Yes, the new one is out!

Brand new edition of...

"You know you're a redneck when......

1. You take your dog for a walk and you both use the same tree.

2. You can entertain yourself for more than 15 minutes with a fly swatter.

3 Your boat has not left the driveway in 15 years.

4. You burn your yard rather than mow it.

5. You think "The Nutcracker" is something you do off the high dive.

6. The Salvation Army declines your furniture.

7. You offer to give someone the shirt off your back and they don't want it.

8. You have the local taxidermist on speed dial.

9. You come back from the dump with more than you took.

10. You keep a can of Raid on the kitchen table.

11. Your wife can climb a tree faster than your cat.

12. Your grandmother has "ammo" on her Christmas list.

13. You keep flea and tick soap in the shower.

14. You've been involved in a custody fight over a hunting dog.

15. You go to the stock car races and don't need a program.

16. You know how many bales of hay your car will hold.

17. You have a rag for a gas cap.

18. Your house doesn't have curtains, but your truck does.

19. You wonder how service stations keep their rest-room's so clean ?

20. You can spit without opening your mouth.

21. You consider your license plate personalized because your father made it.

22. Your lifetime goal is to own a fireworks stand.

23. You have a complete set of salad bowls and they all say "Cool Whip" on the side.

24. The biggest city you've ever been to is Wal-Mart.

25. Your working TV sits on top of your non-working TV.

26. You've used your ironing board as a buffet table.

27. A tornado hits your neighborhood and does $100,000 worth of improvements.

28. You've used a toilet brush to scratch your back.

29. You missed your 5th grade graduation because you were on jury duty.

30. You think fast food is hitting a deer at 65.



I married a minority

Only 10% of Americans in their 20's are shorter than 5'6". I guess it doesn't apply until she becomes American, but if the title of this post was I am going to be married to a minority, that would just be confusing.


To Abby XXXX:

Sadly, while I now remember the episode that you were talking about, I do not have the post. I asked some of my friends if they remembered what the post said, but they to have forgotten. So if you ask me it sounds like you come out ahead because: 1- it was apparently a very forgettable post. 2- I feel like I owe you a post. 3- I used to be a lot angrier. So I am going to write on that experience again. It won’t be the same, but hopefully that means it will be better.

It is very difficult for a person to change who they are. This is where the old adages like, “A tiger never changes its stripes,” come from. As an example, in high school, I was a total jock. I think I graduated with more gym credits than science credits. Since I graduated about ten years ago, I have lived in 15 different places. Of those fifteen times, there were five different times when I started completely over. I went to a place where I did not know anybody. Every time, when I started meeting new people, I was known as the jock. To this day, my fiends think of me as a jock. They joke about it because we are all nerds, but I am still the jock. This is not a comment on my friends; it is a comment on me. I know how to be the jock. It is comfortable for me to be the jock. Even though I have had many opportunities to reinvent myself, I come back to being the jock.

Now you are probably wondering what this has to do with what was written on the other blog, which was the initial point of your inquiry. In today’s America, while racism and sexism are still alive, they are not acceptable in the majority of society. Being labeled a racist or sexist would be hurtful to most people. However, there is another form of prejudice that is not only growing, it is being encouraged by the media, government, and I believe, even in many schools. I call it beliefism. It is a prejudice against people who do not share your same beliefs. I am not referring here only to religious beliefs, but to any closely held belief.

A person’s beliefs are core to who they are. People in general do not like to be challenged on who they are. This has led to beliefism. A typical person, when challenged on their beliefs, does not listen rationally to the argument presented that goes against his or her beliefs. They instead give the person making the argument a label that the two people do not share. The person who is challenged then attaches negative adjectives to the uncommon label and dismisses the argument. As an example, I have a friend who is an atheist. He also really hates religion. He recently said some things that were insulting to a religious group. When some people expressed their displeasure at what he had said, he labeled them irrational, and dismissed what was said. This is an example of beliefism. It is not limited to atheists or liberals, but is prevalent among all walks of life. If my friend actually read this far he is probably saying, “But it is irrational.” You may be thinking it is irrational to believe in religion as well. Fine. The point is not that you have to believe the same as other people. The point is that when you simply attach a label, you are practicing beliefism. If it is irrational, explain why you think it is irrational. Don’t simply label. That was what upset me about the post that you initially asked about. Odds was practicing beliefism. She did not like your point of view; she labeled you young and religious. Since she does not think of herself in either of these ways, it was then easy to slap the adjectives of immature and blinded to these labels and dismiss you. Instead of discussing the points you raised, or better yet explaining why she herself felt that the Dakota abortion ban was wrong, she labeled and dismissed. Beliefism. While I do not agree with her position on abortion, the beliefism is what upset me more.

Some researchers believe that we are hardwired to discriminate. From an evolutionary perspective this makes perfect sense. While a primitive man may have been willing to sleep in the same case as other primitive men, he would not be willing to sleep in the same case as a saber tooth tiger for example. He was discriminating. Those that were not discriminating soon became food for something else and died out without being able to procreate and pass on their nondiscriminating genes.

However, as I have said in the past about other topics, genetic predisposition is not predeterminism. While we may be inclined to discriminate, we do not have to discriminate.

Now to wrap all of this up. A person’s beliefs are very close to the core of that person. Call it the soul or the essence or whatever. In today’s society, we are not likely to be eaten by anything. However, when we are attacked at our essence, it is the modern day equivalent of being eaten. People discriminate without thinking in order to protect themselves, because, as the example I gave at the beginning, it is very hard for a person to change who they are. We do not want to be presented with logical arguments that challenge our self-description because then we might have to change our self-description. Beliefism is merely self-protection. The problem with beliefism is that it causes us to reject other points of view merely because they do not gel with our points of view. I firmly believe that abortion is wrong in most circumstances. No argument is going to change my view of that. However, I need to recognize that there are very good and persuasive arguments that are in favor of allowing a woman to choose whether to abort a pregnancy or not. The fact that these are good arguments does not mean that my beliefs are wrong. It simply means that depending on how you view the issue; a particular argument will have more weight with you than another. This is why two people of equal intelligence, of equal dedication, and equal comprehension of the issue can differ on perspective. Having different views is not wrong. Having a popular or unpopular view is not wrong. Beliefism is what makes it wrong.

The other problem with beliefism is that it is so easy to recognize in other people, and so hard to see in yourself. I would not be surprised if some of my friends comment and say, “you do beliefism all the time, look at what you said about X.” I wish I could say that they are wrong, but I don’t know. I know that I have done it in the past, and had a friend call me on it. I do think it is exceptionally important that we guard against it in ourselves, and hopefully in 150 years, people will look back at beliefism as most of us look back at racism.

Now on another note, I would appreciate it if you would tell your parents about this site. I have a daughter and if she were 16 and getting a post from a 28 year old I would at least want to know about it. Also, I really hope your real name isn’t Abby XXXX, but if it is, don’t use it online anymore ok. Last summer I learned a lot of crappy stuff about what people can do with just your real name, especially to minors. Abby, thank you for coming to my site and reminding me of this. I think it is important to remember and guard against in ourselves.


Scaredy Cat Judges?

This NY Times article explores why the number of decisions by the Supreme Court has decreased so drastically. My favorite explanation is that since the Court is so divided that the judges are scared of granting a petition for fear of not having the number of votes on the court to win the decision.

My second favorite was that the number is going down because law clerks make the initial recommendation on whether to grant cert., and the law clerks are afraid of looking stupid so they don't recommend as many cases. That's a gas. The greatest legal minds of our generation (or at least the ones who get good grades at good schools) are too timid to take a stand.


Half way done

Two finals done, two left. Now the struggle is just to keep studying.



Time once again to review the winners of the Annual "Stella Awards." The Stella Awards are named after 81 year-old Stella Liebeck who spilled hot coffee on herself and successfully sued McDonald's (in NM). That case inspired the Stella Awards for the most frivolous, ridiculous, successful lawsuits in the United States

Here are this year' s winners:

5th Place (tie):

Kathleen Robertson of Austin, Texas, was awarded $80,000. by a jury of her peers after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was running inside a furniture store. The owners of the store were understandably surprised at the verdict, considering the misbehaving little toddler was Ms. Robertson's son .

5th Place (tie):

19-year-old Carl Truman of Los Angeles won $74,000 and medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord. Mr. Truman apparently didn't notice there was someone at the wheel of the car when he was trying to steal his neighbor's hubcaps .

5th Place (tie):

Terrence Dickson of Bristol, Pennsylva nia, was leaving a house he had just finished robbing by way of the garage. He was not able to get the garage door to go up since the automatic door opener was malfunctioning. He couldn't re-enter the house because the door connecting the house and garage locked when he pulled it shut. The fam! ily was on vacation, and Mr. Dickson found himself locked in the garage for eight days. He subsisted on a case of Pepsi he found, and a large bag of dry dog food. He sued the homeowner's insurance claiming the situation caused him undue mental anguish. The jury agreed, to the tune of $500,000. In my opinion this is so outrageous that it should have been 2nd Place!

4th Place:

Jerry Williams of Little Rock, Arkansas, was awarded $14,500. and medical expenses after being bitten on the buttocks by his next door neighbor's beagle. The beagle was on a chain in its owner's fenced yard. The award was less than sought because the jury felt the dog might have been just a little provoked at the time by Mr. Williams who had ! climbed over the fence into the yard and was shooting it repeatedly with a pellet gun.

3rd Place:

A Philadelphia restaurant was ordered to pay Amber Carson of
Lancaster, Pennsylvania, $113,500. after she slipped on a soft drink and broke her coccyx (tailbone). The beverage was on the floor because Ms. Carson had thrown it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier during an argument.


Kara Walton of Claymont, Delaware, successfully sued the owner of a night club in a neighboring city when she fell from the bathroom window to the floor and knocked out her two front teeth. This occurred while Ms. Walton was trying to sneak through the window in the ladies room to avoid paying the $3.50 cover charge . She was awarded $12,000 and dental expenses

1st Place:!

This year's runaway winner was Mrs. Merv Grazinski of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Mrs. Grazinski purchased a brand new 32-foot Winnebago motor home. On her first trip home, (from an OU football game), having driven onto the freeway, she set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the driver's seat to go into the back & make herself a sandwich. Not surprisingly, the RV left t he freeway, crashed and overturned. Mrs.Grazinski sued Winnebago for not advising her in the owner's manual that she couldn't actually do this. The jury awarded her $1,750,000. plus a new motor home. The company actually changed their manuals on the basis of this suit, just in case there were any other complete morons around.


20/20 on charitable giving

I promise this is the last post on poor people and what to do for at least a while but tonight there was a 20/20 entitled "Cheap in America" It explored charitible giving in America. Here are some of the statistics: Conservatives are 18% more likely to give blood than liberals, Conservatives give 30% more of their income to charity than liberals, 24 of the top 25 states that give the greatest percentage of their income to charity voted bush in the last election, the working poor give a greater percentage of their income to charity than any other group, Sioux Falls outgives San Francisco, the number one indicator of whether a person gives to charity is whether they attend church (they are more likely to give to charities other than their church, they are more likely to donate blood, they are more likely to give money to a homeless person on the street). The middle class gives the smallest percentage of their income to charity.

One thing that stood out to me: working poor (those who make in their work what they would get if they just collected welfare) give the highest percentage of their income. Nonworking poor (those who just collect welfare) dont give. I am not a big fan of FDR, but I will say this for him. He made people work for the money the government gave them.

What this tells me is that the phenomenon I described two posts ago, liberals saying they want to give more and then not giving, is widespread. I think it is demonstrative of the hidden and deeply disturbing hypocrisy that exists among liberals today.

Science tidbits

Last night the wife and I were flipping channels during commercials. We went over to PBS and saw a nova that was talking about dog research. Apparently researching on dogs can help humans but whatever. The best part was the narcoleptic dog. It would fall asleep if it got too excited. the show had a researcher opening a can of dog food, the little dog was jumping up to get it, and when the food fell out of the can and hit the floor, the dog just keeled over. Later it showed the dog running down the hall, apparently to freedom, and it just fell over while running. It was the funniest thing I have ever seen.

Also, I found this little portion of an article on ESPN. Science related, but I do not stand behind any of the scientific conclusions. "News from Distant Space: Previous TMQs have noted that as telescopes improve, astronomers find supernovae are more common and more destructive than assumed -- and this is not necessarily the best possible news. The latest discovery, from a team lead by University of Toronto researcher Andy Howell, is that the "Chandrasekhar limit" on supernova explosions isn't a limit.

Subramanyan Chandrasekhar, one of the leading 20th-century astronomers, won a Nobel Prize for his 1930s studies that maintained the most common category of exploding stars, called the Type Ia supernova, could not exceed about 1.4 times the mass of our sun; this seemed to impose an upper boundary on the amount of destruction such a supernova explosion could cause. But the Toronto researchers observed a Type Ia supernova, dubbed SNLS-03D3bb, that reached about two solar masses before detonating, and thus released far more radiation than was thought possible. There's another implication. Partly owing to Chandrasekhar's arguments, it was assumed all Type Ia supernovae explode with about the same luminosity, meaning their light level could be used to estimate the expanse between the Milky Way and distant galaxies. (If they're all giving off approximately the same amount of light, relative measurements allow you to estimate how far away they are.) Current estimates of the size and age of the universe, and its rate of expansion, rely on the assumption that Type Ia supernovae obey the Chandrasekhar limit. If it turns out this class of exploding stars varies significantly, all bets might be off about how large and old the universe is, or its rate of expansion.

He thought there was a limit to the destructive power of nature. Umm, looks like he thought wrong.Now consider this. Since Edwin Hubble's discovery in 1929 that the universe was not static but expanding, theorists have debated whether the expansion would continue forever, gradually slow down or eventually reverse as gravity overcame the outward momentum of the Big Bang and pulled the stuff of the firmament back to its starting point. (The latter conjecture is called the Big Crunch.) Researchers using Type Ia supernova as measuring sticks declared in 1998 that cosmic expansion was accelerating, which nobody's theory predicted. The galaxies could not be speeding up unless energy were somehow being added to them, which caused cosmologists to speculate that mysterious "dark energy" permeates the universe and functions as the mirror image of gravity. No physicist has offered even the vaguest explanation of where dark energy originates or what powers it. (General relativity theory does offer an explanation of how gravity derives its power to pull.) Yet even though the dark energy concept requires you to believe that most of the energy of the universe is undetectable and so far inexplicable, physicists rapidly have accepted the idea that dark energy exists and even might be the dominant force of the cosmos. What if it turns out the universe is not accelerating, that the apparent rising rate of expansion is a data error caused by the false assumption that all Type Ia supernovas have a standard brightness? Then physicists will have to announce that dark energy never existed in the first place. But trust us, we're experts!"



This is not a personal attack on anybody.

It seems to me that a lot of people say that they are willing to pay more in taxes in order to help poor people, but when the government lowers their taxes, not only do they gladly accept the lowering of their taxes, they do not give any more money to people in need. I saw this a lot with my parents friends. As far as I can tell this is the only argument I know of that makes me wonder at the necessity of government programs to aid poor people.


Poor People

We previously had a conversation about why the government should or should not give money to poor people. One of the arguments, specifically countering my argument that a family of three can live just fine on 15,000, was that while I am sacrificing now, having to live like I live now for the rest of my life would be impossible. That kind of bothered me and now that I can I will tell you why. Going to movies, or out to eat, or Starbucks is not a right. You should not take money away from hardworking individuals so that poor people can go to movies. These spending items are a luxury. Not only were they not available for most of human existence (and humanity survived just fine I might add), but they are not even available for most of the world at this moment. Yeah poor people are sad, but taking the money I work hard for and earn in order that poor people can buy these luxuries is nothing more than robbery.


Happy Bday Matt and more

Happy Birthday Matt is self explanatory.

I believe that one of the reasons that adults are better adjusted than teenagers is that teenagers are forced by the state into situations in which they are forced to interact with every other type of person. As we get older we self select into more and more selective groups. During high school, we are forced to attend classes with every other type of person. We have to do everything from grade their papers to shower with them. We are inherently uncomfortable with these people because they are not like us. Yes, in high school we separate into cliques, but those cliques are not closed off. They are forced to interact with other cliques. As adults, our interaction with people that are not in our self selected group are very limited and brief. I think that high school would be more effective and less traumatic if the students were allowed to choose in middle school: where they attended high school, what they would study, and who they would study with.


Why I am looking forward to this weekend

All this week I have been trying to keep a clear head to work on the ethics paper and a full trial that I have to do tonight. However, after tonight I no longer need a clear head and plan on entering a three day codeine induced stupor. Ahh, codeine, my couch, and football. What more could a guy ask for?



Yesterday, instead of taking the MPRE, I played football. This resulted in sprained ligaments around my collarbone, a torn pectoral muscle, and a torn hamstring. Here is a list of things you cant do with these injuries:
Change a diaper,
Pick up a kid,
Read a book,
sleep on your side,
bend over,
reach across your body,
walk at a normal speed.

These are the ones I have discovered so far. If I continue to feel sorry for myself, I may make a more extensive list. Keep your fingers crossed.


Funny, but not mine

Donald Rumsfeld briefed the President this morning. He told Bush that 3 Brazilian soldiers were killed in Iraq. To everyone's amazement, all the color drained from Bush's face. Then, he collapsed onto his desk, head in hands, visibly shaken, almost in tears. Finally, he composed himself and asked Rumsfeld, "Just exactly how many is a brazilian?"



Stress is a wonderful thing. It is omnipresent in our modern day lives. I dont know why I think stress is greater in our modern day than in the past. Realistically it seems that being chased all the time by things that want to eat you would be more stressful than worrying about how you do on finals.

Another aspect of stress that I find fascinating is the effects. Stress makes some people get fat, others get skinny. It makes some people get headaches, unusual bowel action, tension in the upper back, tension in the lower back, tension in the legs. Some people perform better with a certain amount of stress, while others fall apart and routine tasks become impossible.

Another crazy thing about stress is the causes. Some people get stress from having to speak in public. Some people have stress from interpersonal relationships. Some people have stress from psychological problems.

So stress manifests itself in different ways, is caused by different things, and seems to increase the safer life gets. I think it best if I move to the wilderness, live naked, and run from bears for the rest of my life.


Gay Marriage in NJ

For those of you who didnt see this today, and interesting article on the legal fight in NJ


Traditional Marriage

So today in a horrid class that I am taking, the professor told us that people who say that tradition is a reason for preventing same sex marriage dont understand history. He told us that in the past, if my brother married a woman I would be prevented from marrying her sister, or if my sister married a man I would be prevented from marrying her sister. Since these are allowed now, obviously same sex marriage should be allowed. This seems a fallacy to me because in neither of these examples was anyone marrying a person of the same sex. The way I understood the traditional marriage argument was not that marriage hasn't changed in the last 6000 years, but that while same sex relationship have existed for a long time, same sex marriage has never been permitted. Now my understanding may be flawed because I dont argue in favor of same sex marriage and so never hear the arguments against it (other than my own obviously and I dont use the traditional marraige argument). So I ask you my liberal readership, do people actually argue that marriage has not changed ever and so we shouldnt change it now, or is my professor a quack?


The Answer

A booger is born in your nose.


A comparison

So I am a large guy. I know this, everyone who sees me knows this, it is just a fact of life. This last week, I had the experience of urinating in two different airport bathrooms. I know this sounds like a dirty joke, but bear with me. First, Las Vegas. Las Vegas has a newer airport. I went into the bathroom, did my business and walked out. (Of course I washed my hands, that is included in doing my business.) St. Louis on the other hand, has an older airport. I went in there and was sadly disappointed. Now for the female readership who has never been in a men's room, the urinals typically have little wall barriers to prevent peaking. In St. Louis these walls were so close together that my shoulders were touching the walls. My options were either wedge myself in, or stand back and se how good I was at long distance shooting. Now if you are like me you tend to try to touch as little as possible in a public bathroom, but despite the temptation, I decided it best if I didnt whip out willy in the middle of the room and see what I could hit. To prevent this story from getting more graphic, lets just sum up with, I am by far not the largest person on the planet, and while I am a big guy, if I have trouble fitting in at a urinal, there are a lot of people that just dont have the option of urinating in St. Louis. All in all, I give the St. Louis airport bathroom a 0 out of 5, and Las Vegas gets a 5 out of 5.



So on my days off, I like to do a little light reading. Lately I have been reading Catch-22 again and came across this dialogue between a pilot and a doctor that seemed relevant to conversations we have had here in the past. Here it is.

"Turn on the light,' Dunbar said.

'There is no light. I dont feel like starting my generator. I used to get a big kick out of saving people's lives. Now I wonder what the hell's the point, since they all have to die anyway.'

'Oh, there's a point all right', Dunbar assured him.

'Is there? What is the point?'

'The point is to keep them from dying as long as you can.'

'Yeah, but what's the point, since they all have to die anyway?'

'The trick is not to think about that.'

'Never mind the trick. What the hell's the point.'

Dunbar pondered in silence for a few moments, 'Who the hell knows."


Happy Halloween

I know it is early but this should make you as excited as foley at a page convention.

Follow up to Roswell

Recently I passed on an email I had recieved that many leaders of the democratic party were born exactly 9 months after the spaceship crashed in Roswell. It was pointed out that this information was wrong. But it got me thinking. After further research I want to be the first to report that Alex Rogriguez, Derek Jeter, Gary Sheffield, Jason Giambi, Jorge Posada, Robinson Cano, Hideki Matsui, Bobby Abreu, and Johnny Damon were all born exactly nine months after the partial meltdown at three mile island. Coincedence? I think not.


So the NHL season has started. My beloved Avs blew a 2 goal third period lead and lost in overtime. If this is indicative of the rest of the season, I am going to be unhappy for the next f months.


My simple life

Are you ready? This is my confessional post. I don't want to be a lawyer. I don't want to be a doctor. I don't want to be an engineer, architect, accountant, computer scientist, mailman, soldier, or politician. I want to be a farmer.

At the end of this summer, I had about two weeks in which I spent most of the time sitting and thinking about the different issues in the world. I spent a day on abortion, a day on government, a day on stem cells, etc. At the end of the day, I felt that I had defined in my own head the problem better and come to a solution that I felt comfortable with. My solution, I felt, took into account the strongest and weakest arguments of both sides. I don't mean that each side would be happy with my conclusion, but no matter what argument I was presented with, I felt I had considered it and had an answer ready.

These last two paragraphs probably seem disjointed to you, so I am going to join them. If I were a farmer, I could contribute something to society by growing food. I would be helping others, and at the same time it is a lifestyle that does not require constant mental effort the way many of today's popular careers do. The two weeks this summer, I felt my mind opening up, and I felt I could see, comprehend, and analyze more deeply all of the great conundrums of human existence. That made me feel more alive.

Now I am back at school and while I still think, now it is about mootness and ripeness and other legal falsehoods that matter to less than 1% of the people in the world. I miss thinking about great things and I feel that it is a sign of the rest of my life. I fear that in choosing a profession which needs thought, I have relegated myself to a life of thinking little thoughts.


Hi Matt

I often sit next to Matt in class. He often checks my blog during class and I feel bad if there is nothing new for him to read. Since I have my computer today I thought I would say hi. Maybe to get a laugh I will quote a riddle I got from Calvin and Hobbes. "What is the difference between a slug and a two inch long living booger?"


is my new favorite treatment for a sore throat. It works wonders.



So the last two days I have not been feeling well. I am planning on going to the clinic tomorrow just to check if it is strep because my throat really hurts and I am very susceptible to strep. I dont tell you this to garner sympathy, no. I tell you this because tomorrow I will have one of my least favorite conversations with a doctor. It goes something like this.

Doctor: "Let's take your temperature. 99.3, a little high, but within normal range."

Me: "Doctor, my normal temperature is 96.8"

Doctor: "Uh-huh." Said as though I couldnt tell the difference between my head and my...you know what.

Why they gotta be such jerks about it? I am going to make sure to cough really hard in his/her face just so they can take their own temperature and then talk to me about normal range.


Little known facts about the number 21

Twenty-one is a Fibonacci number, a Harshad number, a Motzkin number, a triangular number and an octagonal number, as well as a composite number.
21 appears in the Padovan sequence, preceded by the terms 9, 12, 16 (it is the sum of the first two of these).
Adding up the sums of divisors for the integers 1 through 5 yields 21.
21 is a repdigit in base 4 (111).
21 is the smallest number of differently sized squares needed to square the square.


Glass the Middle East

So the idea that we should glass the middle east to get rid of the fighting and make it easier to look for oil has two problems that I have been able to identify. First, in order to make glass, it requires a rapid cooling of the material. So even if we do drop a nuke over there, we have to rapidly cool the area afterward or we will not end up with glass. Maybe if we drag ice from the north pole down to the middle east we can rapidly cool the area.

Second, in order to make clear glass, the sand if purified. Obviously the sand laying on the ground in the middle east is not purified. Colored glass could make it harder for us to find the oil. I think this problem can be solved through a diplomatic endevour to convinve the people over there to purify all of the sand laying around before we drop our nukes.

So our solution is definitely doable with just those two minor obstacles that we can easily overcome...oh yeah, and the murder of the millions of people living there.



Many will recall that on July 8, 1947, witnesses claim an unidentifiedobject with five aliens aboard crashed on a sheep and cattle ranch justoutside Roswell, New Mexico. This is a well known incident that many say has long been covered up by theUS Air Force and the federal government. However, you may NOT know that in the month of March 1948, exactly ninemonths after that historic day, Albert Arnold Gore, Jr.; Hillary Rodham;John F. Kerry; William Jefferson Clinton; Howard Dean; Nancy Pelosi; DianneFeinstein; Charles E. Schumer; and Barbara Boxer were born. That piece of information has now cleared up a lot of things.


To Catch a Predator

So for the last week or so, Matt has been trying to convince me that the dateline series (where they lure predators to a house where they think they are going to have sex with a child) is bad. Not cause the pervs are good, but because it violates rights. Well tonight I was flipping channels and it was on again. This time with an added twist. After the perv was arrested, they were taken back to the stationhouse and interrogated. These interrogations were shown on the show. How are these admittedly sick individuals supposed to get a fair trial if potentially inadmissible interrogation is aired on national TV? I have no problem with these sting operations that get these sickos off the street, but turning it into entertainment is not right. Airing interrogations is even worse.


New Constitution

I am resurrecting an idea from not long ago. I had planned to write a new constitution of the united states. I am not going to write the whole thing in one post because A: it isn't finished, and B: it would be a really long post. So I will write what I finish when it happens. Today we start with the preamble. If you don't have the original one memorized, get out a copy so you can see what I would change. I encourage comments, especially if you disagree with any portion of it.


We the people of the United States, in order to insure equality among the States and among the citizens of the States, provide for the common defense, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.



Our society has created a generation of critics. I have noticed fewer and fewer of us actually create. We rehash and spin. Tonight I was watching a really great concert on PBS and realized that it had been a very long time since I had created anything new. I look back at this blog and there is nothing new, there is only commentary and tired questions. I look at other blogs and popular entertainment and most blogs and a lot of entertainment is simply critical of other things. We have more book critics than authors. We have more movie critics than directors. Etc.

I think it is great that we are more informed now than we ever have been before, but I think that our mistake is thinking our criticisms can take the place of our creativity. I think that we should get a greater sense of individual accomplishment based solely on our own work and not accomplishment based on the cutting down of the work of others. A friend told me a while ago that a popular personality was criticizing a scientific theory and when asked what her alternative was, she replied, "You don't have to open a restaurant to be a food critic." To continue using that analogy, I think that we are moving towards a society in which you dont even have to eat to be a food critic, and I think that is a mistake.


Old Hobby

When I was learning spanish, I decided that since I was in a location in which there were people learining basically every language imaginable I would learn one phrase in every language I could. The phrase I chose was "Shut up and kiss me." Thanks to babelfish I am listing that phrase in many different languages in case any of you are traveling soon and think it will come in handy.
Dutch- sluiten-op en kus me
French- fermez--vers le hautet embrassez-moi
German- schließenSie und küssen Sie mich
Greek- κλείνω-επάνω και με φιλήστε
Italian- chiudalo -in su e baci
Portuguese- feche-me -acima e beije-
Russian- zakro1te-vverx и расцелуйте меня
Spanish- callate y besame

The problem with babelfish is that it directly translates so use these phrases at your own risk.



For those who are considering taking the MPRE this fall, the deadline of ontime registration is September 26. There is an additional period for late registration but I would imagine it costs more. the test will be given on November 4.

Also, for the record. The author does not stand by these dates and if you rely on them you do so at your own risk.


Jury duty

I got summoned for jury duty. I have actually wanted to sit on a jury for a while, and so if I thought I had a snowballs chance I would be excited. However, I think there is a section in the model ethics code that specifically says that if you allow me to sit on a jury it is presumptive malpractice. Oh well, I will have a day to read a book and tell everyone in open court how much I hate cops.


Good news

This story made my day. But then I started thinking, if these practice areas are expanding so quickly, why dont I have a job? Then I was depressed again.



I had to turn comments off on my punishment post because my real name was used. If I figure out how to get rid of comments I will turn it back on. But now let me try to answer some of you. Merciful justice is a contradiction in terms. Forgiving someone is mercy plain and simple. Justice is paying the price for what you did wrong. Justice requires that the kid that stole the candy bar goes to the store and pays the 99 cents that the candy bar costs. Mercy is when the storekeeper lets the kid pay 20 cents cause that is all the kid can pay. That is not merciful justice because it was mercy, and justice was not satisfied. It was more just than the kid not paying anything, but that does not make it just.

Ella, everyone that will read this (including me) thinks that we should do more in terms of proactively preventing crime, through education, opportunity blah blah blah. That being said there are still people who commit crime, and will commit crime. Should Ken Lay have gotten community service? Is what he did worse or better than a person who kills another? How about rape? Assault? Child pornography? Who in your world do we punish at all?

So everyone is too cool for retribution. We are only down with rehabilitation and prevention. Fishfrog is cool with societal protection. Does our system, if fully funded, not accomplish all of these things. I can think of no better way short of killing criminals to protect society than to keep them away from society. They have demonstrated that for whatever reason they do not wish to obey the law and so do we need to educate them? Heck yeah. Do we need to do it far from society until they get the lesson so they don't hurt anyone else? Heck yeah. And regardless of what we do with the poor, there will be criminals. Does coming from a poor background give you carte blanche to commit whatever crime you fancy at the moment?

If what we do on this planet has no consequences beyond those that naturally occur while we are on this planet, then we should pursue the path that will give us the greatest pleasure for the least discomfort. That is what rationally should happen. That is not what I see happen from people who believe solely in natural consequences. So either those people have a different definition of pleasure and discomfort that I do, or there is a disconnect between belief and action.



this is the hottest fingering I have ever seen. It just keeps going and going, faster and faster. Make sure you watch to the end though, after taking you all the way up, it brings you back down slow.



one rejects the possibility of divine and/or afterlife retribution, why should people recieve leniency in this life? It seems to me that people who do not believe in a final reckoning would desire a system in which the punishment is on par with the crime, yet I find that to not be the case. Why?

Aetheists (or anyone who does not believe that wrongdoers will be punished by a higher power) who believe in a less harsh system of punishment seem to me to want to deny justice in favor of mercy. Justice would require that person A pays the price for all of the damage done to person B. Mercy understands that in many situations there cannot be a sufficient price paid by the wrongdoer to satisfy the demands of justice and so mercy grants a smaller price. This seems counterintuitive to me because to me, mercy only works without excluding justice if there is a divine reckoning. Since the assumption of this long question is no divine reckoning, it would seem to me that a lenient system of punishment for wrongdoers is merciful and unjust to the wrongdoer and merciless and unjust to the victim. Since on this earth far more of us will be victims than will be wrongdoers wouldnt it make sense that on this earth the wrongdoers recieve a just but unmerciful punishment so that the limited time each of us has on this earth is more fully enjoyed by more people?


you know what sucks. picking up a hot pot off the stove and accidentally grabbing the metal part. yeah that really sucks.

New Post

So the last couple of days I have gotten crap about not posting. One from someone who hadnt posted since April 10th and the other who hasnt posted since August 5, and that was after a four month hiatus. But so you know this is why I havent posted in a while. Its adictive.


Good News from the Dr.

So I had recently developed problems in my hands and feet. With the onset of these symptoms I became worried, and diagnosed myself with arthritis (other more medically saavy people agreed with my diagnoses). today i went to the Dr and was told that through two seperate injuries I had developed tendonitis in both my hands and my feet and the two were unrelated. Let me tell you, that was great news cause if it was arthritis I would have had a very unpleasant life. So now I am under orders to rest up. Any good movie suggestions?

Two new book reviews

So on saturday I finished fear and loathing in las vegas. A hunter thompson book. It was basically the story of an eight day drug binge in vegas and his (the book is written in an autobiographical manner) close calls with the cops. It was described to me as a new look at the american dream, but either I missed the point or the american dream is to do some real crazy stuff and not get caught. If you have never done drugs, at least it is interesting to hear what happens when you mix acid, amyls, ether, and booze.

The second book I finished this weekend is the black tulip by dumas. I really liked dumas other books, but this one seemed a lot more lighthearted. What made it more interesting was that it left you feeling more connected with the flower than with the characters. You want the flower to survive but really dont care much about those that pass through the life of the flower. But maybe if you read it you will have a different impression.


New song

So in the last few weeks, squishy and I have "discovered" a new TV show that we really like. It is grey's anatomy. Kind of like an early ER before that got super crappy. Anyway, they have a video teaser for the show with the song chasing cars by snow patrol. Since last night, I have had the song stuck in my head over and over. Today I bought the song on itunes. I am now listening to it for the 6th time straight. I like the song sure, but it is just such a mental relief to not have to sing it over and over when I dont know the words. I am in mental nirvana right now.

Lets see if this works

Maybe you remember the game in which you are stranded on a desert island and can only take one book, one cd and one person. This is kind of like that. But with a twist. I want you to tell me one book, one cd, one person and one food that you think I would take on the island. Whoever presents what is in my opinion the best combination will win. So if you happen to get exactly the book I would take, but then pick as the person nick lache, you will probably lose. You have until tomorrow when I first look at my blog, probably around 9 or 10. Winner gets ... a surprise.


The Great Stem Cell Debate

Recently Pres. Bush got much flack for vetoing the embryonic stem cell research grant bill or whatever it was actually called. Lost in the outcry was the fact that a similar bill which would give research money for stem cell research but without embryonic stem cells never made it out of committee. First, I admit a certain amount of ignorance to the science behind stem cell research, but my understanding is that there is no significant difference between embryonic stem cells and other stem cells other than availability. So my question is this, if we accept that in terms of research capability there is no difference between embryonic and other stem cells, isnt it better to research using nonembryonic stem cells? nonembryonic stem cells do not have the capability to ever become a full grown human being. Embyonic stem cells do have that capability. The honest truth is that we do not know for sure when life begins. Is it not better to err on the side of caution if there is no greater chance of curing disease by using embryonic stem cells?

Again, I admit that this may be moot if there is a substantial difference between embryonic and nonembryonic stem cells, but at this point it is my understanding that there is not. And if there is not, then wasn't it congress who dropped the ball by forcing a showdown with a president who has repeatedly shown that he really doesnt care what anyone else thinks. I am not backing the president, but I think you have to know your opponent.

Congratulations Squishy

For being ahead of your time


Today is squishy and my third aniversary. I never thought I would be married for this long, though I didnt think I would live this long either so lots of good surprises.


My problem with the world part 2

Upon further reflection, here is what it comes down to. You have your opinions of how things should be run. I have my opinions of how things should be run. Doesn't it make sense to allow the greatest number of people have things run as they see best, even if that means that a few miles away things are different? Is different really that bad? Are we really that intolerant of other points of view?

My Problem with the World

A few hundred years ago a group of people decided that their government was not listening to what they wanted and decided to go off and form their own country. Once they won independence, they started the country off with the articles of confederation which was basically that the states had all the power, and the national government was neutered and ineffectual. Realizing that the federal government needed some power if the union of states was to stay together as a cohesive body, they wrote and enacted the constitution. The constitution is a document which specifically grants the federal government certain powers and states that if the power is not listed then the federal government cannot govern in that area. The state is supposed to govern that area in accordance with the will of the people of that state.

So here is my problem. There is great national debate and movements by parties on both sides to get congress to pass legislation that either prohibits or allows certain actions which are not areas in which the federal government should regulate. I will give two examples. No where in the constitution does it grant congress the right to regulate marriage. Marriage must be regulated, but since congress should not be able to, each individual state should make the decision on what it is going to regulate. Now, for the sake of presenting both sides, activists for gay marriage say that all states should be required to allow gay marriage as part of the fourteenth amendment's equal protection clause. Second, abortion. There is no provision that grants the federal government the right to regulate reproduction. Any regulation in that area should come from the states. Again, for the sake of presenting both sides, supporters of abortion rights say that it exists in the right to privacy which is not specifically numerated but is kind of encompassed by all the bill of rights.

So this problem has led me to wonder, our founding fathers choose to limit the reach of the federal government for fear that a federal government with unlimited power would cease to be able to represent the desires of the people. They felt that a state which did not have as diverse a population could keep more people happy more of the time. I think we can see the same thing today with abortion. While the country is fairly evenly split on abortion, on a state level there is a much clearer consensus in every state.

Now to preempt your comments. I dont care if you are in favor of abortion rights or not, this isnt about that. Ditto for gay marriage. Also I understand the state of current supreme court jurisprudence and I know what they think about the issue I am raising. I simply want the answer to my question, "Why should the federal government be allowed to govern areas of our lives in which they have no specific power to govern? Why shouldnt they first be required to get our permission by amending the constitution so that they can legally govern in that area?"


Book List

This summer the library has a program in which the people who read 10 books during the summer and fill out the card with the names of the books get entered into a drawing for all sorts of prizes, since I just finished number 10 (and 11) I am giving the list. Some of them I have commented on previously but it is a fun trip down memory lane for me. Anyway, here is the list.
1- Douglas Adams The Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy
2- Ralph Ellison Invisible Man
3- Scott Adams When did ignorance become a point of view
4- Ayn Rand Atlas Shrugged
5- Richard Adams Watership Down
6- Willa Cather Death comes for the archbishop
7- Patricia Highsmith The talented Mr. Ripley
8- Soren Kirkegaard Fear and Trembling
9- Patricia Highsmith Ripley underground
10- Patricia Highsmith Ripley's Game
11- Oscar Wilde The picture of Dorian Gray

Before school starts up again I want to finish gargantua and pantagruel, fear and loathing in las vegas, last of the mohicans, for the new intellectual, turn of the screw, and the black tulip. we'll see how that goes.


Off to Camp

So I am off to the weekend of camping. While this is normally not a time to rejoice it does mean that my summer job is over, and that is a good thing. I did enjoy my work there when I had it and the people were great, but now I can focus on getting a real job and starting school again.

On that positive note, I already have one interview set up and another firm has called me to set up an interview, but we havent set on a time yet. Maybe someone will hire me after all.

Also, I had an Oyster po' boy for lunch and while it tasted very good, it is not sitting really well so this could be a fun filled camping trip.


Eel Ice-cream and DNA's DNA

Those were my two favorite stories in the times today. Evidentlyice creammakers have cloned a protien found in artic ell blood that prevents the formation of ice crystals when introduced in the ice cream production process. Think this is a little far out, you should know that you may have already eaten it.

The second article talks about how researchers have discovered why DNA twists where it does. I dont really go in for all that biology stuff (meaning I never learned it so it kind of blows over my head) but it was an interesting article. Evidently these portions of the DNA are the most resistent to evolution as a cow and a vegetable share 100 of 102 molecules.



So the last couple of days I have had nothing to do at work. I started reading the NY times more extensively just to pass time. It was there that I found the quotes that have made up the posts of the last two days.

Quote one was an israeli official explaining why civilians were being bombed in lebanon.

Quote two was the introductory paragraph about a transgendered individual who just finished a book about women and science.

But gosh darn it if they are not just pretty funny quotes.


Perhaps it is inevitable that Ben A. Barres would have strong opinions on the debate over the place of women in science. Dr. Barres has a degree in biology from M.I.T., a medical degree from Dartmouth and a doctorate in neurobiology from Harvard. He is a professor of neurobiology at Stanford. And until his surgery a decade ago, his name was Barbara, and he was a woman.



If you go to bed with a missile, you might wake up with another kind of missile.


My sister

I started to write a post about a political discussion my sister and I had this past weekend. then I realized I where I am sitting and thought maybe I should stay away from filling the blogosphere with my political views while I am occupying the space I am occupying. So maybe I will write about it later maybe not. Either way, pray for me that my computer is not being monitored right now.


Job woes

So I am bored. I spent today at my job sitting on my butt looking out the window. It is a very nice window, and I love the view, but why am I spending 7-8 hours a day in a room looking out a window, not getting paid? The worst part is that it was monday, so I still get to look forward to four more days of looking out the window this week.


New Technology

I read this
  • story
  • a couple of days ago and it blew me away.

    One of my favorite science fiction stories involves people strapping themselves into machines and using the machines to fight each other. I always thought it was quite far fetched but evidently I was wrong. Other than the obvious benefit to people who are paralyzed, this could completely change the way we live our lives, assuming of course that the technology improves. Anyway, just thought you might enjoy reading it.


    Blown away

    Never did I think that I could find an obscure scholarly question that none of my friends could answer. Hooray for kierkegaard.



    I have been reading fear and trembling by kierkegaard. In one of his footnotes he talks about a short poem that ends with the line "a blessed leap into eternity." Does anyone know what poem this is referring to? Since people seem to respond better to contests, the first person that finds the answer for me will win whatever candy they want.


    Dorian Gray

    So my latest book is the picture of dorian gray by oscar wilde. I havent finished it yet, but it has got me thinking. Today I got a gift from my sister. A nice beach towel with a picture of a tiger on it. Now for those of you who dont know, I love tigers. The first thing I said was, this is awesome, I am never going to use it. But then I started to think. If I use it, it will get ruined and faded much more quickly and soon I will not have it anymore. However, if I dont use it, I will rarely see it and not get as much joy from it, but I will continue the joy of possession longer. I know it is a classic case of you cant have your cake and eat it too. So what are you? Are you a haver or an eater? I still havent decided what I am but it is an interesting decision to make. Now this does relate back to Dorian Gray, but you have to read the book yourself to figure out how and why.



    Today I was doing research at work. I found a case called State v. Love. It was a sex crime case.


    Thoughts on Work

    For the first few weeks of my summer job, I thought that I would truly enjoy working at the U.S. attorneys office somewhere down the road. I have lately come to the conclusion that I probably will not. See, I suffer from a unhealthy sense of paranoia. As this summer has progressed I have felt pleased that I am working to put the bad guys in prison for a long time. I feel like I am helping society and that the world is a better place for the work that I do. But when I come home from work I drive down the street and I look at people and I start to wonder. Does my neighbor have a meth lab in his basement, are the guys working on my house terrorists, is the waiter at the restaurant looking to steal an identity? Intellectually I believe that most people are not going to actively take steps to screw over someone else. But I have first hand experience that those people are out there. And with the exception of meth addicts who are still using, they look just like normal people for the most part. So I am starting to believe that my own belief in the goodness of people wont survive working with or against the criminal element for extended periods of time. The good news is that this is just a summer job, and now I know.


    Don't Touch Me

    The wife and I have been shopping for a car these last couple of weeks. Yesterday we went in to get one with the salesman we had been working with. He was with another customer and so we sat down at a table to wait for him. One of the times he walked by me he ran his fingers across my shoulders in a tickling motion and made a sound like a dying duck. I was not quite sure what to make of it. I looked at squishy and she was nearly dying from trying not to laugh. I was more shocked than amused, but we still bought the car from him. But if anyone sees one of those novelty t-shirts that says "Dont Touch Me" buy it for me and I will pay you back. XL. Evidently I need it.


    4th of July

    So I know there are a lot of cheesy fourth of july videos, but I like them. Go check out this one I got from my grandpa.


    Atlas Shrugged

    So I finished reading this book finally. It took me about three weeks, which is really long for me. I liked the book. I even agree with most of it, specifically that people need to take responsibility for their own lives, and not rely on the government to give them what they think they need. However, the book ignores an equally important characteristic that I think is essential to be a happy and successful (not the monetary sense) human, and that is the need to help other people. Like it or not, there are people out there who no matter how hard they try and how brilliant they are will not be able to rise above the hand that life dealt them without the help of people more fortunate. The Atlas Shrugged answer of leaving them to rot is not right. I happen to think that taxes are not the right answer either because so much of it is not directed to help the people that need it, and a great deal of the money that is directed to help the poor and unfortunate is sucked up in administrative costs and the huge bureaucracy. People need to help of their own volition in order to make any positive difference in other people's lives.


    Yeah Warren Buffett

    So Warren Buffett donated 30 Billion dollars to charity, and in so doing became the most effective response to the people who argue we need to raise taxes to help poor people because the rich won't donate of their own volition.

    As a side note, if that money had been taxed away from Mr. Buffett, the great majority would not have gone to help poor people.


    Something to think about

    I got an email with this story in it. I wanted to hear what those of my friends who are more familiar with the 1st amendment had to say.

    Brittany McComb was the valedictorian at Foothill High School recently. She graduated with a 4.7 GPA. She earned the right to address the other graduates at Foothill, located in Henderson, Nevada.
    She gave a copy of her graduating speech to the school administrators. It contained some Biblical references and even mentioned (one time) the name “Christ.” The school administrators censored some of the Biblical references. They also censored the single reference to Christ.
    Then the school officials handed the speech over to the ACLU for approval and/or more censoring. After getting the OK from the ACLU, Brittany’s speech (minus the censored references to the Bible and Christ) was approved. Brittany was warned that if she deviated from the ACLU approved language, her mike would be cut off.
    Then came the moment for the big decision. She would not bow down, she decided. She would go with her original version. She stepped to the mike and began her speech. But just before she could utter the name “Christ,” her mike went dead. School officials silenced her. The crowd of 400 jeered for several minutes, angry at the action of the school officials.

    Chess Boxing

    So today on ESPN.com, there was an article about chessboxing. In this new sport, the competitors alternate rounds between chess and boxing. Round one starts with a game of chess. After the end of the round, the board is removed from the ring and the "athletes" don boxing gloves and try to knock each other out. There are four ways to win. First, your opponent gives up. Two, knockout. Three, checkmate. Four, the chess has a time limit, so if your opponent runs out of time you win.

    The inventor of the sport claims that it is the ultimate sport because it combines both brains and brawn. He forsees a day in which international disputes are settled through a nice game or match of chessboxing.

    Now I am not a big fan of boxing, and I really cant stand watching chess, but I am intrigued by this sport. It could lead to a great explosion of similar games. familyfeudbasketball, jeopardytennis, checkersraquetball, etc. I think it would be a nice change, and maybe then elite athletes would stay in school for an education instead of going pro immediately, since they will have to compete with their minds as well as their bodies.


    Today Sucks

    Last night I started getting a pretty bad headache, I thought it would be no big deal so I took a couple of pills and went to bed. This morning I wake up and it is a full blown migraine. I take a couple of more pills and lay back down. Next thing I know it is 1:00 in the afternoon and the day is mostly gone. Luckily the wife got a lot done for me so the day isnt a total waste.


    Different thoughts

    So I have been reading the book Atlas Shrugged lately. Part three of that book is called A is A. For some reason that really got me thinking about the true nature of things. I have for the last few months been obsessed with prime numbers. They have been described as the building blocks of other numbers, or the only true numbers. But last night it struck me that prime numbers are the only true numbers when it comes to multiplication and division, but if you add in addition and subtraction there is only one true number. That is the number one. Every other number is in essence, a grouping of the one true number. Twenty is not an individual entity, but twenty entities grouped together for the convenience of those who have to deal with the group. Fractions or decimals are merely a portion of the one. All of this is probably not terribly interesting unless you are fascinated by numbers like I am (and even then probably not) but it lead me down an interesting path.

    Once I accepted one as the only true number I began to wonder about the true nature of human beings. I have heard it said that humans do not change. They remain the same and the only reason they respond differently in similar situations is the change in stimuli. Now I cannot speak for all humans but looking back on my life, I can identify a few times when I have changed. I realized that the only true change a human goes through has to be a fundamental change. I will call this time x. So the person pre-x and the person post-x are not the same person. There will obviously be similarities, but the change is so great as to have altered the person at a fundamental level. As an example I refer you to the diet craze. Lots of people want to lose weight. Lots of people do something different, perhaps even dropping significant weight. However, within months they have typically gained it back. There was no change. The people who lose weight and keep it off make a fundamental change. For example they become an excercise fanatic, or an anorexic. Both of these I would classify as a fundamental change resulting in a new person. Another example is religion. A person who adopts a new religion (or recommits to their old religion) goes down one of two paths in my experience. Path one, they change religion for some outside influence. In this case there is no fundamental change and as soon as the outside influence fades or changes they fall away from the religion. Path two, they make a fundamental change and regardless of the influences of the outside they are committed to the religion and will not deviate.

    This path of thought and discovery about fundamental change has lead me to believe that I, as a human being, cannot modify myself to be a better or worse person. The only way to become a better or worse person than the person I am now is to become a new person. The tricky part will be trying to figure out how to do that.



    So I guess that spending every weekday 18 stories up in an airconditioned building I forgot about the heat. I know that it isnt even that bad yet, but today being outside I found myself playing the shade game. If you dont know what that is, while walking someplace, you walk extremely fast while in the sun, and then as soon as you hit shade you slow down. Not much of a game but it helps beat the heat.


    Job Search

    So I have been looking for a job for after graduation. I am still in the researching law firms stage, but I have noticed that I am consistently more excited about going to work for a medium or a small firm. I always thought I was a big firm guy for sure, but I guess not.


    Never saw this part two

    So today I went to a change of plea. Basically that is where a person who pled not guilty is changing their plea to guilty. There is a federal statute that requires that when a person pleads guilty they should be immediately taken into custody unless there are exceptional circumstances that call for a deviation. In reality, none of the criminals get taken into custody until their sentencing.

    Today, the man changed his plea to guilty, and then asked that the judge reduce the limitations placed on him while he waits for his sentencing. The judge granted his request...because he had only violated the conditions of his release one time. Ummm. ONLY one time. I guess we don't expect that people will obey the law anymore.


    Never saw this before

    So I am working in the Federal Courthouse. This week the 8th Circuit is holding oral arguments all week. Since I am an appellate junkie, I have been going up there to watch. Today one of the cases was a drug case. Both attorneys had to fly in from K.C. and stay in a hotel. Just for the record the national government has no money because it is all going to the war. So with that background...

    Attorney #1 for scuzzy drug lord. Stands up. Gives 10 minute recitation of facts in a monotone voice, says "I think x case is controlling." He then sits down. Attorney #2 for the United States gets up and says in a depressed sounding voice, "I agree that x case is controlling. I could try to distinguish it, but it won't work." The judges stare at the attorney with a puzzled look, and then tell them thanks and end the argument. So here is the question, why would the U.S. pay to send someone out here to concede an appeal? Why not just conceed in the brief? How was it beneficial to the court, the U.S. government, the attorney's office, or the taxpayers? Stupid lawyer.

    I'm back

    So if you just randomly came to my blog you will not know or care what the rest of this is about. If you meant to come, welcome back. I had decided to take a break from the blog because I was reaching a point where I no longer cared what anyone else thought, and the more I wrote the more convinced I became in my own "rightness." Now don't get me wrong, I am still right, but I feel that I am again at a place where I want to hear what others think.

    Now for the dramatic part. When I told Squishy that I was going to restart the blog she told me it was too bad I had deleted it. For those of you who are now feeling the same way, I just want you to know that it had to be done. If I hadn't deleted it I would have felt compelled to start again too soon. So now it begins again fresh.

    About a month ago, I had two weeks where I went running with matt, and it was a good time to talk with one of my friends about school, life, etc. I also get to ride to work every day with ella. But other than that I haven't seen or talked to anyone basically since school got out.