Wasting Time In Class (In Law School)

Energy Spatula's Friday Funnies on Blawg Wisdom today includes a link to Justin R. Adin's guest-post at Notes from the (Legal) Underground with the scoop on How to Read Weblogs During Class. I wouldn't recommend actually reading blogs in class very often, but it's good to be prepared for those days when you'd rather shove needles through your eyeballs than listen to one more rule of civil procedure. Matt Schuh has another idea for passing time in class via computer—playing with shortcut keys and colored text. More proof that a good part of making it through law school is simply being able to find ways to make it through class w/sanity intact. If I were going to be serious about this, I might suggest that all these strategies for passing time in class are proof that the dominant teaching model in law school is ineffective at best, sadistic at worst. There's no reason time in class should be so mind-numbing the people would rather play with shortcut keys than than pay attention and participate. Oh, but you can't really participate in a classroom of 100 students, can you? Oh, and professors often limit participation within iron bounds of their choosing, don't they? Oh, yeah, these are good ways for people to learn. I forgot. But since I'm not being serious, instead I'll just mention, in response to Matt's comments on function keys, that option-6 is the Mac keyboard shortcut for the section symbol (§), and option-7 will give you a paragraph symbol (¶). This is true across Mac software, not just in Microsoft Word. Oh, and hats off to Energy Spatula, Queen of the Funny Wisdom. She's doing a supercalifragilisticexpialidocious job!

Posted 04:53 PM | Comments (2) | law school mac geek

RNC Convention Wrapper

The Republican Convention is over. Bush has given his speech, a speech which glossed over important facts and trotted out the compassionate conservatism in time to court women voters just before the election.Yay. Now perhaps the campaigns will get serious? I hope so. The first of four scheduled debates is scheduled for Thursday, Sept. 30. By the way, whatever became of Kerry's challenge to Bush to debate weekly from here on in? Did the Bush campaign just ignore it? Earlier this week, William Saletan wrote a devastating indictment of the Bush Administration the other day for Slate, using VP Cheney's own words against the administration to great effect:

"A senator can be wrong for 20 years without consequence to the nation," said Cheney. "But a president always casts the deciding vote." What America needs in this time of peril, he argued, is "a president we can count on to get it right." You can't make the case against Bush more plainly than that.

He also claims "the case against President Bush is simple":

He sold us his tax cuts as a boon for the economy, but more than three years later, he has driven the economy into the ground. He sold us a war in Iraq as a necessity to protect the United States against weapons of mass destruction, but after spending $200 billion and nearly 1,000 American lives, and after searching the country for more than a year, we've found no such weapons.

Saletan's essay was a response to Zell Miller's vicious speech (and, of course, the subsequent interview w/Chris Matthews in which Zeller effectively challenged Matthews to a duel), which Saletan says was full of charges against Kerry that a are "demonstrably false," and which pointed out that Zeller was saying in no uncertain terms that if you don't agree w/the President on everything you are weakening the country and effectively aiding our enemies. Again, one more simple reason it should be impossible to vote for Bush: His "team" has said again and again and again that dissent is unpatriotic, when dissent is what this country was built upon. (Scott Rosenberg points out much the same thing.) I just heard a Republican spinster on NPR say that if the Democrats can have six months of Howard Dean, the Republicans deserve at least one night of Zell Miller. Whatever. The difference is that Dean was speaking truth to power, while Miller was speaking lies to the powerless, which is probably why the Republicans are now running away from Miller. But while the case against Bush sounds exceedingly simple to me, how it is that half the country is still planning to vote for him? Oh, no need to explain, just watch The Daily Show, which had a terrific piece Wednesday night about how Bush "has used the power of words to overcome insurmountable facts."

Don't listen to the filter or the facts, listen to the Words. George W. Bush: Because he says so.

In other "highlights" related to the RNC "Con": Michael Moore praised the Bush daughters as an example of how children can please parents, then he says don't send more kids to die. Other people aren't so happy with the Bush twins. Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and “Consciously Failed” To Act; 66% Call For New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York’s Attorney General, New Zogby International Poll Reveals. Salon says the Republicans never "let the facts get in the way of their partisan ferocity." A Columbus, Montana swift boat veteran is angry that the Swift Boat Veterans for Rewriting History (er, I mean, "Truth") used his name w/out his permission:

"I'm pretty nonpolitical," the 56-year-old [Bob] Anderson said Tuesday. So, when he found out last week that his name was one of about 300 signed on a letter questioning Kerry's service, he was "flabbergasted." "It's kind of like stealing my identity," said Anderson, who spent a year on a swift boat as an engine man and gunner.

And so the circus continues... UPDATE: No wrap-up of the RNC convention would be complete w/out at least some mention of the huge protests that marked the week, as well as the violations of civil liberties that caused a judge to order "the release of hundreds of Bush protesters Thursday, ruling that police held them illegally without charges for more than 40 hours":

Hours before President Bush made his speech to the Republican National Convention, Manhattan Criminal Court Judge John Cataldo held city officials in contempt of court for failing to release more than 500 detained demonstrators by 5 p.m. The judge said that the detentions violated state law, and he threatened to impose a fine of $1,000 per day for each person kept in custody longer than 24 hours without being arraigned.

The irony here is that any money the city pays in fines comes from where? The taxpayers who were jailed and whose rights were violated. I've got a better idea: Instead of handing out fines, how about we throw the police in jail and hold them under the same conditions the protesters were held under, and for the same length of time, plus a little for good measure. The NY Chief of Police should join them. That would give these fine officers a chance to really think about civil liberties and why they should take them more seriously. Also: Why Democrats shouldn't be scared, by Michael Moore

Posted 04:48 PM | election 2004

Flip-Flopper-In-Chief

Whoop! There it is:

A day after telling NBC's Matt Lauer that "I don't think you can win'' the war on terror, he told a veterans' group in Tennessee that "we are winning, and we will win.''

So which is it, Mr. Bush? Maybe you should stick to your cue cards next time, huh? As the news drones on about the Republican Convention I'm reminded again of how the Republicans have operated for the last four years, which is basically to say one thing and do another. Go back to the 2000 campaign and look at the promises of "no nation building" and "compassionate conservatism" and moderation and whatever. What's happened? Lots of nation building and zero compassion and zero conservatism—how can it be "conservative" to run up huge debts and destroy the environment, jobs, social security, etc? But the Bush Administration takes flip-flopping to a more sinister level. Rather than taking "Position 1" for some good reason, then later switching to "Position 2" in light of new evidence or developments, the Bush Administration starts from "Position 2," all the while maintaining it supports "Position 1." Then when it's shown that "Position 2" has actually been achieved, Bush says "no, that's not Position 2—that's Position 1." Example: The Clear Skies Initiative. Bush says he wants to improve the environment (Position 1). His policies create more environmental deterioration, showing deference to the profit-motivated desires of big business (Position 2). We know he wanted to help big business all along (Position 2), and when you point out that the environment has gotten worse, not better, Bush just repeats like a machine his desire to improve the environment (Position 1). In another example, Bush says he wants to help senior citizens get cheaper prescription drugs, then he passes medicare "reform" that makes it illegal for Medicare to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies for lower drug prices and effectively (though not technically) prohibit individuals and states from getting cheaper drugs from Canada. Of course, Bush continues to claim he really cares about senior citizens and reducing the cost of prescription drugs. Doublespeak, much? Even more ingenious is the way the Republicans attack their opponents for the Bush's own weaknesses. Bush has a horrible record of military service (read: virtually none), so what do the Republicans do? Attack John Kerry's military service. Bush campaigned in 2000 as a moderate but his administration has been the exact opposite—extremely right wing. He's saying one thing and doing another (see above), so what do the Republicans do? They attack John Kerry as a "flip-flopper." Bush did nothing worthwhile with his life before becoming President, so what do the Republicans do? Attack John Kerry's lifetime of public service and claim he's done nothing in his decades as an elected representative. It's sick. It's scary. And it's incredibly effective. Bush is now leading in predicted electoral college votes for the first time in a while. Great.

Posted 07:44 AM | Comments (2) | election 2004

Green Means Go

After two days as a 2L, I've learned an important lesson: Yes, I can make it to class in 11 minutes or less, but only if I hit every light just right and if I don't mind getting to class puffing like a steam locomotive and drenched in sweat. Twenty minutes or more travel time is much more sane. The good news about travel time from the new apartment is that it seems much easier to hit all the lights for some reason. On my old commute, I used to have to stop at 4-6 red lights nearly every day, simply because of the way they were all timed. Now, there are several more lights between home and school, but for whatever reason, after waiting at the first one, if I just keep a good pace the rest of the way I don't seem to have to stop at any more—they're all green. I hope that's some kind of positive sign, but whatever, it's a kicky ride to get to school every morning since it's basically all downhill and with every light green I can just fly. Riding home (up up up!) is a different matter, but it's good to get the heart pumping at least once a day, or so I've heard.

Posted 11:53 AM | Comments (3) | 2L

Double Announcement Day

Apple introduces the new iMac (coverage fromMacCentral, Reuters, and AP). Six Apart introduces Movable Type 3.1, including the new plugin pack. Wow, it's like Christmas in August or something. UPDATE: If all went well, ai should now be coming to you courtesy of MT 3.1. Whoa there! No need to get so excited! There's plenty for everyone...

Posted 07:50 PM | Comments (3) | mac geek meta-blogging

Day One, Year Two

Like a truck slamming into you on the highway. That's how the semester begins. Even on day one, there are reading assignments to do and discuss, and student organizations and extracurriculars are hitting the ground running. Yesterday my classes began at 8:50 a.m. and didn't end until 5:50 p.m. Sure, I had breaks in between, but they were filled with running around to the bookstore, financial aid, registration, and other administrivia. Long day. Packed day, a day when suddenly every moment of my time for the next three months seemed to fill up to overflowing. And of course it's not like that; it's never as hard as it seems to be, but on day one, sitting in class again for the first time in months, it can be a little discouraging to think of all the reading that lays ahead of you, all the classes you must attend, all the hoops you must jump through. Of course, it's also a little exciting, too, because there's a lot to learn, and at least some of it will be fascinating and useful and worthwhile. Yin. Yang. One thing I'm not so sure about though: The conventional wisdom is that the second year of law school is somehow easier than the first year. I'm not sure how that could be true. I mean, yes, it's easier in that you know a little more about what to expect so you don't have to deal with all the newness and uncertainty of your first year, but the workload seems, if anything, greater this year than last. Perhaps that's not true. I guess I'll find out. The schedule for this year includes the following classes, three of which met yesterday. Highlights from the notes:

• Evidence: Every attorney and every person should know about the rules of evidence—everything you say or do is evidence of something. "That oughta worry the hell out of ya." (We also watched a few minutes from the film, "Brother's Keeper"—I guess we're going to be talking about it in terms of how we could use the different pieces of evidence raised by the murder investigation it documents.)
• Labor Law: 25 years ago, the stock market was at 1000, now it's at 10,000. Stockholder wealth is up 10 times. 25 years ago CEOs earned 40-1 what average worker earned, now it's 500-1. When American CEOs travel around the world they are embarrassed about this. Meanwhile, employee wages have remained stagnant. 1.3 million more in poverty this year than last. Gap between rich and poor is getting wider b/c people in bottom 20% have no voice. 45 million Americans have no health coverage at all, at least 30 million of those work and either have no health care option or an option that's too expensive so they can't afford it. Every other group in our society is organized because we recognize that we need to be organized to have any political power in America, yet society tells workers they don't need to organize. Why not?
• Corporations: American business is not about business, it's about the stock market. This single-minded focus on Wall Street is a damaging, long-term problem that will ultimately destroy corporate capitalism in America unless something changes, and it's all because of the historical development of the corporations in America. We read Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518 (1819)—"the emancipation proclamation for corporations" because it's the decision that made them independent juridical persons.
• ConLaw II: Hasn't met yet.

So far, so good. I expect evidence will be interesting but a little bit of a slog because I'm not a big fan of rules classes, I'll be loving labor law, and corporations is going to be a big challenge because even though the professor seems highly critical of "American Corporate Capitalism," I'm guessing his critique is still a lot more pro-business than mine. ConLaw II should also be interesting, but I'll find out more about that today...

Posted 07:33 AM | Comments (8) | 2L

The Only Reason You Need

The Republican Convention is underway and it seems the news is all Bush, all the time. I'm too busy to follow any of it in much detail, but yesterday I heard possibly the best reason yet why Bush has no business being president (if I wasn't certain of that already, that is). The reason? He admitted he's begun an endless war. Of course, I agree with those who argue that you can't have a war on an idea, like "terror," and I agree that war is terrorism, so Bush is creating terror by waging his so-called war. So I don't agree that we've ever been "at war" against terror. We've been "at war" in Iraq, but that's been a war of choice, not necessity, and I'm confident it will have an end. It must. So basically I disagree with Bush on about every level of his approach to the world we live in today. However, even if I agreed that we've been "at war" against terror, even if i accepted the Bush administration's claims on these issues, I can't see how anyone could accept or support a leader who plans to keep the United States "at war" forever. Is that what we want—to live our entire lives in "wartime"? is that what we want for future generations? To decide that they will be born into and grow up in a warring nation, a nation perpetually and endlessly "at war"? This is not the only option. It's a bitterly cynical condemnation of America and Americans, and expresses a hopeless vision of the future—President Bush's vision of the future. Is that really what you want to vote for? Is that the future you want? So while the Republicans try to transport you back to the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, and play on your fears and emotions stemming from that day, don't forget what happened the next day, and the next, and for several days following 9/11. What happened in those days? The world came together in support of America, and Americans joined together in support of each other, and for a few days it seemed that we we really going to turn our incredible creativity, our massive resources of money and time and human energy toward figuring out why someone would attack us in this way, and toward resolving the problems that create terrorism. For a moment it seemed that instead of lashing out with bombs and bullets, we would bend our nation and all the nations of the world who sympathized so strongly with us in that moment toward creating a better, more peaceful, and secure futurue, a future with less killing and more cooperation and creativity and compassion, a future based on our American idealism and our conviction that peace is not only possible, but that it's better than war and that it always has been and always will be. The Republicans are asking you to think about Sept. 11, 2001, but don't stop there. Think also about that brief moment of hope after the tragedy, that moment when anything was possible, and remember that we don't have to be at war forever just because some regime of cynical warmongers says we do. Bush has made it clear: If you want to be at war forever, vote for him. If you think there's a better way, vote for Kerry. I guess the bright side here is that the choice is very clear. Thanks, President Bush!

Posted 06:39 AM | election 2004

RNC No Thanks

The Republican National Convention starts today. Get your posters here, here, or here. And here's a little bit about some of the fine folks responsible for these posters. Meanwhile, this week in NYC there are better things to do than pay attention to the Republicans. Check out the Bike National Convention, for example. Last week you could have checked out Life After Capitalism 2004, but they've left some good resources online for those of us who missed it, including links to Counter Convention.org and RNC Not Welcome in NYC! I'm not sure what the latter group hopes to accomplish by harassing Republican theatre-goers, but, well, not all forms of protest are effective or fully consistent with other long-term goals the protesters might have. For a perhaps more positive outlook check out the Still We Rise march tomorrow (Aug. 30) or the A31 Non-Violent Direct Action the next day. Man, I bet legal observers in NYC are going to be busy this week! Thanks to the National Lawyer's Guild, of course.

Posted 07:54 AM | election 2004

And That's Basically That

I was almost forgetting to say the BBQ/Poker Party was a rousing success (at least it seemed so), and to thank all those who came for coming and leaving me with all your liquor and money. Ok, I'm kidding about the money part. We played two tournaments and I got booted ignominiously from the early rounds of the first, but managed to luck my way to the number two spot in the second tournament. I really do play better poker when I just play for fun and don't worry about stakes or winning. There's a lesson in that, I reckon. And so the summer is pretty well over. The list of things I hoped to accomplish this summer is long and daunting, but those things will just have to wait for now. I've been sitting around all day trying to get myself to visit the webpage that lists the reading I'm supposed to have done for tomorrow, but for some reason my web browser just won't go there. I think there's something wrong with my computer, or the internet, maybe. Yeah, I definitely think it's going to be impossible for me to access that homework assignment. Definitely.

Posted 06:31 PM | 2L

Gunners Smunners

New-to-me blawger quasi in r.e.m. (not to be confused with Quasi In Rem) may be a gunner. I'm not sure what law school she's attending (it appears to be somewhere in the "bay area"), but wherever she is, her peers are at least lucky she realizes she may be a gunner. The first step to recovery is realizing you have a problem. I'm kidding, of course. I don't care about so-called gunners. We all learn in different ways, and while some people do just try to show off in class and monopolize the professor's attention, often these little tangents are more interesting than what might be happening otherwise, and I don't usually feel cheated by them. Worse than gunners, in my book, are people who come to class unprepared (and I'm definitely guilty of this) so that when the prof calls on them, they take forever to spit out an answer, one that is likely wrong anyway. And worse still are the profs that then basically bring class to a grinding halt to humiliate these unprepared people and highlight their lack of preparation by continuing to ask them questions until they admit they're unprepared. Some profs will even go beyond this, forcing the unprepared student to look up the answers while everyone sits there twiddling their thumbs. What pedagogical goal does serve? Stupid. So gunners, you go. Ask your questions and get what you need out of class; just recognize what you are and try to make sure your colloquy's w/the faculty are interesting or entertaining to someone besides yourself. Thanks.

Posted 05:53 PM | law school