the blind assassin

not worth the read. i like clssic books because usually with a classic book you either get a view of humanity that makes you re-evaluate your view of human experience, or you get a story that is so embedded in our culture that many many versions or spinoffs or references in other works can be better understood. this had neither thing, and it wasn't even a good story. it is a story within a story, but there are actually four stories going on. the sci-fi adventure, the story of the lady and here paramour (there you go bill dorothy), the story of the old lady, and the story of the old lady when she was younger. turns out three of those are about the old lady fro different points of view, but the style doesnt work for anything great (maybe good but i dont think so). rather it felt like the author became enamoured with writing a story in this style and let that take over the telling of the story. i finished wishing that she would have just told the sci fi story which had a lot of potential in my mind.

attack

I have heard Colorado Springs described as the anti berkley for the number of right wing nut jobs that live here. while it is very conservative, i haven't had many problems (other than some playful threats because of my obama yard sign). however lately i have come under attack for not being pro life enough. i dont think that abortion isever correct except maybe in the case of rape, incest or life of the mother. i dont think that government should provide money for abortions. i think there need to be programs to decrease the number of unintended pregnancies and in that way decease the number of abortions. i think roe v wade was wrongly decided (but my reasons are more legal than i think it was wrong because it permitted abortion). but since abortion is not the number one issue for me, i have been criticized as a flaming liberal. i find it amusing/concerning when an issue is so polarizing that even people on the same side can't stand each other.

but for the record, there are very few places on earth as beautiful to live as the springs (and most of them are also in colorado) and most of the people are actually kind, polite, good people, so dont get the wrong idea from this post.

to kill a mockingbird

disappointing. i thought that the book was good until the end and the end betrayed the point of the book up until that point. while the point of the book was clear, there was a greater point that got lost because of the easy out ending. a book everyone should read, but overhyped in my mind because of the simple ending.

strange case of dr jekyll and mr hyde

this was a fun quick read. i especially liked seeing how popular culture took the idea behind the story and changed it to fit their wants. the real story is more of a commentary on basic human nature than a monster story (though one interpretation is that there is a little monster in each of us). frankly stevinson is not ever an easy read, but i liked the book.

Animal Farm

I remember reading this book back in high school and thinking it was a critique of communism. This time through, it does not seem critical of communism but rather supportive. What the book does criticize are the leaders of the communist movement. But at the beginning of the story when the animals are closest to living the ideals set originally, their lives are better than previously. This will lead to one of two interpretations: communism is good, but the leaders of the movement screwed it up, or communism is flawed and cannot work because a person in power will eventually abuse that power.

I don't know what Orwell was trying to say but apart from communism I think it is an apt description of the complacency and intellectual laziness of most people.

The Long Valley

I realized that I have not been talking much about the books I have been reading. Since that is one of the things I most enjoy about writing on my blog I wanted to get back to that.

I just finished a collection of John Steinbeck short stories called The Long Valley. First, you have to know that Steinbeck is one of my favorite authors so I am inclined to like what he writes anyway. Some of the stories were just OK, but the majority of them I really liked. One of my favorite aspects of these stories is seeing certain character types that appear in his longer writings also playing a part in the short stories. For example, Lenny from Of Mice and Men can be seen as quite similar to Johnny Bear the "moron" who unwittingly makes his life and the life of the people that care about him much harder. While I have nothing to support my position, it felt like some of these characters intrigued Steinbeck and he wanted to explore other aspects of their personality in different writings. So if you like Steinbeck, definitely worth reading.

Outrage over Warren

This article describes the proponents of gay rights being outraged by Obama's choice of warren to offer the invocation at the inauguration. One person is quoted as saying "if anyone is under any illusion that Obama is interested in advancing gay equality, they should probably sober up now." This is the problem with people who only care about one political issue. Every decision made is framed in terms of that one issue. It seems to happen with the extreme pro lifers and extreme gay rights activists the most. But honestly, the guy is saying a prayer at Obama's inauguration, he didn't get appointed secretary of homosexuality. Obama campaigned on unity, and what better way to unify than to invite an evangelical to participate in the inauguration. Obama picked an evangelical who has taken a stance on certain issue that many people will not agree with but, at least from what i am reading on this, he is not out there inciting hatred like many others are. So here is my advice, if you are going to be a one issue voter, shut up about your opinion. For most of us, not every decision is about that one issue that you care so dearly about, so stop framing every decision a person makes in terms of that one issue. If you care about it, fine work for it, but realize that the world has more concerns than your one issue.

the end

so i have written on this blog a couple of times about boston legal. sadly this last monday was the series finale, and while they did take on the chinese, gay marriage, pharmaceuticals, the supreme court, religious bigotry, and unfair employment practices in one episode, i was a little disappointed. the highlight of the episode comes in the first 5 minutes and while it is pretty good, it was not all i had hoped. in the end it is a show i am going to miss. there are not a lot of shows out there that can match it for current events commentary and cleverness, even if i didnt always agree with it.

Follow up to petty crap

So i wrote the last post while my paralegal was making sure my motion complied with the judges personal rules, and a little after i wrote this the oposing counsel filed a preemptive motion because i had called to confer with him (as i am obligated to do). so now i don't hate the petty stuff anymore, in fact i am after this guy with a vengence and any little mistake and i am letting him have it with both barrels. (PS, I think i got his paralegal fired because she kept making mistakes, I kept catching them, and now his cases are in the crapper.)

Petty Crap

I think that i will have succeeded in getting two different cases significantly helped along in two days based on incredibly petty application of the rules. While i ethically have to do it for my clients, i really hate the petty crap. I would much rather litigate these cases on the merits. bring on that dog fight, but this petty crap where i say, hey you didnt comply with the rules so give me what i want, i really hate doing that.

My paralegal sends this to everyone on every vet. day

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

Voting

I voted today. I managed to get through it without this mystical Bradley effect getting me, which according to the major news sources is quite an accomplishment for a white guy.

I thought this was hilarious

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/showbiz/2008/10/10/vo.cash.does.elvis.sonyBMG

Another Bar?

I thought about taking another bar this past summer, but couldn't because i had a 4 day class cert hearing.

I thought about taking another bar this coming February, but can't because i have a 4 day trial scheduled in a case i can't seem to get settled.

I could decide to take another bar this coming August, but that will have been two years and I would be 40 percent of the way to getting reciprocity.

I have decided that if you decide to bar up in two different states, the easiest way to do it is the first two bars after you graduate otherwise you get way too busy.

Old Man v. New World

In the last week or so I read both The Old Man and the Sea and A Brave New World. I was struck by the exceptionally different views of mankind each book contained.

The old man is the story of a man who has been a fisherman for all of his life. He catches swordfish. The story starts as he is nearing the end of his life. He goes out by himself and manages to hook an enormous fish. The way that he fishes if to hold the line himself, without any pole. The line runs over his shoulders and into his boat. His own strength is all the keeps the fish hooked. Over the course of days, the man stays with the fish as it fights itself out. He fights all kinds of physical ailments (cramps thirst hunger age etc.) and in the end he manages to catch and kill the fish. The fish however, is too large to fit into the old man's boat. He has no choice but to tie the fish alongside his boat and begin to row back to his port, days away. As he is rowing back, sharks get the scent of the dead swordfish and begin to attack and eat the swordfish. The old man fights off the sharks but loses the battle until all that is left if the head, tail, and skeleton. The old man finally makes it back to the port. An interesting subplot is how the other people from the old man's town respond to the old man before and after he catches the fish.

The new world is a futuristic dystopia. the story follows a man who does not fit into society because according to some he had a form of futuristic fetal alcohol syndrome. he goes to a "savage" reservation, and brings back a savage fathered by his boss. this makes him popular with society because the civilized people all want to see the savage and he is the savage's guardian. The resolution is that the head of europe sends the man to an island for discontents. This leader also reveals that he at one time did not fit into society, but chose to give up honesty for power. The savage is forced to live in society, until a mob of people beat him senseless when he tries to escape from society.

The contrast of these books is how each author views the human spirit. the old man triumphs over all obstacles, and even when he fails he manages to be triumphant and unbroken. the new world humans are nothing more than what they are conditioned to be. fleeting happiness is more important than anything else. man has no or very little choice in what he or she is. i do not think that the author of new world thought this was good, but he believed that man could become that.

This has caused me to wonder about myself, do I believe man to be a majestic and triumphant creature, or pathetic and weak? I do not know yet, but i want to believe in the old man, and not the new world.

Scalia at his best.

The game of bait-and-switch that today’s opinion plays upon the Nation’s Commander in Chief will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed. That consequence would be tolerable if necessary to preserve a time-honored legal principle vital to our constitutional Republic. But it is this Court’s blatant abandonment of such a principle that produces the decision today.


In the long term, then, the Court’s decision today accomplishes little, except perhaps to reduce the well-beingof enemy combatants that the Court ostensibly seeks to protect. In the short term, however, the decision is devastating. At least 30 of those prisoners hitherto released from Guantanamo Bay have returned to the battlefield.See S. Rep. No. 110–90, pt. 7, p. 13 (2007) (Minority Viewsof Sens. Kyl, Sessions, Graham, Cornyn, and Coburn) (hereinafter Minority Report). Some have been captured or killed. See ibid.; see also Mintz, Released Detainees Rejoining the Fight, Washington Post, Oct. 22, 2004, pp.A1, A12. But others have succeeded in carrying on theiratrocities against innocent civilians. In one case, a detainee released from Guantanamo Bay masterminded the kidnapping of two Chinese dam workers, one of whom was later shot to death when used as a human shield against Pakistani commandoes. See Khan & Lancaster, Pakistanis Rescue Hostage; 2nd Dies, Washington Post, Oct. 15, 2004, p. A18. Another former detainee promptly resumed his post as a senior Taliban commander and murdered a United Nations engineer and three Afghan soldiers. Mintz, supra. Still another murdered an Afghanjudge. See Minority Report 13. It was reported only last month that a released detainee carried out a suicide bombing against Iraqi soldiers in Mosul, Iraq. See White, Ex-Guantanamo Detainee Joined Iraq Suicide Attack, Washington Post, May 8, 2008, p. A18.
These, mind you, were detainees whom the military had concluded were not enemy combatants. Their return to the kill illustrates the incredible difficulty of assessing who is and who is not an enemy combatant in a foreign theater of operations where the environment does not lend itself to rigorous evidence collection.


A mere two Terms ago in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U. S. 557 (2006), when the Court held (quiteamazingly) that the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 had not stripped habeas jurisdiction over Guantanamo petitioners’ claims, four Members of today’s five-Justice majority joined an opinion saying the following:
"Nothing prevents the President from returning toCongress to seek the authority [for trial by military commission] he believes necessary.
"Where, as here, no emergency prevents consultation with Congress, judicial insistence upon that consultation does not weaken our Nation’s ability to deal with danger. To the contrary, that insistence strengthens the Nation’s ability to determine— through democratic means—how best to do so. The Constitution places its faith in those democraticmeans." Id., at 636 (BREYER, J., concurring).1
Turns out they were just kidding.

Thats probably enough for now.

McCain over Clinton

With only three real candidates left for president, I have settled on my final order. Obama first, then McCain, then Clinton, (then Nader evidently). the reason is quite simple. I believe Obama will try and to an extent succed in creating a government that brings different interest together to figure out the best way to solve the country's problems. that is the ideal for me. While clinton and Obama have very similar plans for the country, I think that Clinton is incredibly divisive and will marginalize any republican voice. She will feel entitled to do whatever she wants. An article in the times called her a democratic george bush. While I think she is much more intelligent than bush, I agree to the extent that both are incredibly polarizing figures. (Bush is still a popular president among republicans). since I believe that democrats are going to increase their control of both the house and senate, if we are going to have a polarizing figure in the white house I would prefer that person to be from the opposite party of the party that controls congress. I harbor no love for McCain, but prefer deadlock in government to a polarizing figure with near complete power.

Rejection letter

On Friday I received a rejection letter telling me that the firm is only interested in candidates that have 2-3 years experience. I applied to this firm in February 2007. I am tempted to write them back and tell them that if they had just waited one more year I would have that experience requirement and then I could tell them to piss off.

The persistence of isms

I was talking with one of my friends the other day about Hillary Clinton and how her run for the presidency has exposed certain sexist attitudes in the country. From there was also talked about Obama and racism. It was and is my opinion that Hillary has faced more sexist negativity than obama has faced racist negativity. But that got me thinking about how both sexism and racism persist in this country.

I cam to the conclusion that the vast majority of sexists are people who do not think they are sexist. Most people do not say that a woman, for no other reason than she is a woman, cannot do X. But I think that there are many people who say that a woman can be president but only if X, while never imposing that same restriction on a male. With racism, it is much harder to justify that kind of assertion. I think most rational people have a harder time justifying a race distinction, and for that reason there are fewer racists who do not think they are racist than there are sexists who dont think they are sexist. So I have come to the conclusion that even though I strongly oppose Clinton's run for the white house, and will vote for McCain if Clinton is the democratic nominee, I am grateful to her for having run because I think it has exposed some latent sexism. And recognition of the problem is the first step to solving it.

Man in the Iron Mask

I was looking for quotes because I decided that it was time to change my quote at the top of my blog, and I started with different quotes from some of my favorite authors. One of my favorite authors is Alexandre Dumas. This came up because I saw that by far his most famous quote is "all for one and one for all" from the three muskateers. I recently learned that the three muskateers is actually a trilogy, with the man in the iron mask being the third and final book in the trilogy. This book actually pits the muskateers against each other. the reason that i mention this is that when I read muskateers i thought it light hearted and very dissimilar to dumas other works (the book count of monte cristo for example makes the recent jim cavezel movie version look like bambi before mommy gets slaughtered). I find it incredibly amusing that Dumas, one of the darkest authors ever in my opinion, is best known for a line that is used as a rallying cry for unity, when the point is (I think) that unity only lasts until private interests outweigh group interests, and no matter how unified in spirit, the unity cannot last.