Eminent Domain

I hate to be a guy that just posts links but wow.

This guy is fucking bad ass.

The former hostage that hired mercenaries to go after his captors scores.



Two down.

New study on the corny gas.


I think that one of the most interesting aspects of environmental issues is their acceptance. There is a group of people out there that will automatically sign on to anything that is not oil/gasoline. It's a knee jerk reaction that occurs regardless of the information available or lack of information. Before everyone jumps the gun and starts cutting gas with every damn thing under the sun, maybe these things should be studied more. Just a thought.

Not this guy.

I totally support this. Not that roving groups of hired guns are a good thing, but I think that this guy has a right to a little revenge. Happy hunting, fellas.

Well after a divisive few months of arguing, Marquette has changed its team name back to Golden Eagles. What a waste of time and money. How much has been spent by the university on this little exercise? And we ended up back where we started. Here is the report. I don't see what Father Wild and the Board think this accomplishes. The people who want Warriors still want it changed back. We feel like we were jerked around and misled by them. They dangled the Warriors name in our faces and then snatched it away. I'm not going to cut a check to Marquette until the name gets changed. So never.

Link

Justice Thomas and "imagined resignations."

I'm really starting to wonder if there will be a resignation. If Rehnquist is really doing well enough to stay on, he will stay on. He knows that justices that leave the Court, well, die. If you don't have a reason to get out of bed everyday and be on top of your game, the body just gives out. He might not want to go out on the sour note that has been this term. I wouldn't blame him. Even with Thomas' statement, O'Connor not retiring is hard for me to accept. She hasn't hired a third clerk, her husband is very ill, and she loves Arizona. But there is something that could keep all of them on. If all nine stay on until March 2006, they will be the longest sitting single panel of the Supreme Court. Maybe they're going for the record.

My Trusts and Estates exam was turned in 30 minutes ago. It's in God's hands now. On the plus side, I now have the free time to read leisurely.

Exam is getting there. I have all of the questions roughly answered on paper and am in the process of typing and polishing them now. I'm halfway there. I have 14 hours to get it done, so it's no big deal. A few quick items of interest:

I just ordered this shirt. It was too good to pass up. It's such a great quote.

Bloggers fight da man. I have no doubt that my blog is a meaningless sack of crap that 12 people read with any sort of frequency. I know I am not influencing politics at all. But I think any regulation into this area is wrong and spits in the face of the First Amendment. I saw Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, the ass cobra that runs that shit barrel called Daily Kos, testifying at the hearing. I agreed with his points on blogging. I also think he looks exactly like I imagined him. Rat-like.

They're taking Souter's house. I think this is hilarious, even though nothing will ever come of it. It isn't being done in good faith and fails the test laid out in Kelo. I still think it's good to let the Supremes that they are not insulated from their decisions. It's easy to say that someone else somewhere far away must move for development. It's another thing to have it happen to you.

Back to the exam. Remember, no matter what TV and movies tell you, you cannot videotape a will. It only counts if you write it.

The Menu

I don't eat this well. Compare their breakfast to mine. They get pancakes, an apple, a banana, OJ, tea, and milk. I'm having cold cereal and tap water. If this is the modern gulag, my existence must be the 7th circle of Dante's hell.

I'm working on my Trusts and Estates exam (due Wednesday in the AM) on the day of major Court news. I am the master of timing. I'll say a few things and leave the analysis for the end of the week. I'm not surprised that they split the baby on the 10 Commandments. I am surprised that Breyer was the baby splitter. I'm not shocked at the file sharing case. I'm not shocked there was no retirement announcement. I'll go on record (ON THE INTERNET) right now and predict that O'Connor will retire. Take that, Vegas oddsmakers!

Law and Alcoholism has a good post about unrepresented minorities on the Court. I'd also like to add Werewolf-Americans, sluts, and Atlanteans. Personally, I think President Bush should nominate me. I don't have a snowball's chance in hell to make it out of committee, but I will give the American people the most entertaining confirmation hearing in the nation's history. I'll walk in with a beer.

EDIT: Just read Volokh. They're blowing up like mad with posts.

4:30 AM EDIT: I've been working on this exam all night. I finally have all the answers mapped out. I just have to type it up. I would be asleep now but I have an appointment in a few hours that I will miss if I fall asleep. I am also trying to find a website that offers betting on the Supreme Court retirements. I'm just curious what odds they would give. I'm not throwing down any money or anything.

Link

I try my best to not talk about celebrities on here cause I don't care that much about them. But all this crap about Tom Cruise recently has caught my attention. In the link above, he is shown as being "unhinged" on the Today Show. Good for him. First, I hate Matt Lauer and I will support anyone who yells at him and calls him stupid. Second, I agree with what Cruise said. Mind altering drugs that "fix" mental problems don't fix them. If you have something chemically wrong that is one thing. If you have a behavioral problem or emotional issues and fears, that chemical isn't helping you. You are just tricking yourself into think the problem is solved. We live in an overly medicated society, thinking that pills will make us happy. That's not going to do it. Maybe reevaluating one's life is a better course of action than a trip to a shrink.

I'm not big on Scientology but they do have one practice that I like. It's called bull baiting. Basically, you have people insult you in horrible ways. Think of the worst things that people can say to you. This allows you to get used to the abuse, and you end up not internalizing any of it. I think that's where Cruise got his "I don't give a shit what you think" attitude. I like that attitude.

This blog caught my attention.

Any time someone goes out of their way to say they are "non-partisan" and "objective" it is a sure sign that they are not. The Filibuster Frist link is a sign of this disconnect with the truth. After reading a few of these posts, I have come to the conclusion that this is a group of people trying very hard to sound objective but failing gloriously.

I am biased. Very. I admit it though. I don't try to act like some enlightened arbiter that takes every situation anew and comes to a judicious conclusion. I am an ideologue. I am going to take the position that maintains the Constitution as originally written. If that means that I am going to be against some popular program that helps a lot of people, so be it. I'm a jerk that way.

New York Invokes Eminent Domain to Acquire New Jersey

There have been some interesting reactions to the new redhead stepchild of SC decisions. This is from the New York Times editorial page:

The Supreme Court's ruling yesterday that the economically troubled city of New London, Conn., can use its power of eminent domain to spur development was a welcome vindication of cities' ability to act in the public interest. It also is a setback to the "property rights" movement, which is trying to block government from imposing reasonable zoning and environmental regulations.

I love how they put property rights in quotes, as if it is some figment of the imaginations of a handful of kooks. It doesn't have any history with John Locke, David Hume, Thomas Jefferson... I also love it when people talk about acting in the public interest, as if it is as simple as walking over to a guy named Public J. Interest and asking him what he thinks. This here is actually just socialism. And it has the same flaw that socialism does. Someone somewhere ultimately determines what is best for everyone else. That someone is usually a bureaucrat. Seems like a crock of shit to me.

I've spent a little time on liberal blogs and the debate there is interesting. You have the far left socialist types who want the government to make any decision they want regarding your life praising this case to high heaven. Then you have the anti-corporate liberals who think that Kelo is horrible and will result in homes being taken to build Wal-Marts. Maybe a few of them are seeing the folly in putting their faith in the government to call the shots on everything. Maybe they are questioning the wisdom of the liberal cadre on the Court. Maybe they will see that strict constructionism isn't such a bad thing. Maybe not.

Monday will be something. The final cases will be handed down. I wouldn't expect a retirement announcement though. There is still work to be done on Monday, so an announcement will happen Tuesday at the earliest. I hope it happens, I hope the White House moves fast, and I hope that "where do you stand on eminent domain?" is one of the first questions asked to the nominee.

It is on cable right now. I still can't believe that this was shown on network tv. I've never been a big fan of clowns, so this really got to me when I was younger (ok, it still does now). I miss that great period of time when the Stephen King mini-series ruled the network. Salem's Lot, It, the Stand... Just a few of my favorites. Well, I'm off to get frightened by the clown.

Michelle Malkin has something interesting about his new show.

Am I surprised that he plans the results of his 30 day experiments? Nope. This really strikes at the core of why I can't stand modern "documentarians." It's one thing to have an agenda or some sort of narrative planned, that's just part of making a coherent film. It is another thing to act like you are running an experiment while having the results planned.

I saw Supersize Me. If I had to describe it, I'd call it quaint. The school lunch part was the only thing that I found interesting. Beyond that, I thought it was a pretty useless. At the beginning when he does his monologue, he asks "where does personal responsibility end and corporate responsibility begin?" Here, it doesn't. This is not some company dumping chemicals or spewing poisons into the environment. This is a fast food restaurant. YOU make the choice to stop there. YOU choose what on the menu you want. YOU pay for it by choice. YOU eat it. All that McDonalds does is exist. You make every step of the process possible. It is possible to go past a McDonalds and not stop there. I know. I've seen me do it. Fast food is not good for you. Anyone who doesn't know this is either willfully ignorant or too stupid to function without supervision.

Here is an e-mail that the oh so wise Senator Boxer sent out recently.

As soon as next week, we could be fighting for the future of the Supreme Court. According to the Washington Post, Justice William Rehnquist could retire any time now, setting off the first nomination battle in a decade. George Bush has promised us more ultraconservative activist judges in the mold of Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

There is no greater threat to our basic civil rights and civil liberties than a Supreme Court tilted to the extreme. . .

With your help, we will be ready to take back the Senate in 2006, and we will put an end to the right wing campaign to takeover the Supreme Court.

Sincerely,

Barbara Boxer

You know, she's right. There is no greater threat to our basic civil rights than a Supreme Court tilted to the extreme. Ironically, Justices Scalia and Thomas proved today that they are on the side fighting against the destruction of our basic rights, like that of private property. I doubt Senator Boxer will retract this though.

EDIT: BTW, Volokh and just about every other legal blog is blowing up about this decision. Check out what they have to say and watch the legal community of the US shit a collective brick.

The more I think about this, the bigger a chance it is for President Bush. He should denounce the decision, tell the American people that he wants to appoint Justices like those in the minority (who respect the property rights of people) when vacancies appear on the Court. This is a case where rational people should be outraged by the Court. The President should use this as leverage to push his nominees.

I'm eagerly awaiting Ten Commandments and file sharing cases. If these two are decided horribly, then this will probably be the worst term of the Court in recent memory.

I just got finished reading this. It was quite a feat too, cause it's hard to read anything while constantly shaking your head "no." Eminent domain is a very interesting issue. I like it so much that I named my blog after it. I have no idea how 5 Justices thought that this was a good decision. How did we get from "Hey folks, I need to build a freeway here, here's some money for your property" to "this guy wants land for his shopping center, get out"?

Here's the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment "...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Public use, not the government jacks your land for someone else. Justice Thomas points this out in his dissent. He mentions that "public use" is not the same as "general welfare," which is used elsewhere in the Constitution. The majority is substituting general welfare for public use here. Just because some local board finds a net benefit to a different use of property does not make it "public use."

This whole concept is pretty authoritarian. Private property rights seem to be meaningless. I would be negligent to not point out the vote. The conservatives on the Court voted against this. The liberals (and Kennedy gets to join this crew) voted for it. This is not a business issue, even though some people are framing it as such. This is a governmental power issue. And the liberals on the Court have decided that the government has the right to take your home and give it to a developer. This shows why the Court is so important. They make important decisions that affect the entire country. Here, they fucked up. Big. A strict constructionist would never read "public good" and decide it means "whatever the hell I want." The majority should catch hell for this decision, because it is horrible.

Eminent domain case handed down today.

Take that, private property owners!

I haven't found the opinion online yet, but I'll track it down and give my analysis. That tricky Court is making us wait for the Ten Commandments and Internet file sharing cases. I can't wait to read those.

EDIT: Found it. Kelo.

What is the favorite activity of people in the legal profession (at least those I associate with)? Supreme Court nomination speculation.

It's just so much fun. When you live with the Court as de facto members of your extended family, you care who is on there. It seems like it is the season for our fever to infect everyone else. Bill Kristol thinks that O'Connor, not Rehnquist will be stepping down. It's definitely possible. O'Connor has publicly stated that she will only step down if a Republican president can name her successor. She is getting up there in age and has put her share of time in on the bench.

Kristol thinks Attorney General Alberto Gonzales will be her replacement. I don't know. I think there will be pressure to appoint another woman, but that might not be very strong. I think Gonzales serves Bush better inside the administration. Since Gonzales took part in most of the legal issues of the administration, he would have to recuse himself in cases involving those issues. That's not much of a help. Bush does want to appoint a Hispanic, but Garza would probably be better than Gonzales. If I were Bush, I would put the Hispanic thing on the back burner until Stevens steps down. That's a great way to get a moderate to moderate-conservative to replace the liberal Stevens. "I'm trying to make history here, the first Hispanic on the Court, why are you fighting it?"

The Rehnquist thing is so strange. Scalia recently said that he is doing much better than reported. I don't know if I buy it. I don't know if Rehnquist buys it. Rehnquist, more than any other justice, cares about the Court itself. He is going to do what is best for the Court, not himself. It is possible that he will try to stay on for another term. He might wait to step down until O'Connor's replacement is confirmed. That would lessen the frenzy of two vacancies at once. I just don't know if he's healthy enough to put in another term.

The Washinton Post has what they consider the updated list that the President is working from. McConnell seems to have fallen out of favor recently in some circles. I think there is fear that he will be this administration's Souter. He would have an easier time being confirmed, but why take the easy road and end up getting the shaft when he starts voting with the liberals? Of the short list, I'd want Luttig or Alito. Of my list, I'd want Pryor. He's too young to be Chief... yet. But he would be on the Court for a long time and it would be a nice FU to Feingold and Schumer. And I'm always for that.

Stevens really makes me wonder. He's getting old too, he's talked about retirement. But the question is whether he will retire and let Bush replace him. He might try to hold out but it's a long way to 2008. I think he will try to stay on but won't make it past 2007. No one wants a replay of Justice Douglas. It makes the Court as a whole look bad.

Here's my possible breakdowns:
Rehnquist replaced with Luttig as Chief
O'Connor replaced with Jones (if the female pressure is there)
Stevens replaced with Garza

Rehnquist replaced with Scalia as Chief
Scalia replaced with Alito
O'Connor replaced with Garza
Stevens replaced with McConnell

I could do this all day. And I would probably be nowhere close to what will happen. It's still fun (if you are a nerd). It would be funny if all three retired at once and Bush nominated Robert Bork, Ken Starr, and John Ashcroft as replacements.

I mentioned this yesterday, but I only heard about it second hand. After reviewing what he actually said, I realized something. This is not an apology.

Here's what he said: Some may believe my remarks crossed the line. To them I extend my heartfelt apologies. There'’s usually a quote by Abraham Lincoln that you can turn to in moments like this. Maybe this is the right one. Lincoln said "“If the end brings me out right what is set against me won't amount to anything. If the end brings me out wrong ten thousand angels swarming at his right won'’t make any difference."” In the end I don't want anything in my public career to detract from my love of this country, my respect for those who serve it, and this great Senate. I offer my apologies for those who were offended by my words, I promise you that I will continue to speak out on the issues I think are important to the people of Illinois and to the Nation. Mr. President, I yield to the floor.

Bold Number 1: "Some may believe." Notice he didn't say "I believe." That's because he doesn't believe that he said anything wrong.

Bold Number 2: That first part of the Lincoln quote is telling. It's Durbin's way of saying that he may be proven right, so nothing that anyone says about him matters.

Bold Number 3: He apologizes to "those who were offended." That means that if you were offended, it's your problem. I normally have no problem with that. I think that it is my problem that I was offended by his stupid comment. But this is not an apology. He at no time says that he was wrong for saying what he said. He doesn't think that he was wrong. Durbin stood by what he said for days. I think that pressure from people at home including mob boss - I mean Mayor Daley. This is just a way to get the heat off of himself. Pathetic.

Why am I funding a TV station? Why am I funding a TV station that gave Bill Moyers his own show? If my money is paying the bills down there, don't I get a say in who works there?

Seriously though. PBS and NPR deserve no public money. None. If you like them and want to support them, then you cut them a check. I have no use for either one of them. Especially when you consider the kinds of political opinions you run into on these stations, why is tax money going to them?

In the case of PBS, I think only 15% of their funds come from taxpayers. Yet they trotted out Clifford the Big Red Dog to lobby Congress for more money. A man in a dog suit. You know, it's too bad that PBS doesn't have a really successful show. Maybe a children's show that has been around for decades and is wildly popular. Maybe even one that has had a huge amount of merchandise on the market for that time too. Perhaps they could even have had the top selling, most sought after toy during a Christmas season. Maybe, just maybe, if they had a show like that, they could fund themselves. They could name it "Something Street."

The House passed an amendment that would outlaw flag burning.

I'm against this amendment. I think it becomes hard to enforce. What are the limits? Is it just for cloth flags? What about a flag-sized picture of the flag? What about a t-shirt with the flag on it? It just seems like a lot of gray area that will be full of Con Law headaches.

Don't get me wrong. I personally think that burning the flag is reprehensible behavior. It's usually done by people who have no idea how good they have it here. They throw a little tantrum, burn a flag, and think they are oh-so radical. I've held this position, which I will continue to hold: You are free to burn the flag, and I am free to think that you are an ignorant piece of shit.

Walter E Williams takes on the waiting lists.

I really can't think of a thing to write about today, nothing that deserves its own post.

Durbin apologized. Big deal. He said what he said, it was a prepared statement, he meant it, and he only apologized to take the heat off of himself. The Gitmo thing is still absurd. I really wonder about some of the people in this country sometimes. There is almost a reflexive desire to believe the worst about ourselves and forgive the sins of our enemies.

I am so sick of hearing about 2008 and the presidency. I know the media has been pushing this since November 3rd and I know why. Reason 1: They hate Bush and want to ignore the second term. Reason 2: It is rare to not have an heir to the White House lined up, since Cheney says he won't run. I just think that speculating on it now is useless. Who knows what will happen in the next year or two? That might dramatically alter the types of candidates that have the best chance of winning. If I had to choose someone right now to be president... Governor Bill Owens.

I have two days of class left. It went really damn fast. We get our take home exam on Thursday and have to turn it in next Wednesday. I'm going to put everything on hold for this. I will do stuff, go out, whatever, but I will spend most of my time working on the exam. I really want to do well. I sort of regret not signing up for a class next session too. But I will probably end up doing something with my time.

My laziness in finding something to post about is spreading to other areas in my mind. I'm exhausted. Hopefully there is a more active news day tomorrow.

Phyllis Schlafly has an article about malaria and DDT that is worth a read.

The banning of DDT is probably the greatest tragedy of the last half of the 20th century. Millions have died by taking this safe, cheap, and effective pesticide off of the market. This is the damage that environmentalists do. People like Rachel Carson write a book, level accusations without sufficient knowledge, and then cause the spread of their shitty information to the public at large. DDT is safe and science has shown that. For fuck's sake, a pair of scientists spent two years eating DDT and suffered no ill effects. But bullshit has been spread so far into the collective consciousness that when you say "DDT," people think "poison." Meanwhile, millions die.

What will they do next?

How the hell can you say that a theme park ride, like a roller coaster, is a common carrier? I sort of see common carrier as a bus or commuter train or something like that, not a 200 foot tall ride with a lift hill and double loop. I know it's out of legal vogue, but whatever happened to "assumption of the risk?" I'm a pretty frequent theme park visitor and while the rides are extremely safe, I know that there is a risk that I might be hurt or injured. I go on anyway because I have nothing to live for and I like the rides. It would be a shame to lose some kick ass rides because park owners are too worried about potential liability issues. I want my fun, dammit.

Todd Zywicki has a good post on it. Worth a read.

I saw it this afternoon and it's great. It is everything that a Batman movie should be. Christian Bale plays Batman as a strong but psychologically flawed individual, the opposite of the Clooney/Kilmer take on the role. The cast is perfect, although I was not too thrilled with Katie Holmes. I see her and think one thing: Beek on the Creek. That's just one of those roles that you can't shake. The atmosphere of Gotham is excellent. It feels enough like a real city with minor tweaks that a fictional world allows. It's not this over the top neon funland that is so gaudy that it distracts you. The best part is that I know this film will be a hit. So there will be more. And there is a little preview at the end of the next villain. I can't wait to see what Christopher Nolan comes up with.

Link

My favorite British-American hits on a bunch of topics in this one. Find out what reality TV is like in Iraq, his take on Gitmo, and a smack at Amnesty International. He makes it sound so elegant too. I usually go with "fuck these assholes" and leave it at that.

My arch nemesis strikes again.

I'm not high on PETA's list of nice guys. I had meat at all three meals I had today, and plan on inventing a fourth meal later tonight consisting solely of meat. I'm not too sad about this though, because PETA fucking sucks. The worst part is that many of their supporters have no idea what they truly stand for and what they actually do.

How many of you pet owners out there who cut a check to PETA know that they don't think you should be able to own said pet?

How many of their supporters know that PETA kills animals by the thousands?

How many of them know that PETA sends money to ALF members who blow up labs, destroying property and research?

Speaking of research, how many people know that PETA opposes any and all animal research that would develop cures for terminal diseases?

How many people know that PETA lies to kids in their "outreach program" saying that animal research has no applicability to humans? (I guess if you discount the animal research that developed treatment for anthrax, rabies, smallpox, rickets, diabetes, heart disease, anesthesia, tetanus, arthritis, diphtheria, whooping cough, polio, open heart surgery, you get the picture)

By the way, the vice president of PETA is a diabetic and uses insulin developed through animal testing. She sees no hypocrisy in this.

PETA sucks.

Dick Durbin makes me sick.

More rhetoric, more of that "we're Nazis and Communists" blah blah blah. And then a new one. He compares Gitmo to the internment of Japanese-American citizens during WWII. I'm shocked that someone this stupid could be elected to high office in this country.

Gitmo: Enemy combatants picked up on the battlefield, weapons in hands, trying to kill US soldiers and protect terrorist leaders.

WWII: American citizens are rounded up and put into camps for no reason other than their country of origin.

See a difference here, Dick?

I'm sitting here with my Trusts and Estates casebook open to page 574, in awe of the fact that we are really going to get through this entire book. Normally, that's no big deal but I am responsible for all this material. In order to make sure I am in the top section of the class grade-wise, I'm going to do a major review of this crap over the weekend. Hell, my life can't get any less exciting.

My summer really took a down turn in June. Aside from getting third degree burns at Six Flags last week, there's not much to report. I haven't gone out in 2 weeks. I had to check my phone just now to figure out what day of the week it is. I'm in drastic need of some excitement.

Here's the plan. Further euthanize my social life with marathon studying sessions, as well as a week long cloistering while I work on my take home exam. Try to find some legal work to keep me busy, although that is looking grim right now. And once that crap is taken care of, have fun. Maybe I'll just go on a trip. Who knows?

The truth of the matter is that during a summer that should be great (no working long back breaking hours, one class that leaves me the entire day to myself, about 40 unread books on my shelves), I am not having much fun. You'd think I could manage to pull something off. Nope, I'm just sitting here reading In re Trust of Stuchell, watching Aqua Teen Hunger Force, and singing along to "Fat Bottomed Girls" by Queen. While that is probably the greatest song ever written, it's not enough to keep this night from being anything but ass.

Recent BS on Gitmo.

Ok, here's the deal. I want Gitmo to remain open, no doubt in my mind. If there are American citizens held there, they should be given a trial. Military tribunals are fine by me. That's all they deserve. If they aren't US citizens, fuck 'em. Seriously. I don't give a shit about these thugs and barbarians that took up arms against us. They are not members of a uniformed army so the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

Now we've got people like Biden, Leahy, and some of the more pussy Republicans getting all nervous about our image and allegations of abuse. Our image? Our fucking image? I don't give a damn about our image. I want these thugs behind bars. Being popular is meaningless to me. Let's say we close Gitmo, then what? Everyone loves us? Bullshit.

We have a major security presence at Gitmo, a huge military presence, and it's not on US soil (I know it technically counts, but you know what I mean). This is the best place to hold them. The prisoners are receiving humane treatment, meals, religious materials, and more respect than I would give them.

If we close Gitmo, it does nothing. I don't care what Thomas Freidman says. It would be a meaningless act that would not make one more person in the world love us. You can either be tough or you can be weak and hope it makes you popular.

Socialized health care blows goats.

Let's drive all business out of WI. Let's cripple small businesses. Let's get every freeloader in the region to show up here for health care. Let's create yet another level of oh-so-efficient government bureaucracy. Let's give some bureaucrat in Madison the power to make my health care decisions for me. Let's make WI the greatest tax hell in the country. Might as well be number 1 in something, right?

This passes and I leave WI as soon as I can. I'll get my degree and head to Nevada.

is really good today. Just read everything.

I was out on one of my trademark early AM walks just now. It is such a nice night that I figured why not take a break from reading message boards and other useless crap and take a stroll. I like to scare the herds of rabbits that are in the neighborhood, keeps them on their toes. Or so I thought. I startled one, he went off running, and I slowly walked around the corner to see where he went. I turned and saw him 30 yards away. As I got closer, I realized that was a big fucking rabbit. As I got even closer, I realized that is a cat. The cat sat still until I got with 15 feet, then he ran. Why did he wait so long? Cause he was protecting the carcass of the rabbit he just killed and was eating. I guess I drove the rabbit right to him. I felt bad, but then realized that there are 6 million rabbits on this block alone. What's one less? And hey, it's the circle of life, Simba.

As if my last post wasn't bad enough, I gotta give some love to Tucker Max.

He's an internet legend and his site is full of great material. He's also a law school grad. Here's what he has to say about it in his FAQ:

If you aren't working as a lawyer, why did you get your JD?
I made a fucking mistake going to law school, OK, get off my back. There was a time in my life that I thought I wanted to be a lawyer, but I was terribly mistaken. I didn't know that you had to give up your soul to work in that field.

Should I get my JD? What is your advice for someone thinking about going into law school?
Do you want to waste three years of your life debating stupid and utterly irrelevant minutia? Then yes, get your JD. Do you want to get a degree that allows you work the rest of your life in a tedious, shitty, unrewarding job? Then yes, get your JD. Are you a boring, facile, socially retarded whore, desperate for the illusion of money and success, regardless of the cost to your life and the lives of those you love? Then yes, get your JD. Do you want to squander your existence sitting in a lifeless office, churning out ultimately meaningless paperwork? Then yes, get your JD. Listen to me people: There is a reason that lawyers have the LOWEST job satisfaction of any profession in America. THE JOB SUCKS. It is horrible. If you know any lawyers, ask yourself: Are they happy with their job or their life? 90% of the time, the answer will be no. If the answer to that question is yes, then ask yourself, "Do I like that person." The answer will be almost always be no. The only lawyers who like their jobs are the sketchy ones that are the reason lawyers jokes are so prevalent and popular. Do you want to be that person? If so, then yes, get your fucking JD.

He's right about law school. It blows. Seriously. It's an expensive and frustrating waste of time. Sitting next to me right now are two books, open to material on oral inter vivos trusts of land. Do you have any idea how fucking nitpicky this stuff is? Do you understand the amount of illogical rules and differences without distinctions here?

Right now, I'm not sure that I want to be a practicing lawyer. I need to get some actual experience (which I am working on finding now) before I make a judgment. The good thing is that a JD is treated like any other doctorate out in the business world. There are people who get their JD and never practice a day of law, yet are still successful. I went to a seminar at school last spring about that. These people end up running companies, working for politicians and policy groups, or any number of other things. I figure that I'm 28K in the hole right now, might as well finish this. But Tucker might just be right...

www.tard-blog.com

I read the entire site in one sitting.

I laughed at 95% of the entries.

I am going to hell.

Yeah, I'm disgusted too.

Matt Labash has a great article in the Weekly Standard about how easy it would be for the Democrats to stage a comeback in the South. He profiles two consultants who proved that they can win in the South. I seriously doubt that the party will listen to them.

A look at their assets and jet set lifestyles.

Why does Justice Kennedy have no money? Seriously. Does he just burn through it all or what? My parents are worth more than he is and look at where they live. Breyer's loaded.

Laurie David warns of deadly weather from that global warming thing.

Here's a novel thought. Let's look at the data on US hurricane strikes, not the rhetoric.

As an update, the new number for 2000-2009 (through 2004) is 7. Let's look at that data set [16, 19, 15, 17,23,18,15,12,16,14]. The mean is 16.5. At the halfway point of this decade, we are at 7. I'm not seeing an increase in extreme weather here. At least not in hurricane strikes, which are what is important as far as property damage, insurance costs, etc.

I wonder what the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has to say about this.

"Examination of meteorological data fails to support the perception [of increased frequency and severity of extreme climate events] in the context of long-term climate change."

IPCC 1995, p. 11

The 2001 report states, "No long-term trends evident" for tropical and extratropical storms, and no systematic changes in the "frequency of tornadoes, thunder days, or hail."

But, but, but I thought "a calamity of scientists" saw this coming. Saw what coming?

Fear mongering pisses me off.

Link

Cry your eyes out, Sens. Schumer and Feingold. You couldn't railroad an intelligent, competent man. You failed to keep one of those icky Catholics from serving on the federal bench. I've gone over their criticisms of Judge Pryor before and showed what garbage it was. Score one for the good guys.

Link

If I had to answer that, I'd say no. It's in a coma.

The problem with environmentalism is that it's not about science anymore, at least not for most of the people involved. It's a movement, it's a social experience, it makes you feel good, and it gets rid of the guilt of being a white middle class college student. Many environmental groups have been hijacked by other interests: anti-corporate, anti-globalization, anti-capitalism, radical left wing, etc. That is why Patrick Moore, one of the founders of Greenpeace, quit that organization a while back. He got sick of political interest groups stealing the environmental message for their own use.

If you ever come upon an eco-protest, ask a few questions. Ask them what they think about the urban heat island theory and why that doesn't account for the "evidence of global warming" that they tout. Ask them why global warming is not heating the upper atmosphere, which it should according to the greenhouse effect. Ask them why, in light of the economic damage it would cause, the US should sign on to Kyoto when 100 year temperature reductions would only be .08 - .28 degrees C. Ask them why global warming is causing New York City to have higher temperatures but 140 miles away, Albany is having lower temperatures. I bet that these are issue that they cannot discuss with any sort of intelligence, reason, or scientific support. If you're lucky, they'll chant something at you.

People aren't apathetic towards the environment. Look at this quote from the article:

Hansen points out that voters in 121 communities in 24 states passed ballot measures to create $3.24 billion in public funding to protect land as parks and open space. Since 1996, 1,065 out of 1,376 conservation ballot measures have passed in 43 states, raising more than $27 billion in funding for land conservation. “If you look at the campaign materials for these initiatives, you see little strident rhetoric and a lot of practical solutions,” he says. He might also have noted that in the U.S. today, private citizens support 1,300 private land trusts, which have collectively protected an area twice the size of Connecticut.

People do care. They just don't like a 20 year old with dreadlocks from Brookfield screaming at them about how "Big Oil" is destroying the world and how museums will be the only place we can see trees in the future. If you want a spokesperson for your group and cause, it helps to pick someone who isn't screaming like a banshee (Howard Dean, I'm looking in your direction).

They can have their marches and their rallies. I'll be inside reading the International Journal of Climatology.

Randy Barnett, the lawyer who argued unsuccessfully for the states' rights to have medical marijuana, has a few things to say on Volokh and on National Review.

And here is the cite for Wickard, which I couldn't find for the life of me yesterday. Every time I read it, I throw up a little in my mouth.

Here's the rollcall of votes.

Kohl and Feingold both voted no. Shocker, huh?

I'm pushing for the repeal of the 17th Amendment, which allows for the popular election of senators. The Senate should belong to the states as it was originally written in the Constitution. I say that not only because our Republican controlled state legislature would replace our two useless senators. I say that because I find it odd that the states have no say in the federal government anymore. Give the Senate back to the states.

Not that I'm a defender of the mainstream media, but c'mon guys. She's probably a nice lady.

As a member of the legal community, I feel obligated to give my views on Raich. The decision sucks. I'm totally against it. Let me start by saying that I hate the Commerce clause. Hate it. It's the worst part about Con Law in general because it is such a nebulous issue. We spent the better part of a month on it in class.

The best part about this whole thing is the vote. All of the liberal hippie NORML activists have a new hero in Justice Thomas. Irony: it's fantastic. Thomas' dissent is probably one of the more forceful dissents I've read recently. It's also one of the most clear and convincing dissents of late. The majority basically decided that the federal government can regulate any damn thing they want as long as they call it "commerce." It doesn't have to be commerce per se, just something they can call commerce. They extended the bullshit that is Wickard v Filburn because it would be wrong to limit the federal government in any rational or Constitutional way.

As far as medical marijuana itself, go nuts. Smoke, snort, or inject whatever the hell you want in the privacy of your own home. Matters not to me. As long as you don't harm anyone while under the influence of whatever the hell you put into yourself, I really don't care. If you want to inject heroin into your temple and die on your kitchen floor, you have my support.

at least not when compared to the President.

I got a huge kick out of reading this, especially that his best grades were in French. If this had come out before the election, Bush would've won by more. Seriously. All of that pomp and bullshit about Kerry being such an intellectual would have been destroyed. Also, John Kerry is really ugly. I'm no Brad Pitt, but shit, look at this guy. Do you call that a smile? He looks like he's about to suck the marrow out the bones of a corpse.

Today is the anniversary of D Day, and the beginning of the end for the Axis. Thank a vet today. If you are an old woman, have sex with a vet. If you are a young woman, have sex with me.

Orin Kerr at Volokh explains the Court in the most concise and clear way possible.

What is buried in the pit on Oak Island?

Personally, I hope it is just a trick built by some guy hundreds of years ago that had a bunch of time on his hands. But a shit load of pirate treasure would be cool too.

I've had two people tell me that I look like Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader. I do not see it at all.

Jim Lampley is still insane.

I have an almost perverse desire to read his blog posts. I can't explain it. It's like the need to look at a car crash.

Jim thinks the draft should come back. But it's not because he supports it or thinks it is a great way to increase the size of the military He wants the draft so every parent has a stake in the military and the use of military force. His basic idea is to scare everyone into never using military force again.

This entire draft thing over the last year has been such a headache. Before the last election, I had friends of mine who I thought to be rational, intelligent individuals, say that they were voting for Kerry because of the draft. My first thought: WTF? "They say that Bush will bring back the draft." I asked the obvious question: who is "they"? Guess what obvious question I never got an answer to. I didn't need an answer though cause I knew who "they" were. "They" were Moveon.org. Punkvoter.com, MTV, and every other fear mongering liberal group. I pointed out to these friends of mine gripped with fear that the last draft bill introduced in Congress was introduced by Charlie Rangel, a liberal Democrat. Fortunately, that fact did not destroy the misinformation about the draft that was put into their heads.

We are now 134 days since the re-election of the president. Where's the draft? I thought I was supposed to be in a Bradley Fighting Vehicle somewhere in the Sunni Triangle by now. Why no draft? It's very simple. Drafts are counterproductive for the armed forces. We have a high quality army because it is all volunteer. It is a professional force that requires specific skills and a specific personality. Time is a huge factor. The traditional draft term is 2 years. Our modern military is too complex and has too much specialized equipment for someone to be trained and put into the field in a 2 year time span. Gone are the days of a few weeks in the country and then you get your rifle and sent to the front. In fact, 2 years is the timeframe that the military says it would take to train a sufficient number of replacements for the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. There would be no real benefit.

It also takes people to train people. If there is a huge influx of personnel that have no military skills, there will be a greater need to pull officers and soldiers from the field to train them. Then there is the problem with the costs of feeding, clothing, and paying a new huge force. I guess all these liberals would support a huge budget increase to the military.

It is also a political nightmare. What serious politician would vote to bring back the draft? They would be run out of office. Think back to when the last draft was ended. There was a guy in Congress from Illinois who introduced one of the first bills to abolish the draft. His name: Donald H. Rumsfeld. Tell me why the head of the Defense Department, whose entire military philosophy is to be lighter and faster, would want a huge increase in soldiers.

Back to Jim. He is ignoring a lot of reality, which he's apt to do. Last year, 2 million males turned 18. The 2004 recruiting goals for all the armed forces was 187, 437. Even if you increased that goal drastically, you would have to be pretty unlucky to be drafted. Just as a matter of population, the luck of the draw would probably end up picking more poorer people than rich (there's more poor than rich in the country). Nice system, huh? It solves nothing.

Jim offers up this gem. "If millions of parents in the red states had been faced with the prospect that their teenager might face a decision about the next military adventure, might they have looked at Iraq a bit differently?" Uh, does he know who is in the military, politically speaking? Military service members and families voted overwhelmingly for President Bush. The parents in red states are the ones that have kids in the military right now. They are well aware of the situation. Jim seems to view a term of service in the military as a punishment or a death sentence. That viewpoint speaks so much about him and the people like him.

First, let me state that I am not a crackpot. I am not a tinfoil hat wearing freak. I think that with enough study and help from people smarter than I, I can get to the bottom of most things. I have come across something that I can't figure out. The more I think about it, the more it disturbs me. Not to be overly melodramatic, but it sort of sends a chill up my spine.

The Solway Firth photograph (also known as the Cumbria photo).

Just the image creeps the shit out of me. That... whatever it is standing behind that girl is just wrong. I trust Kodak to not be bullshitting us on this. It's not like they are getting publicity out of the mystery, cause who has ever heard of this? I was bumming around on a message board post about historical mysteries and came across this.

I guess if I shut down the crazy portion of my brain, I come to this conclusion: the guy took a picture of his daughter with a friend of his dressed up in a weird suit behind her. Basically, we're going on his word here. The Aussie connection is just people wanting to see something. They want to make a link between a mysterious British photo and something they saw on security cameras in their country. The connection about the missiles... Ok, I got nothing. I'm going to do some more digging about this, some more thinking and reasoning, and try to figure this shit out.

I will also be sleeping with both eyes open, cradling a loaded rifle in my arms, just in case the space suit men come for me.

Link

This seems very plausible. Everyone has sort of assumed that Scalia would be picked to be Chief Justice after Rehnquist steps down. There would be a huge confirmation fight even though Scalia was originally confirmed 98-0. It's actually fairly common to appoint someone from the outside directly to the chief position, as opposed to promoting from within. I think McConnell would be a great chief. I would get great pleasure from Scalia as chief, but I can live without it.

Todd Zywicki from Volokh briefly talks about reforestation in Vermont. I kind of wish I could have lived years ago to see the rivers of horse manure. I'm stuck with the Milwaukee River's human manure.

Information and reports from Amnesty International might be politically motivated? I'm fucking shocked.

Here, Amnesty tries to defend the "gulag" remark.

Millions of people died in Soviet gulags. How many millions have we killed at Gitmo? Did the prisoners in the Soviet gulags get copies of their religious texts or meals prepared to be acceptable to their religion? This hyperbole, much like the stupid Bush=Hitler rhetoric, is everywhere in modern politics. It's just fucking stupid and it minimizes the suffering and death that people endured under the Soviets and the Nazis. Too many people have a persecution complex where they think they are suffering so greatly now. Give me a break.

I thought I had to be asleep to have a wet dream.

Deep down, Posner has to be at the top of many lists for the Supreme Court. The reason that I never mentioned it or considered it is the age issue. I think the president wants a legacy (as all presidents do) and the best way to get that is with some justices who will be there for a while.

Send Sen. George Voinovich a tissue.

This is why I love the internet. Sarcastic, smart ass, arrogant people (like me) unite to ridicule politicians. I'd send him one but it's not worth the price of the stamp.

Easily the coolest PD on the planet.

Link

This is a pretty extensive review of a book by Donald Alexander Downs called Restoring Free Speech and Liberty on Campus. It seems like something I will pick up eventually. It's amazing to think that through things like speech codes, 80% of universities restrict free speech in ways that the government could not. Private schools aside, why is it that state schools do not have to follow the Constitution? Speech codes and other PC bullshit have turned colleges into islands of fascism. The whole idea of the free marketplace of ideas has just been thrown in the trash.