« August 2005 | Main | October 2005 »
September 28, 2005
Althouse: Free speech and campaign finance.
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/09/free-speech-and-campaign-finance.html#comments I know I shouldn't but I just can't help it: Limiting campaign contributions or campaign spending does not entail “minimizing Free Speech Rights.” Dollars are not speech, and speech is not free if you have to pay for it. Something like the “death tax,” the “right to life,” and other names or phrases those on the right of the political spectrum have invented to advance their objectives, this supposed association between money and speech is simply a rhetorical move to ensure that the side w/the most money always wins. While that may be what capitalism is about, it's not what democracy is about.Posted by mowabb at 12:42 PM
September 21, 2005
Parenthetical Statement: cry wolf
http://www.bloglicious.com/tony/archives/001174.html I saw Ralph Nader walking near the Dupont Hilton once last year and it seemed like a brush w/celebrity to me. D.C. people are geeks that way -- that's why we're in D.C., maybe. I also keep seeing one of the contestants from Showtime's “The American Candidate,” which was a reality show in fall 2004 about these people who were competing for a fantasy presidential nomination. I believe the man's name was Richard and he, too, seems like a celebrity to me. Me = geek. But I'd say Wolf Blitzer is definitely a celebrity. A windbag and crap reporter, but a celebrity, nonetheless.Posted by mowabb at 04:22 PM
September 19, 2005
idlegrasshopper: Old blogs never die, they just fade away.
http://idlegrasshopper.blogspot.com/2005/08/old-blogs-never-die-they-just-fade.html I'm late to this party b/c I only check occasionally b/c you only post occasionally, but I agree w/FPC in the hope that you'll find you miss this and come back. How else will we all be able to enjoy funny stories of your professors calling on you with coded references to your blog? So good luck w/2L and know that we, your loyal readers, will welcome you back w/open arms should/when you decide to come back to this virtual world of plenty.Posted by mowabb at 08:26 AM
September 08, 2005
Lotsawords: 7 Things Right Now
http://lotsawords.blogspot.com/2005/09/7-things-right-now.html I usually get that whole new goal/reevaluation urge in the spring. The fall is just time to chill and be thankful for cooler temperatures, sunnny days that are so clear you wish they could go on forever, and the beauty of the trees adorned in their most brilliant (non-green colors). But anyway, I wanted to tell you what we did to stop the morning barking for the dog: Keep an aluminum can beside your bed w/a handful of pennies inside it. Whenever the dog makes a sound you don't like, shake the can loudly a few times. Then again, then again. Try to make the shake seem like a reflex, something that's going to happen every time the dog makes a noise. Pretty soon, the dog will forget it wanted to make noise in the mornings. Worked for our morning barker/whiner, anyway... Good luck!Posted by mowabb at 08:14 AM
September 07, 2005
divine angst: some early morning musing
http://divineangst.blawgcoop.com/archives/2005/09/some_early_morn.html Good question, and I agree w/both Dave and Jennifer. I'd bet you could make your reading more efficient b/c you probably won't really need to know most of the minute details you're struggling to digest each evening -- at least not for an exam. You may need to know those details someday in practice, but that's what research is for. So I'd say your goal w/your reading should be big picture. The details only matter insofar as they're crucial to the reasoning of a case so that you can do what Jennifer mentions -- apply what you learn in that case to new facts. So instead of reading for every detail, you can try to read for the big payoff: What did the court find most persuasive/important about this case and on what did it base its decision? How does it distinguish this case from others with similar facts? If you're reading restatements it's different. If I recall correctly, in Contracts the restatement *is* the law so you might be expected to understand what the restatement says so you can see how courts apply that to facts in the cases you're reading. Still, you probably don't need to know most of the little details -- only those that really determine the outcome of the cases you're reading. Of course, it took me at least a semester to figure out how to filter the outcome-determinative stuff from the rest, so that's why everyone tells you to brief every case and try to understand it all in the beginning -- that way you're more likely to get what's important. However, if you find you're missing what's important b/c you don't have time to cover all the material, you can start skimming a little more and see if you can find a better balance between retaining older stuff and breezing by extraneouus detail. And, of course, all of this could be completely wrong. I do go on, don't I?Posted by mowabb at 08:23 AM
September 01, 2005
Objective Justice: Video of Police Looting
http://objectivejustice.blogspot.com/2005/09/video-of-police-looting.html I'm convinced. Now check out this article describing how police are barbecuing sausages in the French Quarter while the average citizen starves. They're also exchanging protection of restauarant-owners for prime rib. Yeah, the cops rock.Posted by mowabb at 10:56 PM
Objective Justice: Looting or Privilege?
http://objectivejustice.blogspot.com/2005/08/looting-or-privilege.html Far be it from me to miss a chance to point out cops behaving badly, but that photo you linked to doesn't really convince me that police are looting. I mean, it looks highly possible, but cops also take evidence from suspects in the course of their duties or investigations. Couldn't the dvds and whatnot in that picture be evidence they have confiscated? I dunno. Probably not, but it's a thought. It seems kind of important to critically examine the media spin on what's happening in New Orleans and elsewhere. It makes a good story if the cops are joining the looters, but that doesn't make it true. It also makes a good story to talk about looting more generally, but that may only make the problem worse or blow it far out of proportion.Posted by mowabb at 10:29 AM