Saturday, April 30, 2005
I've been tagged!
1. Sports News/Commentary- I think sports themselves are worthwile and a lot of fun. While I'm not a diehard fan for any team, I can certainly appreciate the desire to cheer for a bunch of guys who happen to be from/are paid by your city as they move a ball or puck against a bunch of guys who happen to be from /are paid by another city. My patience wears thin, however, when I see the ridiculous amounts of TV and radio air-time that is spent analyzing and talking about guys who do this. Particularly loathesome are press conferences given by coaches and players who talk about how they did /didn't "give 110%" and how they did/did not match up to the other side's offensive/defensive capabilites. Since the Gladiators, people have had had some carnal need to see other people engage in controlled violence in a stadium setting. It's fun, I'll admit, and I'm all for it. Just post the scores and spare me the analysis.
2. Watching Poker on TV- I'm actually doing it right now. My roommates do it for at least a few hours a day. Yet still, I can't get into it. Like Mansfield Fox, Death, and almost all of my friends, I love to play, but seeing other people play just doesn't do it for me. Reminds me of watching someone do a coin toss...over, and over, and over.
3. Pizza Hut and Subway - Pizz hut is simply not pizza. It's greasy, manufactured-tasting and makes me feel full and slightly nauseous after half a slice. Subway, in theory, doesn't taste bad, but it's something about it being a chain that turns me off. Perhaps it strikes me as unstanitary, but I'm not sure. If I want a sub sandwich, I'd much rather go to a real deli.
4. U2: I am constantly suprised at how uncommon my aversion to this band is. For a while, I thought U2 was like Dave Matthews and that while a significant portion of people liked it, there was also a sizable group of people who couldn't stand it. Then, I started asking my friends and I could find not a single non-U2 fan. Just last week, I finally found one. So at least I'm not totally alone when I say I find their airy, slightly angsty and depresing but still upbeat songs ANNOYING.
5. Tequila - I'll second Angus on this one. Had a bad experience with it in college, and can't stand the smell/taste of it ever since.
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
Let's have a diablog
What was really interesting to me, however, was not what my friend asked me but how he asked it. He did so by posing the question on his blog and then following it with one of my pseudonyms and a question mark both hyperlinked to my blog. It got me thinking about what might be a new and interesting form of communication in the blogosphere that I'm going to call "a dia-blog". A diablog would consist of one person posing a question to a fellow blogger on a particular issue and then summoning a response by linking to his or her blog. The second blogger would then answer the question via a post and request the answer of yet another blogger. The whole thing would work kind of like a chain letter, allowing web surfers who visit a "link in the chain" of the diablog to click their way from one opinion to the next. They could also traceback to previous posts in the chain. Ideally, this could go on for quite a long time, incorporating the views of bloggers from a broad array of perspectives.
So, in the spirit of my idea, I would like to start the world wide web's first diablog. Because I've devoted my post to this topic, I'm going to (lamely) pass on actually answering the question and punt it to my friend Death in the Afternoon (I know, Angus already linked to her). Death will then (hopefully) post some kind of response and summon the thoughts of another blogger. Who knows where this chain of ideas will lead us. So to repeat, the question for discussion is:
Does law school make us socially inept, or are we just born that way??
**And please, somebody tell me if this diablog concept is as old as canned beer (or if it's just stupid). I'm not exactly on the cutting edge of bloggery.
Monday, April 25, 2005
The Blog at High
The most common manifestation of this the "at" syndrome. You've probably seen it in your very own state or community. It involves taking a name and adding to it the word "at", followed by a geographic location. So, for example, one would take the name"The Short Hills Mall" and turn it into "The Mall at Short Hills". This convention also quite commonly shows up in the names of housing developments and gated communities (I'd be willing to guess there is a swanky development known as something like "Lakeview at Boca Raton"). Why people feel that separating a place's name from its geographic location with an awkward sounding preposition connotes class or sophistication, I don't quite get. After all, don't pretentious types usually look down on those who say things like "where's the mall at" or "isn't that place at New Haven?"
Another strain of this faux fancy naming tendency is the "the" syndrome. This phenomenon shows up more frequently in the context of schools. So, for instance, chances are if you went to a public high school, it was called something along the lines of "Madison High School". If you went to a private school, however, the chances of the name being preceded by a superfluous "the" drastically increase. In that case, you probably went to "The Lawrenceville School" or "The Peck School", etc. etc. Personally speaking, I thought until I arrived at law school that I was going to Yale Law School. I was rudely awakened however, when I was reminded again and again by our illustrious dean that I was a proud student of THE Yale Law School.
The fact that people need to engage in this kind of superfluous "at"age and "the"ing has always irked me. It's a similar pet peeve to my disdain of over-using Old English/fake Old English spellings like "Towne Centre" and "Shoppes". I realize more and more, however, that these linguistic conventions are largely unavoidable, especially in the peer-set that I'm likely to find myself in once I graduate. So, I suppose it's about time I cave in and get used to the fancified names that so many seem intent on propagating. From now on, if people ask, I go to the Law School at Yale.
Sunday, April 24, 2005
Thursday, April 21, 2005
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Ditch Delay without Delay
"We've got Justice Kennedy writing decisions based upon international law, not the Constitution of the United States? That's just outrageous," DeLay told Fox News Radio. "And not only that, but he said in session that he does his own research on the Internet? That is just incredibly outrageous."
I really don't take issue with the first part of that statement (This is the U.S.'s Supreme Court after all, not the U.N.'s), but the second is laughable. Gasp! Justice Kennedy (along with every lawyer and law student in the country) uses that new-fangled thing they call the internet to do his research!! What's next? Sending facscimiles and emails from his chambers?! God save the honorable Court.
What really is "incredibly outrageous" is that Delay didn't have the conscience to step down for the good of his party long ago.
O, tempora! O, mores!
More Pope Press
"Arch-conservative"? Read: much more conservative than Phillip Pullella and Crispian Balmer.
"...stunned moderates"/"surprise choice"? Sounds dramatic, but is it just me, or is this the guy that every single major media outlet has been reporting as a favorite for the last week?? And of course by moderates, the writers mean social moderates, as opposed to economics ones. Ahh, objective journalism.
Arch-Conservative German Elected Pope
By Philip Pullella and Crispian Balmer
VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Arch-conservative German cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was elected Pope on Tuesday in a surprise choice that delighted traditionalist Roman Catholics but stunned moderates hoping for a more liberal papacy.
NBC NEWS: "Brian, there is a very heavy sacerdotal presence in the crowd here right now."
FOX NEWS: "When the cardinals went into that chapel this morning, they really had their game faces on."
Sunday, April 17, 2005
Answer to the Trivia Challenge
Friday, April 15, 2005
And I'll have a.....
Thursday, April 14, 2005
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
Chasing down the terrorists
The Feds grab some bad guys and slap them with an indictment. ...
And on a lighter note, The Onion (hilariously) reports on the latest weapon in the war on terror.
Back to Tom Friedman, I'd like to point out that this is one of his only columns in recent memory that has not revolved around creating some pun or play on words involving a current issue. I know he's a "pun"dit, but he generally takes it a bit too far. And is it just me, or has he straddled both sides of the Iraq war issue more than John Kerry? That said, I generally respect his non-partisanship and moderation.
Monday, April 11, 2005
Penny for YOUR thoughts - Comment!!
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
Iraq Takes Shape
Click here for the full column.
If Congress is going to renew the Act in its entirety, it should simultaneously do the following:
1. Pass a LIBERTY Act mandating annual DOJ reports to the House and Senate (I'll leave it to Congress to fill in the acronym). The mandated reports would detail the exact number of times each provision of the Act has been invoked and for what purpose. Portions of these reports could justifiably remain classified to protect ongoing investigations and prevent disclosure to the bad guys of specific law enforcement methods.
2. Congress should immdeidately consider enacting the 9/11 Commission's recommendation of a privacy/civil liberties Board for the entire federal government. The Board would serve a function somewhat akin to those carried out by the inspectors general at various federal agencies, or the Chief Privacy Officer at Homeland Security. Unlike in the intelligence context, there is little danger that such a Board would risk creating another level of useless bureaucracy, since no governmental body is currently tasked with this important function.
3. Build in another sunset provision that requires Congress to re-evaluate the necessity and efficacy of the statute four or five years down the road.
The PATRIOT Act may be (and probably is) a wholly good and necessary law. But still the question remains - Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?