uighur resistance movement.

The government's second claim was that the information contained in the reports was reliable because it would not have appeared in intelligence reports if it was untrue. The court recognized the danger in this assertion when it found that "This comes perilously close to suggesting that whatever the government says must be treated as true." A scary thought, indeed!

To be clear, the court did not strike down the use of hearsay evidence in these tribunals. It merely held that the government was required to produce "sufficient additional information" permitting the tribunal and the court to determine the reliability of the information. It is important to note that the court recognized that the government could protect the anonymity of its sources and the contents of classified reports by providing the pertinent information directly to the court, rather than turning it over to counsel for the party challenging the classification. This protection is crucial to the government's ongoing anti-terrorism efforts.

I fully support the government's ability to detain enemy combatants, especially when they, or the organizations they are a part of, pose a direct threat to the United States and its interests, but that ability cannot go unchecked. Heck, lock them up at Gitmo and throw away the key, but at least have sufficient justification for it. I don't fear for our domestic security following this ruling, mostly because I trust the court's very narrow ruling and its justifications for the ruling. We are at war with terrorists who would do anything to destroy our country and the freedoms we enjoy as citizens. Substantiating information should not be difficult to produce when it comes to those individuals. Further, the military will continue to have wide latitude in finding and putting down threats to our nation.

Following the Supreme Court's ruling in Boumediene v. Bush, we will surely see a rush of filings from Guantanamo Bay. Just a surely, the courts will find that the detentions are reasonable and justified. A lot of politicians and hot-headed commentators rushed to judgment after the Boumediene ruling and probably will following Parhat. Just because the Supreme Court has permitted the Gitmo detainees to challenge their detention does not mean they are going to be released. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the military quit sending detainees to Gitmo in the future. Holding them abroad where the fighting is going on might allow them to avoid the jurisdiction of the U.S. courts entirely - something future Gitmo detainees would probably not enjoy.

Republican Hypocrisy

2008-06-27T20:14:00.009-05:00

I can't help but laugh at the current state of the Republican Party. It's not enough just to re-introduce the Marriage Protection Amendment, but they had to completely destroy what little credibility the GOP had by allowing Sens. Larry Craig (R - Bathroom Stall) and David Vitter (R - Prostitution Ring) to co-sponsor the damn thing.

Craig was quite publicly arrested for lewd conduct after a toe-tapping incident in an airport bathroom. He pled guilty to the lesser charge of disorderly conduct after hoping to keep the story out of the press. Once the story broke, however, he nearly resigned, then didn't, then blamed the whole thing on a "wide stance." Right, Senator.

My next favorite co-sponsor is Vitter, married to Wendy and father of their four children. In the Summer of 2007, Mr. Vitter, married to was identified as a client of the DC Madam (Deborah Jeane Palfrey). After being confronted with evidence that his phone number was among those on the infamous list, he came clean with his wife by his side to apologize for the sins in his past. You could almost hear Tammy Wynette singing "Stand By Your Man" in the background. Bill Clinton got impeached for a free blowjob but David Vitter gets away with paying for it. God bless capitalism.

Apart from the hypocrisy of these two, the whole "protect marriage" thing bothers me. Conservatives have the insane delusion that that homosexual community is somehow going to destroy the sanctity of marriage in a way straight people haven't already. 50% of marriages end in divorce. Britney Spears was able to marry and annul the marriage before three days had passed. Ted Haggard, Mr. Super-Mega Pastor "just got a massage" from a male prostitute. Reasonable people can differ on this very divisive issue but the Republican Party and most leaders on the conservative right have completely lost any sort of moral authority on this issue.

Big Week for the Supremes

2008-06-26T11:38:00.004-05:00

Not that many decisions that come down from the Supreme Court aren't important but it seems the Court waited until the last week of the session to release some of the most controversial opinions of the term.

First, on Wednesday, came the ruling in Kennedy v. Lousiana. There, the Court ruled that executing child rapists was a violation of the 8th Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment. I cannot begin to think how difficult it was for the justices to come to this decision and the 5-4 ruling makes that pretty clear. As difficult as it might be, I think I have to side with the majority in this case. The last execution for a crime against another person that did not end in the victim's death was some forty years ago. It's hard to think of a more heinous crime than the rape of a child, but the line has to be drawn somewhere.

Even victims' rights groups are torn over the death penalty for child rapists. The primary argument against the death penalty is that rapists would have no reason to allow their victims to live if they face the death penalty either way. The weaknesses of the capital punishment system are such that death sentences should be imposed rarely, if at all. Don't get me wrong - I think child rapists are the worst of the worst in our society. Let the bastards rot in prison the rest of their miserable lives and not clog the court system with their baseless appeals. The politicians have come out in fierce opposition to the ruling, the Democrats less so than Republicans, but even Barack Obama voiced opposition to the ruling. A tough issue, but I think the Court got it right this time.

Second, in another 5-4 vote, the Court in D.C. v. Heller upheld the right of private citizens to own and keep guns in the privacy of their homes. The original suit was brought by Dick Heller, a security guard, against the registration law adopted by the District of Columbia. The law required that all guns be registered, but prohibited registration of handguns - effectively outlawing private ownership of handguns. The ruling does not outlaw all restrictions on guns and rightly so. States may still require registration of rifles, shotguns and handguns and may require trigger locks or other safety devices. The ruling simply reaffirmed the belief of a majority of the country that the 2nd Amendment absolutely protects the right of private citizens to bear arms.

The ruling will be cheered all throughout the South and Mid-West, but will likely be decried in many big cities. While difficult to interpret the constitution in ways that protect the rights of all, while considering the delicate balance between the many different value systems and conditions across the country, the Court made, in my humble opinion, the right decision to err on the side of individual liberty.

NFNS: Week 4

2008-06-25T17:32:00.000-05:00

So I guess for my first real post I'll kind of repeat and expound upon a reply to a blog post on All About Amber. The 4th season of the Next Food Network Star premiered June 1st and, like last season, I'm pretty disappointed with the selection overall. There must just not be many great culinary minds meant for television.

As of this posting, we're four weeks in and four terrible contestants eliminated. Week 1 saw Cory, the unfunny funny woman, cut because she had zero personality. Week 2 saw Kevin, Mr. Bringing Romance to the Kitchen, cut because the judges couldn't see the romance in crostini or anything else he made. Week 3 saw Jeffrey, the tall, goofy guy, cut because he was plain weird. And this week saw Nipa, who I lovingly refer to as the bitch in the kitchen, eliminated. I thought the judges waited a week too long to cut Nipa since she WALKED OUT of the judging during week 3!

So, here's my personal countdown of the remaining contestants from last to first:

6. Jennifer

Jennifer is a very nice, very personable executive chef from Rhode Island. She has a 3 year old daughter named Lyric (yeah, pretty bad) and she is all mom all the time. Her biggest problem is that she apologizes for everything she does. She apologized to Martha Stewart, to the judges, to everyone. She has a serious lack of self-confidence and is at the top of the list for the chopping block unless she fixes it fast.

5. Adam

Adam is also a really nice guy but he tries too hard to be entertaining. In Week 3 he got down on his knees and serenaded Martha Stewart. In Week 4, the contestants are cooking, Iron Chef America style, on a Coast Guard ship. Adam thought it would be funny to trip (on purpose, mind you) on his way into the dining room. The joke fell as flat as he did. Worse, his only winning dish so far was Bacon Cheese Fries. He's clearly a culinary genius...

4. Shane

Shane is apparently a child actor turned chef. Doing some research I found that he used to be on the cast of the Nickelodeon show from my childhood "All That." I guess the show is still on? In any case, he lost a ton of weight and became a chef. Nothing all that special about him and not my favorite. Since he hasn't done anything spectacular on the show here's a vid of him playing Cupid:

3. Kelsey

It really pains me to put this perky little princess in the top 3. She's had great luck with her food and I think she finally learned to reign in the spunkiness in Week 4. I never would have imagined somebody could combine white chocolate and tilapia into a winning dish (outside of Kitchen Stadium) but Kelsey did it, creating her Macadamia Crusted Tilapia with White Chocolate Buerre Blanc, now being served at Red Lobster.

2. Aaron

Aaron is a bit on the rough side. He grew up in Camden, NJ and is a caterer. After watching a couple of seasons of NFNS, he's the most unrefined so far. His dishes have been big hits and he's very personable in front of the camera. I can't say I'd pick his show over any of my current favorites but he's running strong.

1. Lisa
At first glance, one would think Lisa would be more at home in the pages of Vogue than in the kitchen. Her personality really turned me off the first week, as did her culinary point of view, the infamous "3 C's" - Cooking Education, Community Outreach and Culinary Crafts. WTF? Fortunately, she dropped it by Week 3. She slowly started opening up and finally, in Week 4, the Iron Chef: Coast Guard episode, she finally became human. Maybe after taking a spill and ending up with sauce all over her will teach her not to wear $300 blouses and high heels in the kitchen. We shall see.

So it begins...

2008-06-25T17:21:00.000-05:00

We'll see how this blog progresses. I had thought about creating one after seeing several friends with blogs. I have no real direction planned but I'm sure it'll focus on two main areas: politics and food. With that, enjoy!