Let the fun begin!

As of today, Spring Break has begun!

Except that it hasn't.

In a brilliant bit of scheduling, the beginning of spring break at GW just happens to coincide perfectly with the beginning of the journals write-on competition. So, instead of flying off to warm and sunny locales to forget about the law for a whole week, GW 1Ls are hunkering down with their computers, highlighters, and bluebooks to dig into over 200 pages of the most fascinating reading they've ever encountered. Doesn't that sound like fun?

Thus far this competition is distinguished by the seriousness with which it takes itself. For weeks I've heard a steady drumbeat of cautions against violating any of the competition's rules, followed always by ominous threats of the consequences for such violations. My favorite threat: You may be disqualified from even taking the bar exam. Horror of horrors! Say it isn't so! The rules are much like those of "Fight Club," so of course the first rule is: You don't talk about the journals competition. Yeah, that's the second rule, too.

Oops. Did I just mention the journal competition? I may have just violated the whole honor code and rules of the thing. Ssssh! Don't tell anyone!

So, ok. I have until 8 p.m. next Monday to get through this packet, Bluebook a list of about 17 sources, and write a 6-page note. And since I can't say more than that, I won't.

But I will say that I can't wait to be finished with this so spring break can begin for real. In the past month I've prepared for and competed in a Client Counseling Competition and a Mock Trial Competition, and I've written and turned in a brief for the Moot Court Competition, which will actually take place at the end of March. Sheesh. And I'm doing all these competitions why?

Oh well, no time to think about that now -- it's Bluebook time!

Posted 04:12 PM | Comments (9) | law school

They're Alive And Well

The other day I was wondering what happened to Lawless Gal and Liable. It turns out, they're both alive and well and living in Finland. Er, I mean, they're alive and well and attending their respective law schools with much success, if not without challenge. Lawless has picked up the blogging stick again (and she got a summer job -- congratulations!), and Liable provided a brief update of her own progress:

I'm still reading blogs occasionally, but after spending all day typing I just can't make myself do anymore typing in the evenings. But I'll give a quick update: 1. I like law school, but I'd give it all up for a couple rainy Saturdays spent in bed, just lounging. 2. I will be working in a small firm here in the MWU city this summer. The job searching phenomenon was stressful, but turned out for the best. 3. I'm WAY behind right now, as LW has taken up most of the semester. Spring break = I'm in the library, outlining. 4. Fall grades were good, and included a CALI. 5. Practice orals were stressful. Final rounds are nexty week.

Thanks, AI, for letting me update here. Maybe once LW is over I can blog a little...

Glad to be of service! And I'm more glad to hear that Lawless and Liable are doing so well. I don't even know what schools they attend, but I still feel like we're all part of the same "class" -- the same cohort, if you will, the "blawg class of 2006." I'm sure they'd each populate the class a little differently according to which blogs they've followed most closely throughout the last year or so, but for me the class is a rather small one, including Lawless, Liable, and DG. Theirs were the blogs I read last summer as we all planned and prepared to start this law school thing, and theirs are the blogs I continue to check daily, just to see how everything's going. The class has grown since school started to include other 1L blogs I read daily (or close to it), such as Glorfindel of Gondolin, Letters of Marque, Transmogriflaw, and Musclehead. Of course, I read a lot of other blogs regularly, but my fellow 1Ls have a special place above the others. I guess you could call it a sort of class pride.

Posted 02:29 PM | Comments (5) | law school meta-blogging

Cool Google Blog Trick

Try this Google search. On the results page, click the link to "tins : : Rick Klau's weblog."

See that page you go to? It knows you came from Google! How does it do that?

And look, it works with Yahoo search, too.

This is awesome. Why? How often do you do a search, find a blog that posted something that sounds like what you're looking for, then follow the link only to find that the post has rolled off the page and into the archives somewhere? With this neat trick, that problem disappears.

If you know how to work this magic, please let me know...

BTW: In addition to being a cool tech geek with a J.D., Rick was involved with the Dean campaign and has lots of great posts about his experience.

Posted 05:05 PM | Comments (2) | meta-blogging

A bit more on Haiti

A fair number of people have visited this page recently searching for information about Haiti, probably due to a couple of posts from the last few days. Obviously, I don't have any answers. I still haven't seen any real investigation of Aristide's charges that U.S. forces kidnapped him, nor does there seem to be much serious analysis of how, or to what extent, the U.S. supported the so-called "rebels" who now appear to be in power. At least now that U.S. Marines are on the ground, it should be less likely that "Baby Doc" Duvalier will be able to return to Haiti.

This article from The Jamaica Observer [link via Scripting News] offers more perspective on recent events, and argues that Aristide's good intentions were no match for the obstacles to positive change in Haiti:

When Aristide was elected first in 1991, there was no democratic tradition in Haiti. The politicians and intellectuals had been killed or driven into exile, and after 20 and 30 years, they were not likely to return, having made lives elsewhere. Haiti in 1991 was rather like Germany after the Second World War, its dictator gone, but gone too were the working appurtenances of a democratic state, political parties, trade unions, a judicial system etc, because Hitler destroyed them. Aristide had to play the cards he was dealt. A parish priest -- a slum priest as the Western press prefers to call him -- is unlikely to develop statecraft ministering to an oppressed and desperate flock while trying to escape assassination.

Aristide was always a symbol -- with big ideas, it is true -- but without the praxis, without the experience and network of contacts to put his ideas into place. He was surrounded by people who depended on patronage, whether rich or poor, and since old habits tend to linger, they proceeded to behave exactly as they had before. It was Aristide who appointed Cedras who deposed him. And it was because he knew he couldn't trust the army that he dissolved it when he returned to power.

Without an army and with a laughably small and half-trained police force, it was always in the cards that gangs would develop in Haiti, as they have in Jamaica, Brazil and other countries, to fill the hiatus left by the state's armed forces. To describe such a situation as an example of Aristide's corruption is not only self-serving, it is dishonourable.

That's a fairly different story from the one being told in the U.S. by AP reporters:

Haiti's first freely elected leader lost a lot of popularity in Haiti — and in Washington, which restored him to power in 1994 after he was ousted in a 1991 military coup — because he allegedly used militant loyalists to attack and intimidate his opponents, failed to help the poor and condoned corruption. Aristide, in exile in the Central African Republic, has denied the accusations.

Amnesty International offers lots of information about the "rebels" who have taken over (led by convicted human rights criminals), but doesn't say much about Aristide. For still more context, WeHaitians.com, which bills itself as a "journal of democracy and human rights of record," says:

the threat today against Haiti, a small Caribbean nation with a population estimated at 8.2 million, is not from classic military dictatorship, but more forms of dictatorship of the proletariat.

Oh my! A dictatorship of the proletariat! Much better to have a military coup, don't you think?

Finally, for a lot more information on the U.S. perspective of Haiti, check out the U.S. Dept. of State's 2003 Country Report on Human Rights Practices for Haiti.

Posted 04:55 PM | general politics

Boing Spring Boing

The weather in DC recently has been perfect. I want it to be like this all the time. The daily temps have been ideal for shorts and a light shirt and jacket while it cools off just enough at night to remind you this isn't summer yet. Plus, it's been raining at night (very early morning), then clearing through the day, allowing us to wake up mornings to a crisp, clean, shiny new city. The trees are budding and the moisture on the grass gives it a healthy, organic scent, as if to say: "Hello, the process of turning green has now begun." Or something like that. It's just wonderful.

It reminds me of living in the Berkeley hills in, oh, about March or April of 1997. I'd wake up to the sound of water dripping on the roof from the night's rain, and my little apartment would be surrounded by fog. The bike ride to work was brisk and refreshing, and by the time noon rolled around the sun was out and the temperature would be somewhere around the mid-60s. It was like living in paradise, in a way.

Why can't D.C. be like this year-round?

Posted 10:44 AM | Comments (4) | life generally

Kerryyyaaaaaawwwwwwn wins

Subject line of today's email from the MoveOn PAC :

Urgent: Kerry Needs Our Support

Taste in my mouth: Bitter. Disappointed. Moving toward resigned, I guess. I see what MoveOn is doing, and it's great. I just wish all that money and effort was going to go toward more significant changes than Kerry will ever be able to represent.

But, and so, Super Tuesday is over, the votes are counted, Edwards is calling it quits, and Kerry's now all set to start choosing a running mate. Can you say "politics as usual"? I just can't understand how anyone could get excited by this.

In better news, Dean crushed all opposition ... in Vermont, where he won a fat 58% of the vote. Yeah, so it doesn't mean much, but it's great to see Dean get at least one win, anyway.

Kucinich also won a primary yesterday -- the primary for his congressional seat. He claims he's going to stay in the race, and Sharpton says the same. Note how coverage of these campaigns is only showing up at small, local news outlets. It's a shame, but now that Kerry has locked things up, it's probably going to be nearly impossible for any other Democrat to get any attention for the next year or so. Perhaps Ralphie's got something, after all...

The current situation gives me an idea: Voters in the rest of the primaries should vote for Howard Dean. Crazy? Sure, but listen, lots of people (at one time, huge majorities) claimed they supported Dean, but then they changed their minds for a lot of reasons. One of those was that people decided that they liked Dean's message, but they didn't want him to be President. Fine. Now they can vote for his message and not have to worry that he'll actually win. So voters can now start giving Dean delegates, not so that he can get the nomination, but so he can go to the convention in July with enough support to make Kerry accountable.

But how would that work, exactly? I mean, now that Kerry's locked up the nomination, if Dean or Edwards or anyone else continues to pick up delegates, is there any way those delegates could make a difference? IOW: How the heck does the convention work?
______
Posted while listening to: 3rd Planet from the album "The Moon & Antarctica" by Modest Mouse

Posted 02:30 PM | Comments (4) | election 2004

Still Wondering

The other day I asked what was happening in Haiti. Despite the headlines that have followed, I'm still wondering: What is really going on?

Did the U.S. kidnap Aristide to get him out of Haiti? Of course the U.S. denies this, but do we have any reason to believe these denials? The history of U.S. involvement there and in other devloping nations doesn't make the U.S. denials seem very credible. See, e.g., a short history of Haiti by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsy Clark.

The UPI reported last week on accusations that the U.S. has been covertly supporting the "armed rebels" in Haiti:

"The Bush administration is again engaged in regime change by armed aggression," former U.S. attorney general Ramsey Clark said. "This time, the armed aggression is against the administration of the democratically elected president of Haiti."

Note the rhetoric of the news coverage. The people with the guns in Haiti are "armed rebels." Aristide is "Haiti's firs freely elected leader." Last I checked, where a small group of people resorted to force of arms to disrupt a legitimate government, they were being called "terrorists," not "armed rebels." Where's the line between "terrorism" and "armed rebellion"? Does it simply depend on whether the U.S. agrees with the goals of those using force of arms?

Another question: Has Haiti just become another Venezuela? The Revolution Will Not Be Televised.
______
Posted while listening to: Catch Me Now I'm Falling from the album "Low Budget" by The Kinks

Posted 07:18 AM | Comments (3) | general politics

Warning: Sarcasm

In light of recent conversations, I want to make clear that I don't mean to offend anyone here, but I do appreciate sarcasm and so I can't resist: 12 Reasons Gay Marriage Will Ruin Society.

Note: This link is provided as an informational resource only and as a convenience to ai readers and their affiliates. The views expressed in this link do not necessarily express the views of ai or its affiliates. Reasonable efforts have been taken to provide accurate and current information, however readers take the responsibility for verifying all information. This link is provided "AS IS" without warranty of any kind, either express or implied, including, but not limited to, the implied warranties of fitness for a partiuclar use or non-infringement. YMMV.
______
Posted while listening to: Get A Life from the album "Ultimate Alternative Wavers" by Built To Spill

Posted 07:15 AM | Comments (1) | general politics

Duper Tuesday

Today is "Super Tuesday," but somehow it doesn't seem so super. The last debate among the Democratic candidates was mostly annoying squabbling over trifles, as notable for the poor performance of the journalists as for anything the candidates said. Not so long ago it seemed like there was a lot at stake in this Democratic nomination race, but now the headlines say this could be "Edwards' last hurrah" and "Kerry hopes for knockout blow."

*yawn*

Howard Dean's candidacy is what made the nomination race interesting for the last year, and it's still making headlines. Political Wire has a roundup of the different takes on whether the campaign disintegrated because of infighting. Dean says no, Howard Kurtz says yes, and Matthew Gross, Dean's former chief blogger who is now working for Joe Trippi, says yes, too, but sort of moderates that position here. The worst accusation is that Dean never wanted to actually get elected, but I find that very hard to believe. He certainly didn't look or sound like someone who didn't sincerely want to win; in fact, until now, everyone seemed to think his desire to win was too intense, and that's one of the things that brought him down. But whatever the case, I hope Trippi's "people" and Dean's "people" can come together or at least cooperate on their mutual goals. A lot of good could come from what they started, and it would be a shame to waste all that potential on battling egos and hurt feelings.
______
Posted while listening to: Pulk/Pull Revolving Doors from the album "Amnesiac" by Radiohead

Posted 06:59 AM | election 2004 general politics

My Ignorance, My Bliss

While I was wrestling with a moot cour/LRW brief arguing that receipt of a gun as payment for drugs constitutes "use" of a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime, it appears Three Years of Hell and the Curmudgeonly Clerk found much to dislike about Congressman McDermott's speech that I posted yesterday, as well as the fact that I posted it at all. There are several comments on their pages, as well as more in dialogue with Letters of Marque. Anthony (of Three Years) and the Clerk argue that McDermott is making a dumb argument, and that it was dumb of me to post it. To review, McDermott made a short speech using citations to the Old Testament to mock those who would like to make U.S. social policy conform to "Biblical principles."

I admit my ignorance of Biblical specifics is gross (meaning broad or general), in part because I determined long ago that any reference to the Bible (Old Testament or New) to support or refute any position was asking for trouble. Obviously, reference to the Bible to point out this fact is also asking for trouble. But seriously, people can toss "scripture" at each other endlessly and there's never going to be a winner in those fights. In that spirit, I didn't intend the McDermott speech as a serious argument about gay marriage or anything else; it simply mocked the ridiculous "prayer request" it responded to, and I still think it did that quite well. When the Presidential Prayer Group asked that U.S. policy conform to "Biblical principles," it didn't specify any content to those principles, so McDermott chose to respond with Old Testament citations. Anthony and the Clerk claim it was ridiculous or dumb or disrespectful or something along those lines to refer to the Old rather than New Testament, and perhaps they're right. But if McDermott's point was that the Presidential Prayer Group's request was ridiculous or dumb (and I think that was at least part of the point), then choosing those Old Testament passages made that point quite well.

But as I said, in posting McDermott's speech I wasn't trying to make a serious argument about gay marriage or civil unions or the Bible, and therefore I admittedly didn't do a lot of (or any) homework on these subjects. I figured my intent would be clear from the glib sarcasm of my remarks following the quotation. For future reference, if I want to make a serious argument about gay marriage or civil unions, I probably won't base that argument on the Bible.

All of this is tangential to the main and more important point on which Anthony and I agree: The government simply shouldn't be in the "marriage" business. We should grant equal rights to everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, and leave "marriage" to religion.

Now back to that brief...

Posted 06:00 AM | Comments (9) | general politics

Brief Travesty

The weather today in D.C. is arguably the nicest it has been in months -- sunny, clear, and around 60 degrees. All that sunshiny spring goodness is just begging for people of sound mind and body to get out for a hike or a bike ride or a stroll along the shore of the Potomac. But the weather is mocking me, because instead of going out and enjoying this first great taste of spring, I'm sitting inside, hunched over this damned machine, in a death match with my final legal writing/moot court competition brief.

Law school, I curse you.

______
Posted while listening to: Holdin' On - High On Hope from the album "Tuff Jams - Speed Garage" by Various Artists - Ultra Records

Posted 11:15 AM | Comments (1) | law school

Where Are They Now?

Does anyone know where Liable has gone? She was keeping us delighted and updated on her law school progress last summer and early fall in a fairly regular way, and then just stopped. I've left her on the blogroll in hopes she'd return, but alas, it doesn't seem to be happening. Does anyone know if she's doing ok?

And much more recently, what happened to Sue? Did she take the blog down, or what? I didn't comment too often, but I've been visiting her nearly every day for months now, and my daily surf just isn't the same without her updates about classes, papers, and the follies of her peers.

So Sue or Elle, if you're reading this, I hope you're doing well, and I'd love to hear from you...

It's hard to track the blogs that come and go, such as Think, Inc., which was fun for a short while, and Cicero's Ghost, which I thought was gone, but now seems back? Both are (or were?) part of the Michigan law blogs thing, of which there are a growing number -- a short list is available on the links list over at Letters of Marque, which is a definite must-read (and not just because she recently linked to ai, although what more reason do you need?).

Posted 07:20 AM | Comments (2) | meta-blogging

New Wheels

Everyone's getting new cars these days, it seems. Sherry was looking and looking, looking, and thinking and looking and trying to choose between practicality and seduction, and then she bought and loved. You might sift through the comments to some of those posts if you're shopping for a car -- there's some good advice in there, including a link to the Confessions of a Car Salesman. Gotta know what you're getting into.

I was surprised to see that no one recommended the Prius. (Review, specs.)If that's not a dream car, I don't know what is. Wouldn't you just feel great driving a car like that? And isn't that what cars are for? To make you feel good? But ok, even if cars are for transportation and practicality, what's more practical than 60 mpg and super low emissions? Good for your wallet, good for the planet, just plain good.

But perhaps a good (or any) used Prius is hard to come by. They're still pretty new and there just aren't that many of them around, especially out in the wild wild west, where my sister and mother also just got new cars. Sis got a little red wagon, and mom got a little red toy (the 1999 Import Car of the Year!) Both got great deals on cars I would love to have. I've wanted an Outback since I first saw one; it's the perfect vehicle for throwing your bike in the back and going anywhere. And, of course, who wouldn't want a Beetle? And this one's a diesel, so mom's looking at 40-45 mpg. That's not quite Prius-level and there's still the emissions issue, but it's a definite step in the right direction.

Finally, someone else I know is shopping for a new new car, but she has to buy a GM, and maybe specifically a Chevrolet. So if you were shopping for a new car and you were forced to buy GM, what would you buy? If I could get any GM make, I'd probably look closely at the Saturn ION in rain forest green (roomy, cheap, fairly economical at 26/35 mpg w/manual trans.) . If the choices were limited to Chevrolets, I'd have to go for the 5-door Aveo in spicy orange (small, cheap, but sporty; good economy at 26/34 mpg), or maybe the Venture van (roomy and peppy, although it doesn't get great gas mileage at 19/26 mpg).

Of course, I'm not buying a new car or a new used car, which makes me think of the Dead Milkmen song, "Everybody's Got Nice Stuff But Me" (scroll down a bit):

People in nice cars how'd they get em? I close my eyes try to forget em Went out swimming got hit by a jet-ski Everybody's got nice stuff but me I wanna car I wanna jet-ski

Ok, so it's not true. I have lots of nice stuff, but I'm thinking of the song, anyway. It's a fun song.

And but so: Congratulations to all these new car owners (and the future new car owner). Good luck with those wheels, and may they roll long and trouble-free.

Posted 07:08 AM | Comments (5) | life generally