Letters from the Bostonian Exile

Change: It's a good thing

2006-06-04T17:49:00.000-04:00

For a number of reasons that I may or may not outline later (all of them positive, I assure you), I'm starting anew. I've been away for a while (mostly due to work). The fact that I have been feeling limited by Blogger for the last few months contributed as well. So, we're going to give something new a try:

New template.

New blog server.

New focus.

New partner.

New blog.

I give you Great White Snark.

Over the next month, we'll be trying things out over there. The next thirty days are on Typepad's dime, so we'll see if we can't get back in the swing of things.

And, the lovely Lady E has agreed to join me over there.

Tags: Meta-blogging, Typepad

A Trip Down Memory Lane: Stage 1

2006-05-13T15:55:00.000-04:00

The Lady Exile and I are going home to Detroit in a couple of weeks for some wedding planning obligations over Memorial Day weekend. It's another one of those life-changing points that have been filling my life of late. Thankfully, all of these changes have been much for the better.

As chance would have it, I am starting to get addicted to YouTube, especially since I started noticing the incredible amount of content on there that takes me back to my childhood.

So, over the next couple of weeks, I will have some links up to videos that make me think of life before Boston.

This was a commercial for the Detroit Zoo that aired during the early- and mid-1980s. When I rediscovered it the other night, neither of us had seen this ad in the better part of twenty years.

And yet!

We still knew the commercial almost by heart.

Funny how that works....

Clinton vs. Bush

2006-05-12T21:25:00.000-04:00

If the Middle America Progressive says word one about this poll, he cedes any moral authority he might ever have had calling out conservative who still note the shortcomings of the Clinton presidency.

I wonder if he's willing to abdicate a frequent bargaining chip.

Also, the poll respondents think Bush Clinton is more honest by a five point margin. Apparently, authentic corroboration on tape is only slightly more damning than no authenticated corroboration at all.* Who knew that Americans would trust a confirmed liar over, at worst, an unconfirmed one?

(And just to foreclose the inevitable attempts to distinguish the two: the poll only asked which man the respondent trusted more. It made no attempt to draw out the sources of these decisions or any distance between them on individual trust spectrums.)

I do wonder about the usefulness of this poll. Year five of the Clinton presidency was 1998. The independent counsel investigation was only at its midpoint and he had not yet been impeached. While Clinton's approval rating never dipped below the mid-fifties in the second term, two points are overlooked: he was a peacetime president (or at the least he was not running an unpopular war -- the occasional airstrike doesn't count) and his approval ratings had also previously been in the mid-thirties. Also, Clinton peaked in the mid-seventies. I'm not suggesting that I think it is likely that Bush, too, will enjoy a 20-point bump before the end of his presidency, but I'm also not placing it entirely outside of the realm of possibility.

In other words, the poll is interesting, I suppose, as far as it goes. But call me again in another 8 years. At least then we'll know how the Bush presidency ended and we'll have a little perspective.

*Thanks to Kathy for noting my typo, though it only serves to underscore my conclusion, not undermine it.

Tags: News, Politics, Current Events, Polls, Bush, Clinton, Truthiness

Dispatch from the Battlefield

2006-05-10T21:51:00.000-04:00

This is one of those rare occasions where I will blog about work. For obvious reasons (as well as not-so-obvious ones), the details will be scarce. However, it is not the content of what I encountered today that matters as much as how that information struck me.

In the course of starting an incredibly daunting document review today, I pulled up a copy of the complaint we filed in this products liability case.

(For those who are curious, a complaint is the document that essentially starts a lawsuit and is the first one you file in court. All it really does is name the plaintiff and defendant(s) and put everyone on notice about what kind of suit you are filing. That's it. No evidence. No offer of proof. All you have to do is tell who you are suing that you are suing them and what the claim is. If you want to wait until a little later to tell them "why" you are suing them (and flesh out the facts of your case more), go for it. At least that's how it works in most states and in the federal system.)

Usually, the second paragraph of your complaint describes your defendant. Today, I encountered the following (ID information removed for privacy purposes):

[X Corporation] is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at [Address], Detroit, Michigan.

I stopped short because, well, let's just say I had heard of this company. And that I had seen their headquarters, what with growing up near there.

Wouldn't it be nice if I could combine business with a trip home to see the folks?

Busy

2006-05-06T17:08:00.000-04:00

Holy Mother of God. Week one of work.

Suddenly, I'm the proud owner of about a dozen casefiles. Thankfully, only half of them have court dates scheduled for the next month. This means I will actually have some days in the office to get some real work done.

Amazingly, in the span of a week, going to court has gone from a novel and flawless experience to a significant chunk out of an otherwise busy day.

But then, I can see how having half of a day out of the office every now and then can be good, too.

Now, it's the weekend and, really, the last thing I want to do at home in my free time is to look at a computer screen. Off to read this. And, if I get tired of that, perhaps this new arrival instead.

Back when I can come up for air.

Tags: Life, Work, Meta-blogging

Grits and Greens at the Holidays

2006-04-26T22:29:00.000-04:00

No, I'm not kidding.

Dixie Royal
You are 81% true Southern!

You are pure belle or gentleman! You know your Jones Soda, Nehi and RC colas, your Moon Pies and sweet potato pie; you'd absolutely die without air conditioners in the summer, and you've seen Steel Magnolias and Fried Green Tomatoes (or read the book!). Your grandmother lives in an antebellum home and has a cook who makes the best fried chicken and asparagus casserole and summer squash and everything else in the world. And you know the taste of honeysuckle and the feel of grass between your toes. You are blessed.

My test tracked 1 variable How you compared to other people your age and gender:

You scored higher than 55% on Southerliness

Link: The Southern-ness Test written by gwennykate on Ok Cupid, home of the 32-Type Dating Test

[via Cardinal Martini]

Rules for Blogging

2006-04-26T11:18:00.000-04:00

Don Surber suggests some rules for blogging:

The first rule is The Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Malkin learned this in an unhappy way.

The second rule is from my sisters: Don’t dish it out what you cannot take. Call someone a moonbat, expect to be called a wingnut. Bloggers set the tone for their blogs. Opinions are discounted greatly by the author’s use of foul language, personal attacks and general meanness.

Third rule: Thou shall not steal. That means link those whose material you are citing. Take no more than one third without permission.

Fourth rule is from Jim Snyder, an old sportswriter and city editor, who said never write about a person what you would not say to his face. He once challenged the mayor of Parkersburg to a duel of cream pies. Mayor Alvin K. Smith declined. Both are dead. Both were characters. Both hated one another but never wrote anything about the other that they would not say to their faces.

Fifth rule: Have fun. Enjoy what you are doing. Blogging is a hobby first, last and always. A few people are millionaires off this. Good for them. But if they are not enjoying their posting, why are they doing this?

Other than that, follow the rules of journalism, realizing that the only difference is blogs are opinions, not news stories. The ABCs of journalism are accuracy, brevity and clarity. Cite sources. Disclose conflicts of interest. Don't blog to appease advertisers.

There is more, so read the whole thing. He thinks he may be making a fool of himself in suggesting these rules; if he wants to recruit "An Army of Fools," I'll take my place on the front line.

Tags: Metablogging

Kerry Lied, Jefferson Cried

2006-04-26T07:06:00.000-04:00

So says Cardinal Martini of my junior senator. You know, the one of the two I actually like better.

Then again, it's not hard to beat Ted Kennedy in that race.

God help the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

On "Net Neutrality": Slow Down

2006-04-26T00:12:00.000-04:00

It seems that the blogs are abuzz over the "Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006" decrying it as "downright frightening," among other things. The Middle America Progressive calls it "yet another reason for real conservative to stand up and be counted as opposed to George Bush and the budding American Theocracy that the GOP is trying to create." As you know, I respond positively to having both my ideology and my patriotism called out.

It's almost as well as I respond to doomsday claims made by those who I would be willing to bet have not even seen a link to the proposed legislation, let alone skimmed the document itself.

Don't bother looking at Thomas. It's not there: the bill has not been reported out of committee and is apparently not yet linked to any bill previously referred to the Energy and Commerce Committee. But, it is scheduled for markup tomorrow (Wednesday).

I contacted a college buddy who works on Capitol Hill to see if I could get a copy, but he said that is would be available once it was reported out. Of course, he doesn't work on telecom issues, so he might not have had the most complete information on this bill; he was aware of the bill, but did not have ready access to it.

After a rather involved search, I did find what may be committee print for tomorrow's hearing, but I can't be certain that it is the most recent document. However, what I also found was that a lot of this furor was derived from the statements (without much variation) of a single consumer advocate who does work on such matters. I won't be so crass as to call him a special interest lobbyist, except for how that's what he is, isn't he, even if he may be wearing a hat some presumptively deem white?

No, I'd rather just challenge you, dear reader, to find the bill, and put it together for yourself if you are so upset about this. Find the thoughts of someone who opposes the bill that do not (intentionally or otherwise) state verbatim the statement linked above. Find the thoughts of someone (pro or con) who actually notes the FCC adjudication mechanism and the $500,000 penalties for each instance of violating Commission's policies protecting consumer choice in broadband service.

Think about it. If Verizon were to block even 1,000 people from accessing Instapundit or DailyKos, it could face half a billion dollars in penalties.

Am I saying I'm for this bill? No. I'm too tired (and still focused on student speech law) to form an opinion on it.

I'm not about to make a decision on the merits of the bill (with due respect to my friend) based upon the say-so of a Hill staffer who works in other areas and an opposition whose forward guard redlined my B.S. detector within about 30 seconds of reaching their web site.

In short: if you want to call your member of Congress, fine. But if you are going to tell him or her that the sky Net is falling, you might want to make sure that you haven't been duped by a lobbying group that, based on its niche, has its best fundraising opportunity in months.

And if you are convinced that it all fits: explain it to me. I'm clearly missing something here if that's the case.

Tags: COPE, Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006, Congress, Politics, News, Current Events

Post on "Horrifying" Decision to Follow

2006-04-22T11:49:00.000-04:00

I did not quite finish my post on the Ninth Circuit's Harper decision yesterday, since the opinions total nearly ninety pages. Also, my new motherboard arrived yesterday, so I spent much of the evening bringing my primary computer back to life. Look for that post later today Monday.

In the meantime, I will take this rare occasion to say that I think Libby's comment is spot-on: this is a horrifying decision, indeed. It becomes more so when you see how Judge Reinhardt gets from point A to point B.

UPDATE: Busier weekend than I expected. Look for it Monday.

Tags: Metablogging, Law, Reinhardt, Ninth Circuit

Ted Kennedy Does Late Night

2006-04-21T10:57:00.000-04:00

Ted Kennedy was on the Daily Show last night, raising my blood pressure just before bed. Anyway, he's running for re-election. Again. And he has a new book. Fine. If I could get my hands on a full transcript of the interview, it might make for classic fisking fodder, but there were a couple of choice statements that stood out last night.

At one point, Kennedy said that his vote against the Iraq War was the "most important" of his Senate career. He seemed to have forgotten a few other votes:
- The Civil Rights Act of 1964
- The Voting Rights Act of 1965
- The Americans with Disabilities Act
- The Department of Housing and Urban Development Act
- The Higher Education Act of 1965, which developed federal college financial aid.
- You know, all of those major votes that Kennedy built his senate career on? Even Jon Stewart looked like he wanted to call the liberal lion out.

He noted that the "Democrats got us out of Vietnam." Ahem, the Democrats got us pretty well entrenched in Vietnam, including a Democrat who Teddy knew quite well. I'm not saying that the Republicans had their hands clean by any stretch, but good God -- he had a ringside seat on this one!

He also noted that there was too much money in American politics. Of course, he's sitting on $8.5 million dollars to run unopposed in a state that has not sent a Republican to Congress in, what, over 20 years? He's not noting a problem; he's a part of the problem.

Does he listen to himself anymore, really? I have no delusions about the GOP picking up his seat anytime soon, but can we just put him out to pasture already?

And, it's sad, actually. I heard another interview with him yesterday on NPR's "Fresh Air". When asked about how one would fund all of the proposals in his new book, he made a point about the GI Bill: a government study some years ago found that for every dollar spent on the program, the government got back seven. A 600% return on investment gets anyone's attention.

Kennedy, for the first time since he's been my senator, sounded eminently reasonable.

I'm not saying that his data marks the end of the inquiry -- we would obviously take a closer look at the numbers -- but it's a better starting point than we usually have when it comes to policy discussion about social issues. Unfortunately, though, the junior Democratic members of Congress don't have the institutional knowledge on hand to make those arguments, and the senior ones like Kennedy usually opt against it in favor of some nonsense that appeals to the progressive interest group of the week.

And, as a result, I endeavor not to burst any blood vessels when he is on the television.

Tags: Ted Kennedy, The Daily Show, Massachusetts, Boston, News, Politics, Democrat, Books, Television

Programming Note

2006-04-21T09:36:00.000-04:00

Look for posts throughout the workday.

First, there should be a piece on this story. The Ninth Circuit decided yesterday that a high school student essentially did not have a First Amendment right to wear a t-shirt that read "HOMOSEXUALITY IS SHAMEFUL" at school. Looks like a classic Reinhardt / Kozinski battle of the opinions.

Second, Ted Kennedy was on "The Daily Show" last night. I didn't quite have a stroke while watching it, but things were dicey for a while.

Third, I started a long-ish post yesterday on the Duke rape case. I might finish today, unless I run out of time or something huge breaks in the case that renders the whole thing moot.

Stay tuned.

UPDATE (2:00 p.m.): Speaking of apoplexy, I am working my way through Judge Reinhardt's majority opinion in the speech case above. I usually strenuously disagree with his reasoning, and this opinion is developing no differently.

Tags: Metablogging, Law, Current Events, Ted Kennedy, Duke

It's About Damn Time: McClellan Resigns

2006-04-19T10:18:00.000-04:00

WaPo reports that Scott McClellan has resigned.

With his frequent deer-in-the-headlights facial expression, he was the P.R. point man for an administration that has been an abysmal failure at forcefully and coherently articulating policies over the last three years.

I have never been a fan of Scott McClellan, and have hoped for a new press secretary for some time, say, one who doesn't just sit there and take it from the press corps every day: one speaking on the offensive, not the defensive.

I can only hope his replacement will be an improvement.

MORE: His Honor the Mayor: He reminded me of some lost kid on a high school forensics team who has just been given the assignment to write an impromptu speech in favor of serving bald eagle meat in school lunches.

A brilliant mental image provided by someone who I trust once experienced such a thing.

Tags: News, Politics, Bush, McClellan, Current Events

Manchester Airport to Change Name

2006-04-19T09:31:00.000-04:00

In as little as 30 days, the airport in Manchester, New Hampshire, will change its name to Manchester-Boston Regional Airport.

The new name, which could go up in as little as 30 days, is hoped to boost business at the airport, which is predicting its first passenger decline in five years.

Dillon presented a research study saying that only 3 percent of travelers surveyed out west know where Manchester is, while 93 percent know where Boston is.

"This is an issue for the other side of the country," Dillon said.

Logan can sometimes be reached in an hour's drive from Manchester, if weather and traffic conditions are favorable.

(emphasis mine) Read: During the summer, on an off-weekend for tourists, maybe. But, it could happen.

And the 50 bucks you save on the airfare would be totally worth it. [/sarcasm]

Tags: Boston, Boston Globe, Airport, News, Manchester, New England

TomKitten? Are you serious?

2006-04-19T09:15:00.000-04:00

That's what CNN dubbed Tom Cruise's new arrival on American Morning today. Can we put him back on the shelf now?

Oh, and Katie Holmes was there, too, what with actually giving birth and all.

Tags: Cruise, Holmes, TomKat, Celebrities, Pop Culture, Actors

What is the matter with people???

2006-04-18T16:23:00.000-04:00

Yesterday, I was taking the train home from work. Because it was Patriots Day, many of the businesses downtown were closed, but the crowding on the train was far above that of a typical afternoon rush as runners and spectators from the Boston Marathon made their way back to homes and hotels.

Some of these runners, clad in foil ponchos to preserve body heat, looked like they were about to die, while others looked remarkably well for having run farther in a couple of hours than I have in any given year.

A few of these runners were on my train and held onto the handrails to remain standing. Meanwhile, students and young professionals throughout the car took no notice and none offered a seat to the four runners standing within an arms length from me.

WTF?

It's bad enough that every day, seats are denied to the elderly, the expecting, and the disabled. But the one day out of the year when 20,000 people visit your city for the privilege of running 26.2 miles, do you think you could fold over that vacuous "Us Magazine" you're reading, use your free hand to hold the handrail, and give up your seat?

Thank you.

Tags: Boston, MBTA, the T, commuting, Marathon

Making Mischief Elsewhere

2006-04-18T11:34:00.000-04:00

I was going to blog here this morning, but I got caught up in an exceptional conversation over at The Impolitic. The conversation -- about "liberal libertarians" and defining the free market -- was spurred by this post by thehim post at Reload.

Libby thinks so; I don't. What else is new? [ETA: When that is the summary, does it ever really matter what the question is?]

Check it out and join the conversation.

UPDATED TO ADD: We have called a cease-fire for the present time. Seriously, though, go read it. The debate today exemplifies why, despite our differences, Libby is one of my favorite people in the Blogosphere.

Tags: Politics, Liberals, Progressive, Libertarian, Economics, Free Market, Capitalism

A little shameless self-promotion

2006-04-17T12:48:00.000-04:00

I have a new job!

This is the exciting news I alluded to on Friday. Two weeks from today, I will be joining a Boston litigation firm as an associate. The firm specializes in products liability and medical malpractice, the latter of which I find particularly interesting. I am very excited because 1) the job is permanent, and 2) it sounds like I will be getting into court sooner rather than later.

How I landed the job is a bit of a story unto itself and requires a bit of background. This story is about two law firms and three brothers, who I will call "One," "Two," and "Three," ordered by age from eldest to youngest. (Anonymity is necessary for the moment, so please bear with me.) One owns a firm where I formerly worked. Two is a partner in the new firm. Three is a member of the firm where I formerly worked.

Last Thursday, I went to a pub downtown for a bon voyage party for a former co-worker who is moving to Washington. About 20 minutes into the party, Three showed up to make an appearance (and bought a round for the party). We exchanged pleasantries, seeing one another for the first time in about a year. I casually mentioned that I had met Two a few weeks prior when I interviewed at the new firm. (Despite being near the end of the interview process, I had heard nothing either way and believed that the position had gone to someone else.) Three asked why I didn't call him, because he and Two are very close and talk several times a day. (It had never occurred to me to call Three because most of my work in the old firm had been for other attorneys.) Three said that he thought the position was still open and excused himself to CALL HIS BROTHER. I was a little stunned at that moment about how quickly things were suddenly moving.

Three returned about five minutes later and said that he had left a voicemail for his brother and that I should call him the next day: a decision would be waiting.

At about noon the next day, I received a phone call from the Hiring Partner at Two's firm, offering me the job. I. Was. Stunned. Good salary (not six digits as Libby guessed, but certainly enough to cover bills, beer, and other essentials, putting to an end my days of living like a grad student :) ), good benefits package. It was all moving so quickly, but I was flying. I stammered a request to think about it over the weekend, promising to call Monday. The Hiring Partner agreed.

I was almost immediately certain that I would take the job, but I did want to ensure that everything was covered on my end and that I had not forgotten any details. I only had a few minor questions today when we spoke and I accepted the offer about an hour ago.

So, I made it. After months of searching for my first job while strapped to an emotional roller coaster, I'm finally setting out to do what I want to do. It's been one hell of a ride, and I could not have done it (not with my sanity intact, anyway) without Lady E, who has been flying high with me all weekend.

Also, thank you to all of you who have offered words of encouragement over the last year or so. In the last year, I've learned a lot about perseverance, tenacity, humility, self-assurance and self-doubt, about myself. . . . I could continue the list, but I'm sure I would never fully complete it. All the same, whatever your role, thanks for joining me on that journey. I can't wait to start this next one.

And to think that I almost didn't want to go to the bar on Thursday. I won't fall into that trap again. Heh...

Very Exciting Day!

2006-04-14T14:56:00.000-04:00

More later.

UPDATE: Sorry to hold you all in suspense, but it will be well worth it. Look for an official announcement on this exciting development Monday.

Did Comedy Central Censor "South Park"?

2006-04-13T12:25:00.000-04:00

Volokh has a great discussion about whether Comedy Central really did censor a scene from last night's South Park depicting the prophet Muhammad.

As of now, there has been no statement from Comedy Central or "South Park" creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone. I have to admit, I've been trying to figure this one out since last night.

[via The World According to Nick]

UPDATE: It seems that we have verification that Comedy Central did censor the episode, via National Review of all places.

UPDATE II: The Associated Press has more, noting the part of the episode that led me to think that this might have been an actual swipe at Comedy Central:

Banned by Comedy Central from showing an image of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, the creators of "South Park" skewered their own network for hypocrisy in the cartoon's most recent episode.

The comedy _ in an episode aired during Holy Week for Christians _ instead featured an image of Jesus Christ defecating on President Bush and the American flag.

Tags: South Park, Television, Entertainment, Terrorists

Straight Talk on McCain

2006-04-13T11:43:00.000-04:00

Jacob Weisberg at Slate has a brilliant column on John McCain's recent overtures to the right-wing of the Republican party.

"Brilliant", that is, if only because it presents coherently some thoughts that have been bouncing around in my head for a while.

Most liberal commentators take McCain's love fest with the neo-Calvinists at face value, arguing that he's finally revealing his true colors. A few months ago, The Nation ran a cover story titled "The Real McCain," which contended that the Arizona senator is a dyed-in-the-wool conservative. To the American Prospect, McCain is Barry Goldwater's true heir. A couple of weeks ago in the New York Times, Paul Krugman wrote, "The bottom line is that Mr. McCain isn't a moderate; he's a man of the hard right."

But the literal-minded left has McCain all wrong. He's trying to win over enough of his party's conservative base to win, for sure. But this is a stratagem—the only one, in fact, that gives him a shot at surviving a Republican presidential primary. Discount his repositioning a bit, and McCain looks like the same unconventional character who emerged during the Clinton years: a social progressive, a fiscal conservative, and a military hawk. Should he triumph in the primaries, we can expect this more appealing John McCain to come roaring back.

Read it all.

Tags: Politics, Republicans, GOP, McCain, Current Events

Opening Day

2006-04-11T11:51:00.000-04:00

Spring has finally arrived in Boston, as the warm weather and the Red Sox returned on the same day. My head cold is all but gone, and my favorite time of the year has begun. I've been wicked busy of late, but my view from the 29th floor these days makes it bearable.

Yes, today is opening day at Fenway Park as the Sox host the Blue Jays. Off to a 5-1 start, this is the best start they have had in years. The excitement was palpable this morning as I left for work and there was already a line of cars on Boylston Street entering the Fenway -- pre-game traffic for an opener that wasn't due to start for another six hours.

I wonder if I will be able to score some tickets before the end of the season. This is my third full season in this town, and I am still yet to attend a game. Given how close to the park I now live, there is really no excuse.

[/ramble]

Tags: Boston, Red Sox, Sports, Baseball, Fenway

Libby: Bush OK'ed Leak

2006-04-06T12:46:00.000-04:00

The Boston Globe is reporting that Scooter Libby testified that his leak of sensitive information was authorized by President Bush.

When I first saw the headline, I thought that this was it: game, set, match, and the Dems finally just might have their impeachable offense. And then I saw this buried in the last paragraph of the piece:

"Defendant testified that the circumstances of his conversation with reporter Miller -- getting approval from the president through the vice president to discuss material that would be classified but for that approval -- were unique in his recollection," the papers added.

[Emphasis mine] This muddies the waters, no doubt. Politically damaging? Yes, and in all likelihood, to a breathtaking degree. A crime? I'm still too medicated to get into that, but I doubt I'd make much headway even with a fully clear head.

About all I'll venture at this point is that no one -- not a soul -- will be happy with the final outcome of this revelation. It sort of reaffirms my decision of a while back.

MORE: Then again, this could be much ado about nothing (since there is no indication that the leak of Plame's identity was authorized) and I could have been fooled by the huge headline at boston.com. If so, blame the meds.

Tags: New, Current Events, Politics, Law, Scooter Libby, Bush, Plame

"South Park" Wins a Peabody

2006-04-06T10:59:00.000-04:00

"South Park" has won a Peabody Award for excellence in broadcasting for its irreverent satire:

"South Park" was praised as a show that "pushes all the buttons, turns up the heat and shatters every taboo," Peabody Awards Director Horace Newcomb said. "Through that process of offending it reminds us of the need for being tolerant."

Willing to acknowledge that the show is more than just "poorly drawn animated brats making poop jokes," Kevin?

Peabody Count

John Stewart: 2

Stephen Colbert: 1

Matt Stone and Trey Parker: 1

Bill O'Reilly: Still Zero

Tags: Peabody, Awards, News, Current Events, South Park, Entertainment, Television

Reconsidering Reincarnation...

2006-04-06T09:06:00.000-04:00

and then reconsidering yet again when I saw the results of this quiz. Heh.

Which Historical Lunatic Are You?
From the fecund loins of Rum and Monkey.

You are Gaius Caesar Germanicus - better known as Caligula!

Third Emperor of Rome and ruler of one of the most powerful empires of all time, your common name means "little boots". Although you only reigned for four years, brief even by Roman standards, you still managed to garner a reputation as a cruel, extravagant and downright insane despot. Your father died in suspicious circumstances, you were not the intended heir, and one of your first acts as Emperor was to force the suicide of your father-in-law. Your sister Drusilla died that same year; faced with allegations that your relationship with her had been incestuous, you responded, bafflingly, by declaring her a god.

You revived a number of unpopular traditions, including auctions of properties left over from public shows. When a senator fell asleep at one such auction, you took each of his nods as bids, selling him 13 gladiators for a vast sum. You attempted to have your horse, Incitatus, made into a consul and hence one of the most powerful figures in Rome. It was granted a marble stable with jewels and a staff of servants. At one point you forced your comrade Macro to kill himself - in much the same vein as your father-in-law - accusing him of being his wife's pimp. You, of course, were having an affair with said wife at the time.

Things went from bad to worse. When supplies of condemned men ran short in the circus, you had innocent spectators dragged into the arena with the lions to fill their place. You claimed mastery of the sea by walking across a three-mile bridge of boats in the Bay of Naples; kissed the necks of your lovers, whispering sweet nothings like "This lovely neck will be chopped as soon as I say so,"; dallied with your sister's lover and made her pull her unborn child out of her womb prematurely. Towards the end of your reign, you had a golden statue of yourself made and dressed each day in the same clothes you yourself wore. When you eventually died, the terrified people of Rome refused to believe that such a cruel reign could ever end, and believed you to be alive for years afterwards.

[via Cardinal Martini]

In other news, look for regular posting to resume later today or tomorrow as I (finally) start to bounce back.

Programming Note

2006-04-04T08:09:00.000-04:00

Blogging has been light, and will likely continue to be light, as I fight off a spring weather-induced cold.

Back later.

SJC: Mass. can bar out of state gays and lesbans from marrying

2006-03-30T11:20:00.000-05:00

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled today that the Commonwealth could bar gay and lesbian couples from other states from marrying here.

I have not yet seen the opinion, but I will have more on this later.

Tags: News, Current Events, Boston, Massachusetts, LGBT, Law, Politics, Boston Globe

Insufferable?

2006-03-30T11:05:00.000-05:00

Don Surber thinks we are. I'm not sure if I should be offended - or merely amused at his Fenway envy - so I'll let it slide. (Oops! There I go being insufferable, I suppose.)

I won't quibble too much with his regular season prediction for the AL East, though; if his hatred of the Sox will get us to the playoffs, I'll take it.

Tags: Baseball, Sports, Boston Red Sox

Summary Disposition

2006-03-30T09:02:00.000-05:00

Environmental Republican on Barry Bonds, steroids, and sensationalism in McPaper:

Give me a friggin' break. The reason that people don't want Bonds to surpass Ruth or Aaaron is simple--he cheated. There's no racial angle here, just the angle of a player who has treated fans and fellow players alike like garbage. He has shown no respect for the game. It's no different than Mark McGwire's tainted HR season or Ken Caminitti's MVP year. In my mind, they cheated and those records should be erased.

Get off the racial angle and focus on the real issue; a stronger steroid policy would instill the respect and trust back the game that was lost when these idiots injected an enhancement substance into their bodies.

Read it all.

Tags: Baseball, Steroids, Barry Bonds, USA Today, Current Events, Sports

Fresh Fodder for the Cannon

2006-03-29T20:04:00.000-05:00

Just when I start to think I am (temporarily) running out of bogging ideas, something like this comes along.

The Alliance for Justice has started a blog: Full Court Press. In the usual arrogant AFJ fashion, the blog purports to "keep you up-to-date about the rapidly increasing number of judicial opinions that unjustifiably restrict rights, undermine legal protections, and adversely affect real people."

Notice how they make no promise to justify their preferred (and ultimately losing) outcomes, demonstrating why they should have prevailed? That's because, as often as not if the first few posts are indicative, this is really more about the evils of Republican-appointed judges (except, of course, those named Souter, Stevens, and sometimes Kennedy) than about why their legal arguments should have won.

I fully expect the Full Court Press to supply me with blogging material for some time to come.

Tags: Politics, Law, Current Events, Alliance for Justice

Criminal Bumper Stickers

2006-03-29T15:01:00.000-05:00

Stone Soup Musings points us to this case about a Georgia woman who received a $100 ticket for having a "lewd decal" on her car.

Apparently, the cop thought the lewd decal law applied to a bumper sticker that read, "I'm tired of all the BUSHIT."

Apparently, the same cop also missed the memo that the lewd decal law had been held unconstitutional fifteen years ago.

I would chalk this up to the absurd if the implications weren't so troubling. I don't buy the argument that this is an extended action of the Bush administration, and to my mind that makes matters worse, in a way. Having seen firsthand how individual crooked police officers can use simple traffic tickets to create trouble for citizens (and increase the city's revenues), I have to think that this sort of development is worse because it is decentralized, and thus trends are nearly impossible to track.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for the way the message was conveyed. The use of expletives is far from clever, and doesn't offer much insight into the issues. It's not an argument or an explanation, but a mere expression of frustration: one that is only a notch or two above a primal scream.

Nevertheless, it's protected. An expression of frustration with the government that plays on a vulgar word for an excretory function is no less political than the Declaration of Independence itself. Beyond that, we engage in qualitative stratification of speech at our liberties' peril, if not at our own.

Linked to Don Surber.

Tags: News, Law, Civil Liberties, Georgia

Rock Royalty (Refreshingly) Plays the Commoner

2006-03-29T09:52:00.000-05:00

Alexa Ray Joel, the daughter of Billy Joel, debuted Monday at Harper's Ferry, a small Boston-area venue. She did it with neither fanfare nor entourage.

And, the Globe thinks she did pretty well.

I wonder how many eardrums would be intact today if Kelly Osbourne and others at her level would have followed a similar humble path.

Tags: Music, Billy Joel, Alexa Ray Joel, Boston, Boston Globe

You can stay at the J-A-I-L

2006-03-28T20:16:00.000-05:00

Victor Willis, the policeman from the Village People, is facing up to five years in prison. After agreeing to a plea deal last year on weapon and drug charges that would have capped his jail time at sixteen months, he bolted.

Well done.

Tags: Village People, Law, Crime

Cafe Owners of the World, Unite!

2006-03-28T10:23:00.000-05:00

Scot Lehigh of the Boston Globe pens a spot-on column today about Doting Indulgent Modern Parents (DIMPIES) that is well worth reading in full:

Our fortunes took an even starker turn a few days later when we stopped at a trendy Charlestown bakery, there to encounter a DIMPIE couple sipping coffee while their daughter played at decibel levels that should carry an OSHA warning. For the first few minutes of our (abbreviated) stay, the little terror staged a loud animal-kingdom Armageddon with her plastic menagerie. That concluded, she proceeded to run a 10K around the table.

Now, so cowed am I by the objections that meet my intermittent efforts to promote better public behavior that I've grown hesitant to urge DIMPIES to discipline their children. Indeed, I've come to understand that the very term fairly reeks of neocolonial parental imperialism.

I can't tell you how many times I have gone into a coffee shop on a Saturday morning, only to have the tranquility shattered by the spawn of a discipline-averse parent. Though I am not a parent (and will not be for another few years, at least), I do acknowledge that raising children is difficult work and that parents need an occasional escape, too. Most of them truly deserve it. I'm not about to begrudge someone a leisurely cup of coffee on a Saturday morning, after all. I do draw the line though when the parent's temporary abdication of responsibility intrudes on my own little escape from the mundane. God knows that the three-year-old Exile would never have gotten away with running around a coffee shop for more than one and a half seconds without swift and serious consequences.

Really, though, you do see this sort of thing everywhere: cafes, grocery stores, airplanes, and busses. And it is unreasonable to expect children, as the colonial Americans did, to act as miniature adults. Indeed, children will be children.

Parents - some of them, anyway - just need to step up and be parents.

MORE: It occurs to me that an experience from last night is relevant here, if indirectly. The Lady Exile and I were at Om in Cambridge for a drink after work. Directly across from us was a family of four: parents and two small children, the older no older than the age of five. As is her usual practice, Lady E complimented the parents on how well-behaved their children were. They looked very surprised to hear this, since I imagine it doesn't happen often. Were the kids angels? Not exactly. They weren't perfectly still, nor were they perfectly quiet. But, on the whole, they didn't disrupt anyone in the surrounding area. If only they were all taught to act this way in public . . .

Linked to Don Surber.

Tags: Society, culture, parenting, Boston Globe, Scot Lehigh

Card Resigns

2006-03-28T08:07:00.000-05:00

CNN is reporting that White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card has resigned. More later.

New Mass. Lottery Game to Offer Sox Season Tix

2006-03-27T16:44:00.000-05:00

I wonder how many people would rather have the Red Sox season tickets for life than the $1,000,000 grand prize.

Tags: Red Sox, Boston, Massachusetts

Today's sign of the Apocalypse

2006-03-27T13:23:00.000-05:00

A statute of a "nude Britney Spears giving birth."

The clay sculpture features a nude Britney Spears on a bearskin rug while giving birth to her firstborn because, according to Edwards, pop-star Britney Spears is the "ideal model for Pro-Life."

This is particularly ironic since Britney could just as easily be an ideal model for, as the Lady Exile might say, an extremely late-term abortion (say, twenty years or so post partum should do the trick).

[via: The Llama Butchers]

More: phin's blog has similar thoughts, and a link to the sculpture.

Tags: Britney Spears, Celebrities, Morons

RINO Sightings Monday

2006-03-27T12:00:00.000-05:00

This week's RINO Sightings Carnival is up at Coldheartedtruth. Go take a look.

Tags: Raging RINOs, Carnival

Quaid Sues "Brokeback" Producers

2006-03-27T10:41:00.000-05:00

Does anyone else find it surprising that Randy Quaid commands a seven-figure fee and a cut of the gross receipts when he does a movie? Apparently, that's one of the grounds for his $10 million fraud claim against the producers of the multiple Oscar winner, Brokeback Mountain.

Tags: Randy Quaid, Brokeback Mountain, Lawsuit

Behold, the power of Google!

2006-03-23T11:38:00.000-05:00

The hit counter seems to be getting a workout today, as The Exile surpasses its daily average prior to 11:00 a.m.

Apparently, my prior post on the whole South Park/Scientology imbroglio makes the first page of a lot of searchs for the terms "south park," "chef," and "Scientology". Cool.

In other news, I have been wicked busy this week. It started to slow a bit, so look for more posting soon.

Programming Note

2006-03-20T14:52:00.000-05:00

Expect light posting until at least tomorrow. My best friend has been in town since early Saturday morning, having just returned to his home port of Norfolk, Virginia after six months underway on an Aegis-equipped U.S. Navy destroyer. Prior to this visit, I had last seen him two years ago. Suffice to say, we've had a lot of catching up to do.

If you are so inclined, lift a glass in appreciation to him and his shipmates at the next opportunity. They dealt with some interesting situations while they were far from home for so long, including this one.

It's about time...

2006-03-17T16:33:00.000-05:00

AP: Boston monsignor, six priests defrocked:

A former vice chancellor of the Boston Archdiocese and six other priests accused of molesting children have been defrocked by the Vatican, church officials announced Friday.

In a statement, Boston Archbishop Sean O'Malley expressed his "deepest sorrow for the grievous harm" done by Monsignor Frederick Ryan and the other Boston priests.
* * *

Ryan was one of the highest-ranking church officials to be accused of child molestation since the Boston sex scandal broke in 2002. He resigned that year after being accused of abusing two boys in the 1970s and '80s at a Boston high school.

Looks like ~~God's Rottweiler~~ His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI is starting to move on this issue. Look for more defrockings to come.

More: The Boston Globe reports that a deacon has been removed as well.

Summary Disposition

2006-03-17T12:06:00.000-05:00

Don Surber reacts to the Clooney/HuffPo spat:

All posts on this blog are written by me. Not by my publicist. Not by Huffington Post's staff. Not taken from interviews of me or speeches I have given to the Motion Pictures Arts Academy. All typos are mine and will not be blamed on some poor schmuck who took down my dictation.

Couldn't have summed it up better myself.

Moussaoui Case: It Only Gets Uglier

2006-03-17T11:44:00.000-05:00

As if this case wasn't shoddy enough:

Lawyers for two airlines being sued by 9/11 victims prompted a federal attorney to coach witnesses in the Zacarias Moussaoui death penalty trial so the government's case against the al-Qaida conspirator would not undercut their defense, victims' lawyers allege.

One of the airline lawyers forwarded a transcript from the first day of the Moussaoui trial to Carla J. Martin, a Transportation Security Administration lawyer, the victims' lawyers, Robert Clifford and Gregory Joseph, claim.

* * *

Because that government position could have "devastating" impact on the airlines' defense in the civil suit, American Airlines' lawyer forwarded the transcript to a United Air Lines lawyer who forwarded it to Martin, Clifford and Joseph wrote. As proof, they cited March 7 e-mails that they provided to Hellerstein but which were not immediately available here.

If these allegations are true (and it is not yet entirely clear that they are), then look for ~~heads~~ law licenses to roll.

While I'm not exactly crying over the prospect of the so-called "20th hijacker" not facing the death penalty, the malfeasance that created this sequence of events is the sort of thing that galls me to no end, that offends me on behalf of my whole profession.

Hat tip: Below the Beltway

Programming Note

2006-03-16T16:13:00.000-05:00

Posting unlikely today. My day job was far less cooperative than usual today and, after I leave here, I will be tied up until about 10:00 this evening.

At which time I will go home and crash.

The Carnival of the Vanities

2006-03-15T16:04:00.000-05:00

is up at Forward Biased. Lot's of rich bloggy goodness, as the kids say.

A Little Lenten Fun

2006-03-15T14:50:00.000-05:00

No, really...

For Catholics, Lent - the six weeks or so leading up to Easter Sunday - is a time of atonement and self-denial. One often hears of "giving something" up for the duration of Lent. Additionally, all Catholic adults are expected to abstain from eating meat on Fridays during Lent. (I'm usually so busy that I forget it's Friday until after I have eaten, but that's another point entirely.) In any case, this is all background that becomes important later.

The Lady Exile is vacationing in Key West this week with her parents. She has had a hellacious work schedule lately, and her vacation is well-deserved. However, while she is enjoying temperatures in the 80s, I am lucky to see them in the 40s as intermittent snow flurries flutter over Boston today. Not that I'm jealous...

This morning, I saw this story come over the AP wire. St. Patrick's day is nearly always during Lent and happens to fall on Friday every few years. Accordingly, if an observant Catholic is going to celebrate the day with corned beef and cabbage, his local bishop needs to give a dispensation. This is usually done without question in dioceses with large Irish populations.

The Archbishop of Boston, Sean Patrick O'Malley, granted a dispensation.

The Archbishop of Miami, whose See includes Key West, did not grant one, leaving the decision instead to local parishes.

Since The Lady's family is very strictly Irish Catholic, I was eager to share the news that I could celebrate the Feast of St. Patrick in the usual way (and to warn them off of their own sinful activities).

So, I dialed Lady E's cell phone to share my joy at being able to enjoy some fine corned beef this Friday.

As the Lady took a good ribbing, her mother noted that the bishops in their home state had all issued dispensations.

I reminded them that those bishops had no jurisdiction over Key West.

The Lady's father then asked how it was that I wondered at people wanting to kill all the lawyers. I couldn't help but laugh all that much harder.

As I hung up, I looked at the flurries outside and reality returned.

Summary Disposition

2006-03-14T21:41:00.000-05:00

Midamerica Progressive: RIP The Democratic Party - 1792 - 2004:

Fine, bring on the censure vote. No doubt Kerry will vote for censure, before he votes against it. Or vice versa. He's a big part of the problem - he not only failed to defeat the current president, he failed to run even the most remotely competent campaign.

Heh...

Jay Bennish's First Amendment Case? Please!

2006-03-14T16:10:00.000-05:00

A lot of bandwidth has been devoted to the case of Jay Bennish, a Colorado high school teacher who was disciplined in relation to political comments he made in his social studies class recently. I though the issue had been fully exhausted when he was reinstated.

That is, I thought so until this morning. Then I encountered this piece by Julie Hilden at Findlaw. She argues, essentially, that public school teachers should be viewed as special public employees who should enjoy unfettered First Amendment protection in the conduct of their employment.

I take great interest in First Amendment liberty interests and I think the argument is load of bunk.

Hilden describes the state of current precedent on the speech rights of public employees. The short version is this: Pickering v. Board of Education upheld the rights of public school teachers to speak in their capacities as private citizens on matters of public importance (there, the operation of the local school system). Connick v. Myers, which she conveniently disregards as simply being about district attorneys, while upholding the termination of a recalcitrant D.A., notes:

Myers' questionnaire touched upon matters of public concern in only a most limited sense; her survey, in our view, is most accurately characterized as an employee grievance concerning internal office policy. The limited First Amendment interest involved here does not require that Connick tolerate action which he reasonably believed would disrupt the office, undermine his authority, and destroy close working relationships. Myers' discharge therefore did not offend the First Amendment.
* * *
[I]t would indeed be a Pyrrhic victory for the great principles of free expression if the Amendment's safeguarding of a public employee's right, as a citizen, to participate in discussions concerning public affairs were confused with the attempt to constitutionalize the employee grievance that we see presented here.

The Bennish case falls somewhere between these two ends. Hilden apparently thinks it's beyond the farthest reach of Pickering; I think it falls closer to Connick.

(For those who are impatient: Does this mean that I think Bennish should have been fired for his in-class statements? Probably not. Keep reading.)

It oversimplifies the matter to say that Bennish was speaking as a citizen on matters of public import and that fact renders his speech free from any consequence. He is free to speak out, write letters to editors, attend and organize protests, and even publish manifestos -- on his own time. When he does so on the public's dime, then there must be some reasonable regulation of how he conducts his class. And the public, in my mind, may draw a line in the sand at ideological indoctrination.

Does this mean that teachers must present themselves as completely ~~fair and balanced~~ neutral? No. I recall having teachers with a wide array of political opinions. None of these teachers compelled us - explicitly or implicitly - to agree with them. Actually, now that I think about it, my government teacher never really expressed any opinions either way (though I always suspected that she leaned liberal).

If a teacher is to educate -- to teach students how to think critically -- then something resembling balance in the classroom is necessary. After all, each ideological perspective has its own shortcomings. If a teacher can not be honest about his own, then how can he expect his students to do the same if the end goal is truly to prepare students to think and speak critically for themselves.

That in mind, we must not forget that the public school teacher is entrusted with the education of minors, impressionable ones at that. It is an environment that is easily opened to abuses by those few ill-intentioned teachers who might seek to indoctrinate rather than educate.

The abuses of a single teacher, though, are not the first but the last reason why Hilden's "balance of experience" ideal is unworkable. After all, how many progressive civics teachers live in - let alone work in - Kansas or rural Utah? How many conservative civics teachers are there in Boston or Berkeley? Let's be honest: balance, of necessity, should be sought on the micro level.

Is it always easy to find, note, and evaluate the foibles of all competing viewpoints, particularly one' own? No, and I say this from some small experience, having taught essay writing during college and law school. Between Ann Arbor and Boston, I had no shortage of students whose views differed from my own. I gleefully ripped their essays to shreds, challenging them to push beyond the pat version of what they thought. Invariably, though, I would have in each class a student or two whose beliefs more closely reflected my own. I found even greater pleasure in dissecting their arguments, having said on a couple of occasions, "I agree with you, and yet you still have not convinced me." They knew I was being perfectly honest with them, and they generally pushed themselves that much more. It was not always easy; there will always be a temptation to be lazy and give a pass to those who agree with you. But that's not the standard we should embrace for our teachers. This is one point on which I agree with Hilden, but I don't see it as a justification for a broad blanket protection of all political speech by teachers in the classroom. There is some room for the enactment of reasonable parameters, and we should not foreclose that prerogative to school administrators and the electorates they answer.

In light of this, though, I have a hard time seeing the argument that Bennish should have been fired. Reprimanded (as he was)? Fine. Suspended? Maybe if the recording had been without any other mitigating content than what I will describe below. Fired? No. While Bennish's politics may (and I stress "may") fall on the fringe of the American spectrum, I think that he probably was acting in good faith and he is a young teacher (perhaps only a year older than I) and he might have pushed the envelope a little too far. However, the end of the recording does indicate that (in a single limited instance, at least) Bennish was not compelling his students to agree with him, undercutting (if only a little) charges of indoctrination. If it's nothing more than an inexperienced teacher getting a little carried away in his good faith effort, then that shouldn't ruin his career.

Legislatures and school boards have the power to grant great discretion to teachers and the way they conduct their classrooms. If they do so, I have no quarrel with that. But, as long as the state pays that teacher's salary -- effectively sponsoring that speech and stamping it with its own imprimatur -- I can not agree that a teacher's First Amendment rights are fully coextensive with those he holds in his private life.

Linked to Don Surber.

Heh...

2006-03-14T14:01:00.000-05:00

This is probably more accurate than anyone on his side of the Senate aisle would care to admit.

"Chef" Leaves South Park

2006-03-13T18:21:00.000-05:00

This is hardly a surprise - Isaac Hayes is leaving the cast of "South Park" in the wake of its Scientology episode:

"South Park" co-creator Matt Stone responded sharply in an interview with The Associated Press Monday, saying, "This is 100 percent having to do with his faith of Scientology... He has no problem - and he's cashed plenty of checks - with our show making fun of Christians."

Last November, "South Park" targeted the Church of Scientology and its celebrity followers, including actors Tom Cruise and John Travolta, in a top-rated episode called "Trapped in the Closet." In the episode, Stan, one of the show's four mischievous fourth graders, is hailed as a reluctant savior by Scientology leaders, while a cartoon Cruise locks himself in a closet and won't come out.

Stone told The AP he and co-creator Trey Parker "never heard a peep out of Isaac in any way until we did Scientology. He wants a different standard for religions other than his own, and to me, that is where intolerance and bigotry begin."

In the words of George Carlin, "Let's not have a double standard. One standard will do just fine." Over the years, the show has satirized Catholics, evangelical Christians, Jews, Buddhists, atheists, and probably other religious groups that immediately escape me. And Isaac Hayes leaves on "religious intolerance" grounds after the Scientology episode airs?

I'm sorry, but if he was suddenly offended by the episode that aired two weeks later and (not for the first time) poked a little tasteless fun at Catholicism, he would have said so.

MORE: Eric at Classical Values feels similarly.

Linked to Don Surber.

Good Riddance

2006-03-11T10:35:00.000-05:00

Slobodan Milosevic found dead in cell.

~~There isn't much more to say here.~~

Environmental Republican: Say hello to Stalin and Hitler in hell, Slobo. Unfortunately his victims that survived didn't get to see him convicted but they did see his crimes exposed to the world.

Don Surber: He had no weapons of mass destruction. He posed no threat to the United States. He had no connection to al-Qaeda. Still, I am glad the United States and a Coalition of the Willing removed Slobodan Milosevic from power in the 1990s. He butchered thousands of his own people. Now he is dead and I pray the Lord forgives me for my glee. [Comment: If God - in theory, at least - could forgive Slobo's murderous actions, surely He'll forgive our emotionally founded reactions to this tyrant's corporeal end.]

Joe Gandelman: Yes: his highly publicized defiance to the end, and the seeming impotence of the Hague and the United Nations during the trial, mean that he will likely become an inspiration to some. And, given his lawyers' comments, unless the autopsy is definitive look for a slew of conspiracy theories to emerge surrounding his death. [Comment: Chalk up another achievement for the United Nations. (/snark)]

Captain Ed: Milosevic's death cheated the Hague, which had hoped to finally convict the former leader of Yugoslavia of various war crimes. The numerous delays in the trial, which had just "celebrated" its fourth year in progress, had been prompted by suspicious health complaints. It looks like either Milosevic and his doctors told the truth, or perhaps the lies just caught up with him.

(Bar) Membership Has Its Priviliges

2006-03-10T14:03:00.000-05:00

I finally received my bar card in the mail today. Now, I can just breeze past security whenever I go to court. Since the bar of Massachusetts has already investigated my entire life history, I guess there isn't really any need for the court police to look in my briefcase.

Also, for the first time in my career, I was approached by a former co-worker who was admitted to the bar on the same day as I to start our own firm. Though he is one of the few people I know who I would consider partnering with at this early stage of my career, the timing is almost certainly wrong. I was quite flattered just to be asked. I told him I would think about it -- and I will -- but I don't think it's a wise move at this time. In any event, I will leave the door open for something down the road.

All in all, a fairly eventful day off.

In Brief

2006-03-09T13:18:00.000-05:00

This Slate article sums up - better than anything I have ever read - why the Democratic party leadership has been an unabashed disaster at capitalizing on President Bush's and the Republican-controlled Congress's anemic support:

Pelosi is a conventionally liberal congresswoman from San Francisco who serves as House minority leader. The quite conservative Reid, who comes from a small town in Nevada, is the Senate minority leader. Dean, the former Vermont governor who seemed headed for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004 until he yodeled in Iowa, is the chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Since assuming their positions, the three of them have shown themselves to be somewhere between useless and disastrous as party leaders. Individually, they lack substance and policy smarts (Pelosi); coherence and force (Reid); and steadiness and mainstream appeal (Dean). Collectively, they convey an image of liberal elitism, disarray, and crabbiness.

Read the whole thing.

I haven't disappeared...

2006-03-09T11:41:00.000-05:00

I swear!

This has just been an incredibly busy week. I am going to try to get back to regular posting later today and tomorrow.

Light Posting Today

2006-03-05T13:38:00.000-05:00

The Lady Exile and I are getting ready for our first annual Academy Awards party. This is also a belated housewarming party for us. Accordingly, expect normal posting to resume tomorrow, though I might have some thoughts on this year's Oscars before then if time permits.

Reaction to the Open Letter

2006-03-03T18:29:00.000-05:00

Wow.

That word was used more than once in reaction to my open letter to President Bush, and it's about the best word I can use to sum up my view of those responses.

The Impolitic - my long-time friendly rival and blogmother - notes a bit of sadness, but also hope, at the news. I assure you: though it may have been difficult to write, it was also remarkably cathartic. Also, in comments here, Kathy of Stone Soup Musings expresses no joy at this development, given what it says about the state of the country. We may all lose in the short-term, but I am hopeful that we will win in the end.

The Midwestern Progressive exerpted the letter in his regular "Fine Lines" feature, which displays the craft of the written word in the blogosphere. I'm honored, Mid. Truly.

The Mayor of Simpleton, a new venue for blog friend Kevin McKague, says some very kind things about my return to the 'sphere and seems to have been fired up at my thoughts on the president's job performance. I have not known him to engage in habitual profanity, so a "DAMN" from him suggests that maybe he liked the post. [/understatement]

Lest my left-leaning friends have all the fun, Cardinal Martini expresses support and confesses that he has been thinking along similar lines for a while. And he's right: we do need more moderate Republicans. Once upon a time, I detested moderates like Lincoln Chafee. Now, I think I understand his position a little better. It's about time that the term RINO became a badge of honor.

If there are any of the above that you don't read regularly, you should. All are solid daily reads.

Lastly, and most importantly, thank you all for a warmer welcome back than I could have imagined. It's good to be here again.

MORE: Cardinal Martini posts an astute comment that may as well express my own thoughts on the matter. So, I'm promoting it in full to the main post:

There was a time when my lefty college friends would criticize Bush for the dumb things he does -- he falls off his bike, or misspeaks, or has a weird expression on his face -- and I would defend him.

There was a time when they would criticize him because he's religious, and against gay marriage, and against abortion, and I would tell them that I don't agree with him on those issues. I'd tell them I voted for Bush because he is strong on national security.

And now they criticize him about the aftermath of the war, about his saying he didn't know the levees would break, about the Ports deal. And I really can't defend him any longer. Even when he makes a good decision or holds a defensible position, he refuses to defend it, and he refuses to explain it.

When was the last time he told us his thoughts about what is going on in Iraq? Is there ethnic cleansing? Is there a civil war?

He told us no one anticipated the levees' failure in New Orleans. Well, a videotape seems to say otherwise. Response? None.

Was the Dubai Ports World transaction a good one? I thought so, and apparently the president thought so. But he and his administration have been totally inept at selling it, and now because he can't farking mount a verbal defense of it, the ports deal will probably be stopped.

Again and again and again, he won't explain himself, he won't talk about what is going on. I'm not naive; I never romanticized him. But I expected more from him than this.

Coming Home...

2006-03-02T23:59:00.000-05:00

Posted to the top of the page until the end of today. See below for more new content as it becomes available.

It is not without some trepidation that I write this entry.

I have been away for the better part of two months. I have had my reasons, which will become clear shortly. The time has flown and, dear readers (if you're still there), I have missed you all.

I set blogging aside for a while for mental health reasons. I'm being somewhat facetious, of course. Nevertheless, I found increasingly that the blogosphere as a whole tended to drive me to anger. In the last year, the medium has grown shriller by leaps and bounds. More noise, less thought. I had to disengage - even from the blogs I enjoy - in order to refocus and find some inner tranquility.

It helped immensely. I found other interests and hobbies. I started reading as I did before law school. (There is - and ever will be - something profoundly satisfying about the tactile experience of holding a book that electronic media will never adequately replace.) Also, I found that my blood pressure dropped significantly. (For a Type A person like me, you take lifestyle improvements like these where you can.)

Additionally, I had more time to devote to finding a permanent job while taking on some contract work. If you're someone who follows financial news, there is an excellent chance you have heard of the case I am working on. I am acting as local counsel and otherwise playing an exceptionally small role in the litigation. That's all I can really say about that.

I stayed away, fully acknowledging that I might choose never to return. Stepping away from the blog had been exceptionally liberating. Something would really have to push me in order to get me to return.

Something did. The hiatus ends today.

An Open Letter to the President

2006-03-02T14:54:00.000-05:00

President George W. Bush
1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

I quit.

While history may yet bear you out in Iraq and Afghanistan, I am left without any remaining confidence in your ability to adminster the domestic affairs of this great nation. This is a failure on your part in both substance and style. Your administration, to this country's detriment, has spent money like the largest band of drunken sailors this world has ever known. The only skill your executive personnel decisions have demonstrated is that of hiring people capable of making losing arguments in support of even winning policy choices.

But for your two confirmed Supreme Court nominees, both of whom I supported, this term would be an unmitigated disaster. This description is particularly apt in light of today's news of your pre-Katrina briefings.

This administration has had a fundamental failure to admit its shortcomings. Fortress Bush has stonewalled on every issue, from those as significant as Katrina to those as inconsequential as your vice president's hunting accident. Somewhere along the way, the adminstration lost all credibility, not just with its adversaries, but also with all but its blindest supporters.

As I noted, your administration has exhibited failures of style and substance. Even if your remaining supporters are correct and you never foresaw the levee breaches (but only their potential overtopping) and this really is all old news, that will make little difference to the people affected by the storm. But, if the accusations are substantially correct and you did know the extent of the impending destruction, then you really have supplanted Richard Nixon as the worst modern president. Incompetence resulting in the deaths of civilians that might otherwise have been prevented in some cases might not amount to an impeachable offense, but it may well add up to a damnable one.

What is more, if this AP report really is trumped up, then you have to do better than, "Don't read too much into a single briefing." That you have not cleaned house in the Office of the White House Press Secretary only speaks to your blind loyalty to your personnel and your tin ear to what the country hears your administration saying.

As a result, I'm out. While my arguments may parallel your policies from time to time in the future, I can't say that I approve of the job you are doing as president. The execution of things you have done right has been mostly poor and the articulations of your administration's rationales have been worse.

This is not a decision I take lightly. Indeed, I have wrestled with it for the last six months or so. This deliberative process has led me at times to question whether I was abandoning my principles. In fact, you have abandoned them. It led me to wonder whether I would leave my party, when it was you who have in many respects failed in its leadership.

I voted for you. Twice. And yet, I have no qualms about saying that your lame duck period, in my eyes, begins today. Please, just sit tight for the next three years.

Here's hoping Senator McCain can do a better job in the White House after 2008. Please try not to burn the place down before then.

Sincerely,

The Bostonian Exile

Preliminary Impressions on the NSA Case

2006-01-17T23:51:00.000-05:00

Today, the ACLU filed in Detroit federal district court a lawsuit seeking to enjoin the NSA from continuing with its recently revealed program of extra-FISA electronic surveillance. Upon my first skim (and I stress skim) of the complaint, the merits of the case, which was brought on behalf of numerous journalists, academics, and several organizations, seem to have been presented as well as could be expected in a case like this one.

But, I have a feeling that - all things being equal – this case may not get too far. Not on the constitutional issues, anyway.

The allegations of fact presented in the complaint may be insufficient – indeed, too speculative – for the plaintiffs to demonstrate standing to sue.

(I know, standing is never nearly as sexy as the merits of the constitutional claims, and the resolution of cases on standing grounds is often less than satisfying. That said, I find this stuff fascinating and I imagine a fair amount of my career will consist of showing how the other side has no adjudicable case. Besides, the Constitution requires that plaintiffs have standing before the federal courts can hear their cases, so it’s pretty important. Accordingly, I geek forward.)

I don’t want to get into the specifics without a fuller reading of the complaint, but each of the claims of injury I read articulated a “well-founded belief” that the plaintiff had been a subject of NSA surveillance of some sort, and goes on to demonstrate a rough (read: not remotely scientific) probability that the named party (if nothing else) had a higher chance of being monitored than a random member of the population. I’ve done some light reading on the matter tonight, and will do more, but alleging a sufficient “injury-in-fact” of each of the plaintiffs may be difficult; this numbers game strikes me as being their Achilles heel. (Again, it’s just a lightly informed gut reaction at this point. I could be wrong.)

MORE: The above may be a non-issue in the initial stages. The judge hearing the case, Anna Diggs Taylor, is a Carter appointee. I don’t know much about her specifically, but in general Carter appointees are usually fairly liberal (even when compared to Johnson or Clinton appointees). She may be more inclined to be permissive on the standing issue, but this is purely speculation on my part. This also means, though, that the standing issue (which the government will certainly raise) could shadow this litigation all the way to SCOTUS (if necessary) and if any level of the judiciary finds a lack of standing, that's the ballgame.

MORE: It seems a separate suit was filed in New York City as well. I have not yet seen that one.

Public Service Announcement

2006-01-16T21:35:00.000-05:00

If you have linked to the (now defunct) News From Davison, Michigan in the past, you may want to consider removing those links from your blog. It would seem the main web address has been hijacked by an *ahem* adult content purveyor.

In other news, you might have noticed that I have taken a bit of a hiatus here. I have scaled back my blogging (and reading of other blogs) substantially for about the last week. I may have more on this later, but it has been good to get away for a bit.

Not to worry, though -- I'm still around. I'm just attending to other interests these days.

Today, four is a mystical number

2006-01-09T22:32:00.000-05:00

Libby tagged me for this meme, so here we go:

Four jobs you’ve had in your life: computer repair technician, golf course manager, resident advisor, law clerk

Four movies you could [and do] watch over and over: Office Space, The Big Lebowski, Zoolander, The Godfather

Four places you’ve lived: Rockwood, MI; Ann Arbor, MI; Allston, MA; Boston, MA

Four fiction books you can’t live without: 1984-Orwell (A matching answer - fancy that), Fight Club-Palahniuk, Les Miserables-Hugo (as much as I hated it at the time, I spent on of the best summers of my life with this book), Crime and Punishment-Dostoevsky

Four non-fiction books you consider essential: The Elements of Legal Style (a new acqusition)-Garner, The Spirit of the Laws-Montesquiue, A Second Treatise on Government-Locke, The Art of Warfare-Sun Tzu

Four TV shows you love to watch: House, Law & Order, Mad Money, Desperate Housewives (don't tell anybody)

Four places you’ve been on vacation: Germany, Czech Republic, Slovak Republic, Hungary, Austria, and Switzerland (one trip); Northern Michigan; Colorado; Four Corners

Four websites you visit daily: Boston Globe, Detroit News, Craig's List, What Would Tyler Durden Do?

Four of your favorite foods: Sushi, Macaroni & Cheese, Lamb Curry, Gummi Bears (if that counts)

Four places you’d rather be: in the mountains, in Obdach, Austria, in Hartford, Alabama, the Florida Keys

Four albums you can’t live without: The Jimi Hendrix Experience (Another matching answer), Speakerboxxx/The Love Below, Franz Ferdinand, Nevermind

Okay, I'll tag Kipper and anyone else who wants to play.

My senator, ladies and gentlemen...

2006-01-07T20:04:00.000-05:00

I missed this tidbit from yesterday's WaPo:

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), hosting a morning roundtable with reporters, had nothing nice to say about Alito. "We here in the United States are not going to stand for monarchial tyranny," he said, protesting Alito's support for "unfettered, unlimited power of the executive." He faulted Alito for belonging to a group that was "anti-black and also anti-women." Kennedy wondered if "the average person is going to be able to get a fair shake" under Alito.

Briefly, Kennedy rewrote the outcome of the 1964 election. "This nominee was influenced by the Goldwater presidency," he said. "The Goldwater battles of those times were the battles against the civil rights laws." Only then did Kennedy acknowledge that "Judge Alito at that time was 14 years old."

(emphasis mine, via The Corner and The New Editor)

Uncle Teddy seemed to forget that Goldwater lost that election in a landslide to the man who had been Vice President to his then-late brother, Jack, whose senate term he was elected to finish in 1962.

I am led to conclude (in the common practice of today's politics) that, when making this statement, he was at best inebriated, at worst delusional. (In light of the fact that this was a morning press conference, this assessment could arguably be reversed.)

And yet, the ~~Social Democratic~~ Democratic Party of the ~~People's Republic~~ Commonwealth of Massachusetts, while celebrating the most minor Bushism as evidence of unfitness, has to date made no move to retire the last of the Kennedys' greatest generation.

Well, at least we have John Kerry... Yeesh!

2006-01-07T16:36:00.000-05:00

Thanks to all who posted kind wishes in response to my engagement announcement! The Lady Exile and I greatly appeciate each of them.

Beyond that, though, I have not had much to say over the last few days. I could say I have been busy, but that would only be half-true. Over the last few days, my interests have been "not blogging". I don't intend to shut down The Exile, because I know that I would be back at it within a week or two, but I have been taking time to pursue other interests and they, of necessity, are not as easily shared, at least not here. The Project has been coming along over the last few days, and I expect to be devoting more time to it in the coming days and weeks.

For all I know, I may be back here blogging up a storm later today or tomorrow. I know I still owe the Midamerica Progressive some thoughts on Johnny Damon's acquisition by the Evil Empire. I'll have those soon.

But then, the Alito hearings start this week. I could post some general thoughts on the People for the American Way's "report" on him. (The short version: even by my low standards for that organization, I'm underwhelmed.)

And I suppose part of it is just getting back in the habit of returning here on a regular basis.

More: I know I've been MIA for a few days, but does anyone know what happened to News from Davison? As of this writing, it appears to be down.

Announcement

2006-01-04T06:55:00.000-05:00

Look for posting to resume usual frequency today or tomorrow. Things have been pretty busy around here since returning from Michigan in light of the following news:

On New Year's Eve, The Lady Exile and I were engaged to be married! We expect the wedding to be in the summer of 2007, and I'm sure that we will need any extra time we can get to plan a Michigan wedding (both of our families -- immediate and extended -- are there) from here.

This is one of those increasingly rare occasions when I am at a bit of a loss for words in light of my jubilation. She is my best friend and has been for what feels like forever. This next step in sharing our lives with each other is something that we are both excited about.

More later...

Year-end Update

2005-12-28T18:18:00.000-05:00

   Thanks to those who sent along kind wishes for my cousin, whether in comments or privately. I am happy to report that the surgeons successfully removed his brain tumor, meaning if nothing else that he got to spend Christmas with his family, albeit in the hospital. He was out of intensive care within a couple of days and has gone home for a few weeks.

   In other news, there is little else to report. Christmas was great. I will be in the Detroit area for the next few days, returning to Boston late in the evening on January 1.

   I have not had much to say lately. I have on a couple of occasions begun to compose posts in the last few days, only to scuttle them for lack of publishability. For some inexplicable reason, I have been generally dissatisfied with my writings lately. I'm not sure if this is indicative of anything more than my attentions being focused elsewhere during the last couple of weeks, but it has been the source of some dismay. I feel as though I am in a blogging rut. (This does not really lend itself to a clever blogging word coinage in the traditions of bleg and blogviate; blut is the German word for "blood", while Brut is an essence I am unlikely to apply to anything with which I identify, but so it goes.)

   As 2005 comes to an end, I find myself increasingly disappointed, generally speaking, in both the Bush administration and its detractors. (Don't worry; if you're reading this, I'm almost certainly not speaking about you specifically, but instead of the overall political atmosphere in the nation.) The only thing keeping either from being abysmal failures in my mind comes back to the adage: a broken clock is right twice a day. Bush, despite all of the ineptitude -- arguable and otherwise -- under his watch, has nominated a likely stellar chief justice and a likely excellent associate justice (the latter subject to reservations pending the confirmation hearings, of course). Nevertheless, you don't have to disagree with the man's policy choices to see that his administration has been abysmal at articulating its message effectively. As for the Democrats, the same principle applies, though in a different way. Even if they are right about this whole NSA brouhaha (and it appears increasingly likely that they are, at least in principle if not in detail and extent), they will almost certainly overplay their hand in 2006 with (Dean/Pelosi/Reid) at the helm. Looking beyond partisan self-interest for a moment and assuming some level of illegality in the recently-revealed NSA surveillance, the Democrats are setting themselves up for an overreach that does no service to their party or our country, one that is not terribly different in lack of effect from the Clinton impeachment.

   As 2005 comes to a close, I find myself more fiercely independent than I was a year ago. And yet, as weary as I am of the religious right, I am equally (if not more) weary of the progressive left. I am growing increasingly tired of obfuscation's crescendo across the political spectrum. I am galled at the ever-more-common practice of otherwise exceedingly intelligent people repeating statements of questionable veracity; with the increase of access to information on the Internet comes the increased duty to scrutinize not only stories but also sources. For every conscientious amateur journalist, there are a thousand or more irresponsible ones who pass off rumor and innuendo as fact to someone who passes it as fact to someone who passes it as fact...

   A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth. The life of the blogosphere seems to underscore this point several times a year.

   And yet, the blogosphere, the administration, the loyal dissent -- all are really just reflections of ourselves and our greater society. It seems, anymore, that Americans either don't give a damn or they care so passionately about their own positions as to cloud their better judgments; rare is the person who can avoid those two extremes. I don't exclude myself from this construction, as I find myself from time to time veering to one side or the other and I think that everyone does to some degree. But, I'm specifically talking about those who are chronically in one camp or the other.

   But, then, is it ever really a good thing to be content with society? Shouldn't I welcome some level of discontent, if only as a sign that I have not given up on the rest of the nation? Shouldn't we all?

   If so, shouldn't it at least be slightly less exhausting?

   Happy New Year! May the country begin its return to its collective senses in 2006.

[/rant]

Programming Note

2005-12-22T10:59:00.000-05:00

Expect light blogging until January 2, since I am leaving to visit family in Detroit over the holiday.

Also, if you are so inclined, please send some kind thoughts to my cousin Nick and his family. At the age of 24, he has been fighting cancer for nearly three years already. Just when you think he's been to Hell and back, he endures a treatment that is even worse than the last. Things took a marked turn for the worse recently and, though he is in the care of some of -- quite literally -- the finest doctors in the country, it seems he is reaching a point where divine intervention will soon be the only avenue for recovery.

That's all I have for now. Given the circuitous route we're taking to Detroit, look for an update no sooner than tomorrow, though I may have some time to post this evening.

Seasons' Greetings

2005-12-21T11:19:00.000-05:00

Courtesy of a co-worker...

For Our Democratic Friends:

"Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, our best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all. We also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2006, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere. And without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee. By accepting these greetings you are accepting these terms. This greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal. It is freely transferable with no alteration to the original greeting. It implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for herself or himself or others, and is void where prohibited by law and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher. This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first, and warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wisher."

For Our Republican Friends:

"Here's wishing all of You a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!"

Wednesday Food-blogging

2005-12-21T09:25:00.000-05:00

Look for light posting (if any) until this afternoon as I struggle to escape the food coma I entered last night.

Last night, I made Sun-dried Tomato Burgers with Balsamic-Glazed Onions and Home Fries with Wild Mushrooms.

I was a little leery of making hamburger patties with cumin, but the spice added a subtle, but readily apparent base for the rest of the flavor. Also, I strongly recommend using the best balsamic vinegar you have for the onions -- they come out tasting like candy. (Most high-end balsamics are very expensive, because of an importing consortium that controls the majority of the market. If you live near an ethnic Italian neighborhood, you may be able to find a shop that imports Modena balsamic from outside of the consortium -- at about a quarter of the cost!) Top with an extra sharp Wisconsin white cheddar just before serving and your all set.

When I sauteed the potatoes, I added two big cloves of garlic, finely minced. I also used portobellos instead of shiitakes and oysters, and the flavor was probably less woody, but it took on the flavor of the garlic very well. A dash of garlic powder at the end made for some potent potatoes, but that nicely balanced the sweetness of the burgers.

Serve with Harpoon I.P.A. If you can't get it (meaning: if you live just about anywhere outside of Rt. 128), another hoppy beer goes nicely. (Or, you could beg your local beer distributor to carry it -- we found a place near Detroit last year that stocks Boston's finest micro-brew!)

At Bartley's in Cambridge, this easily would have been a nine dollar burger. But Mr. Bartley has nothing on me. Not after this.

What she said

2005-12-20T10:08:00.000-05:00

On the MBTA's roll-out of the new CharlieCard, quoth the Pelican:

I don't care how easy the CharlieTicket will be. Ridership will not increase if the T doesn't run on time, has incomprehensible signage, has unhelpful employees, and has stations that are dark and dangerous. The MBTA should work on its service first. Better fare collection will not help me when I am choosing to walk thirty minutes from MFA to downtown because it is faster than waiting on the T.

[via Universal Hub]

RINOs in the Mist

2005-12-20T09:18:00.000-05:00

I completely forgot to link to this week's edition of RINO Sightings at Kesher Talk.

Check it out.

Orin Kerr on the NSA and FISA

2005-12-20T08:54:00.000-05:00

Professor Orin Kerr has an exceptional post up at the Volokh Conspiracy about the NSA and FISA. His conclusion: the activity is probably illegal under FISA, but probably permissible under the Fourth Amendment. He is careful to add numerous caveats to this very basic opinion.

For the most part, I agree with his Fourth Amendment analysis; indeed, he articulates thoughts similar to my own, though he does so with far greater clarity.

As for the FISA analysis, his reasoning strikes me as generally sound, save a couple of quibbles: I wish he had fleshed out the implications of the statutory definition of "United States persons" under the statute and that he had looked with greater specificity as to how FISA addresses terrorism as a matter of statutory construction. Despite this, he makes a strong case for illegality.

In any event, there is no excuse for any interested person to pass this post by. It's long, so be sure you have a decent block of time to work through it, but well worth a full read.

Get your Exile fix on the go...

2005-12-19T20:10:00.000-05:00

I have added Feedblitz capabilities to the sidebar. I know that dealing with RSS/XML feeds can be a pain sometimes, especially for newcomers to the blogosphere. This service allows posts from The Exile to be syndicated directly to your inbox, allowing you to keep up with happenings here anywhere you can access your email.

Thanks to Digger for pointing me to the service!

Follow-up on FISA

2005-12-19T18:31:00.000-05:00

Following up on my previous post on the NSA and FISA, two quick points:

First, I have actually had a chance to sit down and start reading the statute. I won't go into significant details here about my impressions; I don't have the energy for an epic-length post at the moment. That said, on my first time through, I could not envision how the secret order squared with FISA. On my second pass, though, it looks as though Congress and President Carter apparently did not envision something along the lines of what the NSA has apparently done, and therefore made no provisions -- affirmative or negative -- for such a situation. I ~~may yet~~ will ~~probably~~ almost certainly change my mind again on the third pass, since this is far from the clearest law in the world to even begin to fully comprehend. In any event, don't expect anything resembling a fuller opinion until tomorrow at the earliest.

Second, things seem to have gotten heated in comments to my previous post -- and understandably so. No matter where you stand, this NSA issue has very real implications for our security and our freedom. That said, let's be clear about something: I have always made it a point of pride to be straightforward here at The Exile. While I sometimes engage in hypothetical for the sake of discussion, it has never been my intent to obfuscate anything discussed here for the benefit of any ideology or any other person. Accordingly, I will never express an opinion here without having satisfied myself that I have given it adequate and due consideration, regardless of what the conventional wisdom about the holding of a particular opinion might be, and regardless of whether it is positive or negative. I may not always be right (Hell, I'm human, after all), but I'll never be anything less than sincere. And, I'll be damned if I am going to allow anyone to pressure me into taking a position prematurely. I didn't get this far (and, indeed, I will get no further) by simply going along.

I don't intend to start now.

If you want considered thoughts from a conservative-leaning perspective, I hope you have come to the right place, and of course opposing viewpoints are always welcome. If you're expecting to find the party line, a parrot of partisan mega-blogs, or a wingnut to bait, well . . . I suspect you can find one without looking too hard.

What changed?

2005-12-17T14:42:00.000-05:00

That's the prevailing question I had after reading yesterday' piece in the New York Times about the NSA's efforts since 2002 in monitoring some international phone calls. One section of the piece took me by surprise:

The White House asked The New York Times not to publish this article, arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. After meeting with senior administration officials to hear their concerns, the newspaper delayed publication for a year to conduct additional reporting. Some information that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists has been omitted. (emphasis mine)

If this is such an earth-shattering story now, why wasn't it one a year ago? The Impolitic chalks it up to the corporatization of the mass media:

US newspapers wonder why they're becoming irrelevant? It's because they stopped functioning as news sources and focus on infotainment in an attempt to raise profits. Any one who cares about news, is getting it from sources that still employ the methodology of investigative reporting and the readers that only care about news that amuses already has Fox. That crowd only looks at the pictures anyway. If the US press wants its readers back, it should try giving us something worth reading.

I think she's half right. While I don't think the New York Times qualifies as an administration lapdog -- when did they last actually support Bush's position on a civil liberties/national security issue? -- I do think this is to some degree about influence-peddling.

I have a hard time buying that this is solely about a matter of principle. If yesterday's report is true, not only in the broad strokes that the President acknowledged and defended today, but also in the further implication that this monitoring is a new and gross violation of Americans' civil liberties, then was this not also true a year ago. What was the incentive to delay?

And then it occured to me: this story broke just hours before a closely-divided Senate was due to vote on the renewal of the PATRIOT Act. Shortly thereafter, I noticed that Captain Ed had reached similar conclusions, with an additional rationale that I had not really considered:

It published now for two reasons, one a typical media convention and the other to beat its own reporter to the scoop. With the Patriot Act up for renewal, the current headlines finally provided a political context that would make this story a blockbuster -- not because it describes illegal activity, but because it plays into the fears the Left have of the rise of an Orwellian Big Brother government from the Bush administration. Ironically, this comes less than a month after the same newspapers giving this story red headlines provided breathless coverage to the 9/11 Commission's "report card" on the government's progress on counterterrorism -- which condemned the White House and Congress for not doing enough to protect Americans from attack.

The second impetus to publish came from the upcoming release of James Risen's book, "State of War", due to be released in less than a month. The story would lose its impact and the Times would lose its investment in the development of it if the book came out first. Also, it doesn't hurt to have its reporter on the best-seller list, and the explosive nature of this leak will almost certainly propel the upcoming Risen tome to the top of those lists, at least briefly.

Now, I don't know if I endorse Captain Ed's theory completely, but on the first point this timing does seem to give the story more impetus if the Times thought it was realtively weak to start. Also, it does put a little more pressure on Senators who might have been on the fence before yesterday's PATRIOT Act vote. While I don't believe for a moment that Senator Chuck Schumer was undecided up until the morning of the vote, other senators almost certainly were.

As to the second point, I dismissed it when Drudge noted that a Times reporter on the NSA piece, James Risen, has a book coming out next March on this very topic. But, putting The Impolitic's piece next to Captain Ed's, there may really be something here. (I know -- who knew?)

The Times, as the keeper of all the resources that went into this reporting, had an obvious interest in being the first news outlet to break this NSA story, whatever it may be in the end. With one of the reporters on this piece set to publish a book in the coming months, the question of whether the Times would print it was never one of "if?" but rather one of "when?"

So, when would this article go to print? Of course, when it would make the biggest spash. Passage of the PATRIOT Act renewal in the House was a foregone conclusion, but much more uncertain in the Senate. That yesterday's Times piece included a few bits of meta-reporting compels me to ask:

Is the New York Times descending in to the pits of "infotainment" for the nation's Democrats and other self-identified civil libertarians?

You decide.

In anticipation of the inevitable question, I'm sure someone will ask: But aren't you missing the point? Isn't this a gross violation of our privacy rights? Shouldn't our focus be on the administration instead of smearing the messenger?

My answer: To take the questions in reverse order, I hope the Senate undertakes a thorough investigation of this whole affair, and let the chips fall where they may. As to whether there is a civil rights violation here, I don't know. If this were purely domestic monitoring, I have little doubt that there would be. That said, the international element of this monitoring pushes it into a realm miles away from any expertise I might have, so I can't in good conscience give an informed opinion on that point at this early time. Captain Ed thinks that the lawyers at the Times didn't find anything illegal here; I'm not convinced that their actions necessarily reflect that, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

All the same, I'll be keeping an eye on this.

Related posts:
Follow-up on FISA

And the Webbie goes to. . .

2005-12-16T10:27:00.000-05:00

Someone else (Garfield Ridge, to be exact). Congratulations!

Thank you to all who voted for The Exile in this year's contest. We came in better-than-last, which exceeded expectations.

Also, thank you to all who visited for the first time during the last ten days, and saw enough here to return. Since the nomination, my daily traffic has doubled, so welcome!

Gratuitous Friday Quiz Link - Deity Edition

2005-12-16T06:52:00.000-05:00

Lug
Indeed, you are 83% erudite, 79% sensual, 70% martial, and 45% saturnine.

The God Lug certainly cut an impressive image. Lug was a mighty hero, often portrayed as a blond muscle-man, all decked out in magnificent armour complete with helmet and shield of gold.

As the story goes, Lug came to the glorious palace of The Dagda expecting to be welcomed as a full fledged member of the "God Fraternity" right there on the spot, no questions asked. But the palace guard did question him. In order to take a seat among the immortal Gods, one had to possess a skill not already covered by one of the deities. When the guard asked Lug to name his unique specialty, the mighty hero declared that he was particularly competent in the art of war. The guard shook his head. They already had a War God. Lug then called out several of his many expert abilities. Could they use a God of healing? Nope. A Water God? Nope. How about a God of magic? Of music? Commerce? Nope, nope, and nope. Finally reaching his wits end, Lug lashed out at the guard and demanded to be admitted since none of the Gods were masters of all skills like he was. This worked. Soon he became the greatest of all the Celtic Gods.

The Fifteen Gods

These are the 15 categories of this test. If you score above average in …

…all or none of the four variables: Dagda. … Erudite: Thoth. … Sensual: Frey. … Martial: Mars. … Saturnine: Mictlantecuhtli. … Erudite & Sensual: Amun. … Erudite & Martial: Odin. … Erudite & Saturnine: Anubis. … Sensual & Martial: Zeus. … Sensual & Saturnine: Cernunnos. … Martial & Saturnine: Loki. … Erudite, Sensual & Martial: Lug. … Erudite, Sensual & Saturnine: Coyote. … Erudite, Martial & Saturnine: Hades. … Sensual, Martial & Saturnine: Pan.

My test tracked 4 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:

You scored higher than 68% on erudite
You scored higher than 51% on sensual
You scored higher than 81% on martial
You scored higher than 23% on saturnine

Link: The Mythological God Test written by Nitsuki on Ok Cupid, home of the 32-Type Dating Test

We needed a federal investigation to reach this conclusion?

2005-12-15T20:50:00.000-05:00

NTSB: Plane at Midway Needed More Runway

CHICAGO - A jetliner that skidded off a landing strip and into a city street needed about 800 more feet of runway to come to a safe stop, federal investigators said Thursday.

The Southwest Airlines jet crushed a car, killing a 6-year-old boy, after it skidded off a 6,500-foot runway and crashed through a fence at Midway International Airport earlier this month.

A preliminary investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board shows the airplane touched down with about 4,500 feet of runway remaining, but snowy conditions and other factors meant the plane ideally needed about 5,300 feet of runway, according to a report released Thursday.

   On the few occasions I have flown in and out of Chicago - Midway, I have seen just how close the end of the runway is to the surrounding neighborhood. It's really a wonder that this kind of thing has not happened before.

   And yet, a Southwest pilot who has no doubt flown into Midway countless times (it's a Southwest hub) decides to set his plane down a little long in inclement conditions, no doubt aware on some level that he has absolutely no room for error.

   I smell a lawsuit brewing...

Bush, McCain agree on torture ban

2005-12-15T19:56:00.000-05:00

It seems that the White House and the Senator from Arizona have finally come to an agreement on McCain's torture ban. I have not been able to find a copy of the compromise text, so I'm reserving judgment in light of the concerns I raised last week. I just hope we have done enough.

Nevertheless, I think that Howie at The Jawa Report probably has the right idea:

I’ve never been more proud of Mr. Bush or Mr. McCain. John McCain for sticking with it and Mr. Bush for proving he is a reasonable man. Look out for the “me too” on the left. But no this is Moderate and Conservative Republicans working together and coming to an agreement. Also notice the forward looking let’s solve a problem attitude. Rather than stomp on America these men got together and worked out a good solid compromise. So if the left hopes to cut the moderates from the Republican herd I say to them, “Fat Chance”!

If he runs, I can see myself backing John McCain for president (especially compared to the rest of the apparent field this early and his campaign finance position notwithstanding). As badly as Bush needed this deal, McCain needed it, too, if he was to have any hope of laying the foundation to draw votes from the hard-liners in the party during primary season.

   I can see it now: Moderates turn out to vote for McCain; Conservatives turn out (if nothing else) to vote against Hillary (or someone to her left).

   I can dream, can't I?

   Here's hoping we see more cooperation like this over the next few years.

Mindwarp

2005-12-15T16:11:00.000-05:00

I started reading The Genealogy of Morals the other night before bed. As a result, I pose the following question:

Is it at all possible to read Nietzsche without coming away with the oddly and viscerally unsettled feeling one might experience having just read the diary of another who is severely mentally ill?

Perhaps this is not the best possible introduction to this particular philosopher - and I know that he suffered a mental breakdown later in life and also that some people say that he has been misinterpreted and misunderstood - but I've come away from it both nights feeling a little disturbed at this particular display of the human experience: whether of Nietzsche's view of the world or of Nietzsche himself.

If anyone has read this book, or any other by him, your comments are particularly welcome.

A little lawyer humor

2005-12-14T19:07:00.000-05:00

From yesterday's Wall Street Journal, a letter:

Martini's Founding Fathers: Original Intent Debatable

Eric Felten's essay on the dry martini is itself near-perfect ("Don't Forget the Vermouth," Leisure & Arts, Pursuits, Dec. 10). His allusion to constitutional jurisprudence is faulty, however, since neither in law nor martinis can we know the subjective "original intent" of the Founding Fathers. As to martinis, the intent may have been to ease man's passage through this vale of tears or, less admirably, to employ the tactic of "candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker."

What counts in mixology is the "original understanding" of the martini's essence by those who first consumed it. The essence remains unaltered but allows proportions to evolve as circumstances change. Mr. Felten's "near-perfect martini" is the same in principle as the "original-understanding martini" and therefore its legitimate descendant. Such latter-day travesties as the chocolate martini and the raspberry martini, on the other hand, are the work of activist bartenders.

Mr. Felten lapses into heresy only once. He prefers the olive to the lemon peel because the former is a "snack." Dropping a snack into a classic drink is like garnishing filet mignon with ketchup. The correct response when offered an olive is, "When I want a salad, I'll ask for it."

Robert H. Bork
The Hudson Institute
Washington

Somehow, it's refreshing to see that the man whose name became a verb has a sense of humor.

[Hat tip: The Llama Butchers]

Canadian PM Quacks Loudly in Run-up to Elections

2005-12-14T18:34:00.000-05:00

I seem to remember this tactic not working so well for Schroeder in Germany.

Just a thought . . . what with having already suffered an historic no confidence vote and all.

UPDATE: It seems that Captain Ed has some similar thoughts on the matter, albeit stated more fully.

Jousting on another Knight's Turf

2005-12-14T17:48:00.000-05:00

I've been tied up elsewhere today.

Twice today, in fact.

Holiday Shopping

2005-12-13T20:00:00.000-05:00

   (Apologies in advance to my more liberal friends.)

   I was going to take this evening off from posting, but I found something that struck me in just the right way: From the Six Meat Buffet's Last Minute Gift Ideas for Liberals, Stratego for Democrats.

   Now, this satire would not even be half as funny to me if The Lady Exile, my much more progressive better half (see also "The Vote Canceller"), had not won every God-forsaken game of Stratego we had ever played.

   Every game.

   Ever!

   That is, while I dominate our chessboard, when it comes to Stratego even St. Jude shrugs his shoulders and says, "Hey, there things even I can't pull off."

   It's so bad that I eventually reached the point of declaring her "Champion for Life", never to return to the cardboard battlefield; the cause really was that hopeless.

   It's almost a shame I can't really get my hands on a copy of Stratego for Democrats. It would be a great gift this year.

   Maybe I could actually win. ~~(I can't believe I just said that.)~~ Nah.... Probably not.

[via The Llama Butchers]

Calling it a night

2005-12-12T20:55:00.000-05:00

Post-flu fatigue is setting in early this evening.

Before turning in, I direct you to Professor Bainbridge's thoughts on the state of conservatism. It seems that conservatives of differing persuasions can't quite agree on where we are, let alone where we are going.

Monotheism the worst idea ever? Please!

2005-12-12T20:49:00.000-05:00

Rachel at Tinkerty Tonk has it exactly right.

Frist's Nuclear Option

2005-12-12T10:25:00.000-05:00

The ever-astute Joe Gandelman presents some thoughts on how Bill Frist could bungle the Alito nomination - and unwittingly cause damage to the GOP's positional advantages - by banging the "nuclear option" drum unnecessarily.

Indeed, this whole thing is pretty silly. Perhaps Mr. Frist has already seen the new version of King Kong, and thought beating on his chest will scare his enemies away. But there are few signs so far that the Democrats intend to FILBUSTER Alito: vote against him, perhaps...but there doesn't seem to be any groundswell to use the filibuster.
* * *
Left to their devices, the Democrats --divided, showing increasing signs of impending intraparty warfare and buffeted by demands from some to decrease the size of the Democratic tent (after all, in 2006 and 2008 it CAN'T hold Joe Lieberman and Hillary Clinton) — can damage themselves. But hit them with a nuclear option — or threaten them with elimating the filibuster when that issue has not seriously arisen yet — would be the GOP's WORST political strategy in terms of helping solidify Democratic unity and further alientate independent voters.

Check it out.

Pandora's Music Box

2005-12-12T06:23:00.000-05:00

Many thanks to The Impolitic for pointing us to Pandora, a great music recommendation site.

For those looking for a way to help time fly at the office, this site is in a class by itself.

RINO Sightings

2005-12-12T06:12:00.000-05:00

This week's edition of RINO Sightings is up at the Countertop Chronicles.

Check out the best of opinion this week from the conservative-leaning individuals Tom DeLay doesn't want you to know about.

The Weblog Awards Campaign Continues

2005-12-11T18:59:00.000-05:00

As the Weblog Awards enter their final days, more RINOs step up with their endorsements:

Hector Vex offers up his thoughts in his own irreverent stylings.

The Llama Butchers offer a split RINO/Munuvian ticket, including a killer endorsement for your humble host. (Thanks, guys!)

Lastly, there is a RINO still within striking distance if we all band together. In the "Best of the Top 2501-3500 Blogs" Category, I'm throwing my full support behind The World According to Nick, and I encourage you to do the same.

Back in the saddle

2005-12-11T17:19:00.000-05:00

Thanks to those who sent get well wishes yesterday. Thankfully, my illness was brief; it seems to have been unrelated to the weather and if it's the only brush I have with the flu this winter, I'll be very fortunate. After spending pretty much all of yesterday in bed, I seem to be back to normal.

Now, where were we?

Sick/Snow Day

2005-12-10T11:56:00.000-05:00

On the rare occasions when I sleep until almost noon, it's usually because I have been sick the night before. Today is no different. Look for updates later today.

But, briefly, we had a nasty snowstorm yesterday. I had to walk in it yesterday to attend an event and, for the first time in my life, experienced that painful headache commonly known as "brain-freeze" from the outside of my head.

More later.

Shaq Sworn as Miami Reserve Cop

2005-12-09T13:42:00.000-05:00

Talk about giving back to the community:

Shaquille O'Neal was sworn in as a reserve police officer Thursday, with the Miami Heat center choosing to skip a public event in favor of a quiet, no-frills ceremony.

"Officer O'Neal is very considerate toward the other officers, and he was afraid if he was there he would have taken away from that moment for other officers," department spokesman Robert Hernandez said. "This is a very special time for them and their families."

O'Neal has said he is most interested in working with the special victims detective unit to help stop crimes against children.

"He made it clear when he decided to come to Miami Beach that he didn't want to just be a poster boy for photo ops, he wanted to get down and dirty and do the job," Hernandez said. "He's here to conduct investigations and to make arrests."

A lot of professional athletes should be taking notes.

When Lawyers' Hubris Runs Wild...

2005-12-09T11:02:00.000-05:00

Judges break out the snark.

Every once in a while, an opinion like this is handed down. This is the stuff that gets forwarded around firms and law schools and gives students and lawyers alike something to laugh about (if at the expense of lawyers who have misplaced their self-awareness).

RINOs on the Weblog Awards

2005-12-09T08:54:00.000-05:00

As I noted previously, lots of Raging RINOs are finalists for Weblog Awards.

Reaction is starting to trickle in:

Eric at Classical Values demurs to his own nomination and offers his strong recommendations for Best LGBT Blog.

Rachel at Tinkerty Tonk offers her endorsements -- RINO and otherwise -- in multiple categories.

Decision '08 has started a series of posts looking at individual categories.

Pigilito offers his thoughts, including a couple of tiebreakers in categories where he is splitting his vote.

Searchlight Crusade gives recommendations in what looks like every category and, in true RINO fashion, votes his conscience instead of a straight RINO line. I can respect that.

UPDATE: The World According to Nick checks in with his thoughts on the matter. His blog is the choice for "Best of the Top 2501-3500 Blogs", bar none.

Keep checking back for more RINO reactions and remember: Vote every day until December 15!

Globe: MA Foreclosures up 35%

2005-12-08T14:51:00.000-05:00

This isn't good.

The number of foreclosures filed through Oct. 31 was 9,459, compared with 7,003 in the same 10-month period last year, the report said. Essex County had the largest increase, at 50 percent.

Adjustable-rate and interest-only loans, which are riskier than traditional fixed-rate loans, are partly to blame. They've become popular because they cost less up front, but they require higher payments typically after a year or two.

A little ironic, no?

2005-12-08T00:30:00.000-05:00

   That liberals who criticize President Bush's "you're either with us, or your against us" mentality sometimes use the same reasoning against opponents of the McCain torture amendment.

   Take this example from the Michigan Senate GOP primary race, still in its infancy: the three candidates split on the McCain bill -- two against it.

   This caused some concern on a forum for progressives in my former home state. One of the commenters called opposition to the McCain amendment "endorcing [sic] torture." Friends of mine have taken similar positions.

   Sorry. It isn't quite that simple. Just as someone can abhor terrorism while opposing the Global War on Terror (is that what we're calling it this week), one can abhor torture without endorsing the McCain Amendment.

   As a general matter, I am against torture of detainees and others in the custody and control of the United States military. I can't imagine anything that has the potential to damge our standing the world community more than would the torture of detainees in the custody of the American government. And yet, I am not convinced that the McCain Amendment is the best way to prevent this, predominantly because the Amendment, while saying some very noble things that I support in principle, isn't terribly clear as to what it is proscribing.

The language defining torture in the McCain Amendment is as follows:

Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Defined.--In this section, the term ``cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment'' means the cruel, unusual, and inhumane treatment or punishment prohibited by the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, as defined in the United States Reservations, Declarations and Understandings to the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment done at New York, December 10, 1984.

That's it. You would think that our personnel are required to observe the protections of the constitutional amendments named in the provision, except that its only incorporating the referenced United Nations Convention, which reads, in pertinent part:

The Senate's advice and consent is subject to the following understandings, which shall apply to the obligations of the United States under this Convention:

(1) (a) That with reference to article 1, the United States understands that, in order to constitute torture, an act must be specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering and that mental pain or suffering refers to prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from (1) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering; (2) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality; (3) the threat of imminent death; or (4) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality.

The Convention is not terribly clear either. We can all probably agree that beating, shocking, and drugging detainees is forbidden. What about sleep deprivation? Or requiring a detainee to stand for hours on end? Or waterboarding? These are the questions in the grey area of a necessarily grim business and would produce a variety of answers from different people.

   The upshot? More lawyers writing more memos for future administrations, not necessarily justifying torture, but just trying to figure out what the Hell the law actually means to the soldier on the ground.

   If you think the McCain Amendment, as it is written, is the key to ensuring that Abu Grahib never happens again, you're kidding yourself.

   If you want to label a McCain Amendment opponent as "pro-torture," (most opponents, anyway) show me a McCain Amendment that at least attempts to describe explicitly what practices we as Americans will not tolerate from our own armed forces, in addition to leaving the ambiguities allowed under the Convention in place for closer calls. That's a McCain Amendment I could begin to support: one that sets a firm, even unflinching, tone.

   If we can't spell out in our laws the very worst forms of treatment that we will not tolerate, setting a tangible threshold of minimal decency, how can we even begin to examine with any meaningful standards those marginal cases that will come up in the future?

   If we want to indulge our national pride by how well we treat our prisoners, then maybe we should get serious about what torture means as a practical matter. As much as a number of politicians have come out against torture, not one has gone so far as to initiate any meaningful debate -- one that is desperately vital to this issue -- over which methods are acceptable, and which are not.

   Not even John McCain.

   Nevertheless, though the conversation about what constitutes torture is unsettling, and even nauseating, it is one that we need to have if we are going to prevent another international disgrace.

Defending the (Allegedly) Indefensible

2005-12-07T10:08:00.000-05:00

Today, the Boston Globe has a fascinating profile of criminal defense attorney John Carney.

Morning Reads

2005-12-07T09:15:00.000-05:00

Middle America Progressive: It's nice to see that Sully, having sold out to Time (by some accounts), has not sold out his principles.

News From Davison, MI: Fun game, but I need to wake up first. My first effort (a rehash of a previous edition of this game) resulted in a blank screen.

Don Surber: Don links my post and some others with content addressing aspects of the would-be "War on Christmas". Don't dare question our loyalty.

Cardinal Martini: A grammar lesson for Howard Dean.

More once the caffeine kicks in...

Spreading the ahem "Holiday" Cheer

2005-12-06T19:09:00.000-05:00

Much has been made this year of the perennial "Happy Holidays" / "Merry Christmas" quandary, and other related issues.

I'm not going to say much on this issue, since I spend a fair amount of time railing about religion and society during the rest of the year. Instead, check out these links:

(via Classical Values) Eric thinks Foamy has it about right, and I'm inclined to agree. (Caution: Strong Language)
These guys have the highest-rated morning radio show back in Detroit; I almost spit out my coffee when I heard this offering.

Letters from the Bostonian Exile

Change: It's a good thing

A Trip Down Memory Lane: Stage 1

Clinton vs. Bush

Dispatch from the Battlefield

Busy

Grits and Greens at the Holidays

Rules for Blogging

Kerry Lied, Jefferson Cried

On "Net Neutrality": Slow Down

Post on "Horrifying" Decision to Follow

Ted Kennedy Does Late Night

Programming Note

It's About Damn Time: McClellan Resigns

Manchester Airport to Change Name

TomKitten? Are you serious?

What is the matter with people???

Making Mischief Elsewhere

A little shameless self-promotion

Very Exciting Day!

Did Comedy Central Censor "South Park"?

Straight Talk on McCain

Opening Day

Libby: Bush OK'ed Leak

"South Park" Wins a Peabody

Reconsidering Reincarnation...

Programming Note

SJC: Mass. can bar out of state gays and lesbans from marrying

Insufferable?

Summary Disposition

Fresh Fodder for the Cannon

Criminal Bumper Stickers

Rock Royalty (Refreshingly) Plays the Commoner

You can stay at the J-A-I-L

Cafe Owners of the World, Unite!

Card Resigns

New Mass. Lottery Game to Offer Sox Season Tix

Today's sign of the Apocalypse

RINO Sightings Monday

Quaid Sues "Brokeback" Producers

Behold, the power of Google!

Programming Note

It's about time...

Summary Disposition

Moussaoui Case: It Only Gets Uglier

Programming Note

The Carnival of the Vanities

A Little Lenten Fun

Summary Disposition

Jay Bennish's *First Amendment* Case? Please!

Heh...

"Chef" Leaves South Park

Good Riddance

(Bar) Membership Has Its Priviliges

In Brief

I haven't disappeared...

Light Posting Today

Reaction to the Open Letter

Coming Home...

An Open Letter to the President

Preliminary Impressions on the NSA Case

Public Service Announcement

Today, *four* is a mystical number

My senator, ladies and gentlemen...

Announcement

Year-end Update

Programming Note

Seasons' Greetings

Wednesday Food-blogging

What she said

RINOs in the Mist

Orin Kerr on the NSA and FISA

Get your Exile fix on the go...

Follow-up on FISA

What changed?

And the Webbie goes to. . .

Gratuitous Friday Quiz Link - Deity Edition

We needed a federal investigation to reach this conclusion?

Bush, McCain agree on torture ban

Mindwarp

Jay Bennish's First Amendment Case? Please!

Today, four is a mystical number

Spreading the ahem "Holiday" Cheer