Nobel Peace Prizes

President Obama won a Nobel peace prize today. This makes sense because in his short time as President, he has… given a lot of speeches?

Previous notable Nobel Laureates include President Carter – destroyed the US for four years and hates Israel. Vice President Gore also won one for An Inconvenient Truth which has given him a convenient platform for what an increasing number of people believe to be a fictitious message. Other notable Nobel Laureates include Mikhail Gorbachev (NOT Reagan), Yasser Arafat (terrorist), and Kofi Anan (UN Sec. Gen.).

Curiously, President Reagan never won a Nobel peace prize. Single handedly dismantling the Soviet Union is nice, but there are so many qualified candidates. President Bush (41) also was overlooked. The quickest most successful war in WORLD HISTORY to oust an invading despot from a neighboring country is close, but just not quite there. Nixon? Remember how he opened China to the West? No soup for you.

My question to you, dear reader: what has the President done that Reagan failed to do?

Investments

Since last fall's economic meltdown, I have more than doubled my money during the market's cliff's-of-Dover-steep recovery. Now, I'm thinking about taking a short position for the month of September or maybe even for the rest of the year.

I feel a bit squirrely about betting against our economy/stock market. Like I'm somehow acting unpatriotic or doubting a favored child. Those feelings are probably just silly... right? It is patriotic to "capitalize" on whatever the market does... right?

Summer Vacation is Over

I am back dear readers! I know you missed me... I hope you were able to entertain yourselves sufficiently without compromising your morals. Idle hands and all that...

Today's topic: terrible lawyer jokes. Here's mine:

The IP lawyer turned from his window and disgustingly exclaimed to his client, "Death-ray my butt! This thing doesn't even slow 'em down!"

Not funny? How about this one:

It's the 99% of lawyers that give the rest of us a bad name.

No? Last chance:

What's the difference between a rat and a lawyer? I don't know either. (This one is marginally better when delivered out loud.)

OK, dear reader, obviously I'm depending on your writing skills. Have a go...

Sotomayer

Sonia Sotomayer will be confirmed with a vote of about 75-25. At best/worst, she would be confirmed at 60-40. In other words, Republicans CANNOT stop this Judge from becoming the newest Justice.

Furthermore, the Democrats and media have already cried "foul" at conservative opposition to Judge Sotomayer, calling her opponents sexist and racist. Now, I haven't educated myself on her background at all, but does she even matter? As I said a while ago (see below), assuming she is a flaming liberal -- and she may well not be -- she will be 1 incomming liberal vote replacing 1 outgoing liberal vote on SCOTUS. So who cares?

Summarized: Republicans cannot block her confirmation, conservatives risk losing greater numbers of hispanic and female voters, and Sotomayer on SCOTUS is inconsequential.

My question to you, dear reader: why in the world would Republicans or conservatives mount opposition to Judge Sotomayer's appointment to SCOTUS?

Cheap Labor Law

Why in the world would a firm whittle down its current associate ranks and support staff while still hiring law students as summer clerks/associates at between $2300 and $3000 per week?

Answers:

1. Support staff are not widgets. Lawyers make law firm widgets: billable hours. Law firms make money by selling billable hours. Firing support staff does not reduce widgets.

2. It is a buyer's market for attorneys right now. Why not downsize your $160,000-$250,000 per year seasoned associate ranks and make room for this next year's crop of willing-to-take-less law students? At this unique time -- sure to arrive only once every 15 to 20 years -- midsize and small firms in less desirable markets can snatch up top tier school students who were heretofore out of range. And on the cheap!

See Exhibit #1 to the right of this post.

It ain't pretty or nice, but its how the market is working right now...

Stronger than a Locomotive

If you are looking for a hero, look no further.  Danielle Elliott was car-jacked and kidnapped about a mile from downtown Waco.  The scum-of-the-earth thief took her money and the Baylor senior's class ring during a thirty-minute ordeal.  The terrifying episode concluded when Danielle jumped from her moving vehicle and broke both wrists in the landing.  

The next day -- and this is the really amazing part -- Danielle walked the stage to receive her degree from Baylor University.

Of going forward with her life, she said, "This person had my life in his hands for 30 minutes, and I honestly refuse to let him have any more of it."

My question to you, dear reader:  Why can't I be as tough as Danielle?

PS The theif was arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced to 45 years.

Insignificant Justice; Significant Judge

Justice David Souter's replacement will be a push for the interminable battle between conservatives and liberals on the Supreme Court. In the same way that Roberts, a dependable conservative vote, replaced Rehnquist, a dependable conservative vote, Souter, a dependable liberal vote, will certainly be replaced by another dependable liberal vote. In that sense, whoever President Obama selects as the new Justice will be fairly inconsequential and an insignificant story.

Not so insignificant is the resignation of 10th Circuit Judge Michael McConnell. This significant jurist and Constitutional Law scholar is stepping down to head the Stanford Constitutional Law Center. His professed reason is that his first love is teaching. You also have to wonder if the election of President Obama scuttled McConnell's - a Bush appointee - Supreme Court aspirations.

My question to you, dear reader: Would you give up lifetime appointment as a Circuit Court Judge to take a professorship at one of the top 3 law schools in America?

Parenting, Sex, and the State

I attended a previewing for parents of a sex ed video to be shown in a certain grade level in a particular public elementary school. Alarmingly, in a school with at least 100 (maybe more) children in the subject grade level, I was one of six parents to attend.  Of those six parents, four were husband and wife.  In other words, four children/families were represented.

Now, regardless of whether your values with respect to sex are more traditional or progressive, wouldn't you have expected more parents to care about how sex was being introduced to their children by the STATE for the first time?

Maybe for all of our pomp and waxing poetic about our love and care for the little ones in our country, we really don't give a damn about them...  even those who inhabit our own homes.... 

Hate, Stupidity & Racism

I think robust debate is good for our country, for strengthening our values, and for sharpening the application of our values. In an effort to promote legitimate debate between you and me by avoiding caricatures of each other, I suggest the following:

1. Stop calling me stupid when I disagree with you.
2. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I am hate-filled. Just because I am pro-life and am not pro-gay marriage doesn't mean I hate gays and women. Just because you oppose the war in Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Vietnam or every war doesn't mean you hate soldiers.
3. Stop calling me a racist if I don't buy what our current President is selling.

My question to you: What do I do that caricatures you and hinders our debate?

Don't Tread on Me

I did not attend a Tea Party, but I watched the coverage (in all its forms) with interest. Here are two observations about the coverage:

1. Fox News covered these with interest. Promote is too strong a word to use, but its probably close to the right one.
2. CNN, NBC (in all its forms), CBS and ABC ignored these at best and generally ridiculed (see "tea bagging") what they did cover. I wonder what the coverage would have been like had the primary message been protesting a war.

Why did the media (and many elected Democrats) choose to ridicule these gatherings? It appears to me as though this was a legitimate grass roots movement (via email and blogs) of a significant portion of the populace that was mad as hell at their elected officials (Democrat and Republican) over spending.

I didn't hear our President address these Tea Parties directly. (Maybe he did.) I did hear him talk about how great his tax plan is and we should't worry and we'll have a kinder and gentler April 15 from here on out.

Here's what I think he should have done: He should have held a press conference and had a Bill Clinton moment. "I feel your pain." He should have acknowledged the outrage and asked for patience and trust. Now, maybe that would have only impressed me, but at least he would have been engaging We the People with respect. Is that too much to ask?

My question to you (don't everybody respond at once): Why are some folks ridiculing the Tea Parties rather than debating their message?

Right Wing Extremist

See this report:
http://images.logicsix.com/DHS_RWE.pdf

My question to you: How far to the right do you have to be before the DHS determines you are extreme?

TR

Teddy Roosevelt used to say, "Over, under or through.  NEVER around."

My Question to you:  Knowing me as well as you do, why do I love this statement so much?

Sell By...

In 1947, out of a concern that FDR's four terms provided the Executive branch with too much power, the Legislative branch proposed a limitation on any individual serving as President to 2 terms or 10 years, whichever is longer. This was ratified by the 50 states in 1951. This appears to me to be a wise and textbook use of separate powers to place a check upon one and keep in balance all of the branches of government. Its nice that We the People had a say, too.

Consider this: at least 25 senators have served for 34 or more years. In last year's Senate, two senators had served for 36 years, two had served for 46 years, and one, Robert Byrd, had served for an astounding 50 years.

My question to you: Should we impose term limits on our Senators? If so, how long?



* By the way, Term Limits, by Vince Flynn is outstanding!

Protocol

This last week, our President bowed before the King of Saudi Arabia. This further stirred up the conservative hornet nest. Frankly, it doesn't sit quite right with me either because our President is not merely a man, but a repersentative of these sovereign United States.

Two hundred and some odd years ago, then Ambassador, John Adams, performed the same humble motion before the King of England, against whom he had recently taken up arms. History's verdict is that Adams' conduct enabled (maybe too strong a word) the young nation to survive by doing much to repair the wide rift between the nations. At the least, Adams contributed to postponing the next conflict with England.

My question to you: Is there a difference between a President and an Ambassador bowing before a foreign king?

UPDATE: Apparently the current administration is reading (but curiously not posting on) my blog! Now, no bow ever occurred - regardless of what you think you saw: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0409/White_House_No_bow_to_Saudi.html

Apologies

Our new President is making it a priority to "mend fences" and un-hurt feelings in Europe and the Middle East. Without a doubt, many countries who in the past had been our friends have a less-than-favorable opinion of us as a result of our previous President and his policies.

My question to you: While humbling yourself and apologizing is an effective way to fix problems here in the West, is this an effective and persuasive technique for a Western power to employ in the Middle East?

Chapter, The First

The 18th Century Thomas Paine said that society is mankind's tool for furthering his pleasures.  On the other hand, government is a necessary evil for retarding mankind's evils.  Therefore, common sense dictates that the minimum possible amount of government is the ideal. 

My question to you, oh heretofore silent reader:  Is "small government" a fundamental principle of the founding of this American Experiment?