Konstantzusammenschaft-whatever that is

I would like to thank the Law School Virgin for pointing me towards this wonderful way to avoid work. I don't know about this result though..

Read My Result
Take the Test

Am I wearing perfectly matched flannel pajamas? I think I gave way too many "yes" answers to questions about kink and questionable behavior to have an avatar with a full matching pajama set. That's probably why I'm sitting on the ground there...thinking to myself "where did it all go? It all used to be so exciting! Now look at me. And my Chai Tea is still too hot to drink! Oh why me? Why me?" Although it does look like I have some scratches on my neck....

Update: After looking more at this picture, I think maybe it was supposed to be "Really Gay , Loves Madonna." Not that there's anything wrong with that. Well, except maybe this.

New Jersey Same-Sex Marriage Case

So New Jersey weighed in on the same sex marriage front the other day with an interesting opinion in Lewis v. Harris. The court held that preventing same sex couples from enjoying the same financial and social benefits that heterosexual couples enjoy ran afoul of the state constitution's equal protection clause.

So what to do? Here the court split. The dissenting judges thought that anything less than full-blown marriage was an equal protection violation. The majority decided to leave it up to the legislature, giving them 180 days to work out a way to give same-sex couples the same privileges as married couples, BUT, they don't have to call it "marriage;" civil union, or I guess "Bert and Ernie Union" would work too, but the privileges enjoyed have to be the same. So a sort of "separate but equal."

I guess this is a compromise of sorts, but this really seems like a silly distinction without a difference. Is it really just the word "marriage" that social conservatives are so upset about? Or do they feel that same-sex couples are so abhorrent that they should not be given the same benefits as married persons? Is there really a constituency out there that is willing to let same-sex couples marrry...strike that....union-ize?, as long as they don't call it "marriage?"

Media reaction has predicted a backlash, similar to the one that my fair city created a few years ago, saying that once again this will galvanize the social conservatives. I'm not so sure. I think the court has diffused the argument that they are being activist by leaving the remedy up the legislature. I think some of the fear is gone as well. Critics now see that people in Massachusetts and elsewhere are still living in peace and procreating, which has taken the steam out of the argument that gay marriage will somehow destroy civil society.

Plus, I think everyone realizes this time around that there are more important conversations to be had.

From CBC News

Effed up quote o' the day

"With the psychotic, middle-aged Madonna out there on the loose buying up all the stolen Negro babies in Africa, I felt it my social and humanitarian duty to take in any young, beautiful and sexy orphaned Jew teens running wild in Beverly Hills. Cory's a great kid, and I'm proud to be her daddy." -Vincent Gallo, referring to Cory Kennedy. (NYP)

Lil' Victory o' the Day

I'm in the middle of a solo intra-office document review, meaning that I am currently going through several thousands of documents by myself looking for "relevant" stuff, which is way too broad of a category. I actually have to read at least part of each document. My eyes start to glaze over at times, I start thinking about lunch, and forget what I'm looking for. I should look up "malpractice" one of these days.

So you'll permit me my girlish squeal of joy that today Gawker posted my nomination for their "Worst Magazine Covers Ever" list, and why I thought it was worthy. It's the March 12, 2006, Time cover about half way down entitled "How We Shop Now." You might remember this magazine cover from my earlier completely unrelated post.

A découvrir

Camille, who was featured on Nouvelle Vague's first album. Strange yet intriguing amalgam of African rhythms, Bobby McFerrin-esque body noises, and Björk-like vocals. Enjoy!

Siempre Nadie

Can you believe this is still going on?

After 35 rounds of voting, neither Venezuela nor Guatemala have attained the 2/3 vote necessary for the temporary seat on the Security Council. Venezuela has put forth a "compromise" candidate. Can anyone guess who that would be? That's right!

Mini Me. Bolivia.

Now again, I'm all for dialogue and having developing countries on the Security Council (should be a permanent seat), but come on now Hugo. This is not a "compromise."

The Tipping Point?

Or maybe the breaking point, or melting point, or perhaps critical mass of bull shit. Granted, we all have the attention span of a ferret that has just imbibed a double-espresso (thanks for nothing Nickelodeon), but there has got to a point where we say "basta."





"It's never been stay the course?" Are you kidding me? While the American public is too distracted to notice some of the more subtle shifts of policy (e.g., why we're in Iraq), we all have heard this one thanks to the ubiquitous talking point. You're just fibbing now George. Can we please just sit down and be honest about this now? Please?

Thank you to my friend (who knows who he is) for sending me this link. Incredible.

Northern California: Part Two

In the interest of a limited attention-span Friday, I thought I would just post some pictures. I have found local area or special interest photos to be an interesting aspect of this blogging thing. So for those of you in CA, these probably won't be very interesting, but maybe someone out there might like 'em. (Direct link to flickr photos).

Lost Coast. Beautiful, if not somewhat difficult to get to.

Monterey Bay Aquarium. That's the GF in the jelly fish display:



Monterey Monarchs:

Point Reyes:

Mount Tamalpais. I thought this would be a pretty picture, but it kind of looks like my Windows wallpaper.

Yosemite:

San Francisco Conservatory of Flowers

Big Sur:

Broken Social Scene

So I guess their follow-up album has been out for a while now (good god, could it already have been a year since I saw them live?). They are the classic indie band, with about 20 people on stage during some sets. They are very intense live, so I highly recommend seeing them if they come through your town. I had just never seen any of their music videos before (thanks YouTube), so I've been reminiscing. I mean working. I've been working.



P.S. Has anyone else noticed that there has been a lot of good music coming from Canada in the last few years?

Out of the Line-Up

I don't love baseball. My grandmother used to take me to Dodger games when I was a kid, but since little league, I just can't be bothered.

I was sad when Oakland got stomped on by Detroit, but I probably watched 1/3 of one game. I'll probably watch a game or two of the World Series, but I'm not planning my week around it or anything. For me, baseball is not a national past-time. It's something to watch when I'm hung over and there's no football on.

My roommate though, who spent a significant amount of time in Boston, loves baseball and the Red Sox. She's not a crazy fanatic or anything, but gets excited during games and knows all the players and who's leading the AL East at any given moment. But I still don't think that she'd spring for this:

Eternal Image Speeds Production of Major League Baseball(R) Urns Based on Enthusiastic Public Response

First Urns to Be Available by Opening Day 2007

FARMINGTON HILLS, MI -- (MARKET WIRE) --
October 10, 2006 -- Eternal Image, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: ETIM), a public company engaged in the design, manufacturing and marketing of customized designer caskets and urns, today announced that it has moved up the production of the first-ever licensed Major League Baseball® funeral urns due to enthusiastic public response.

Here's a computer generated image of what they think it will look like:

"So are you a Yankees fan?"

"Me? No, but uncle Henry was."

"Then why do you have a Yankees...uh...thing up there on the mantle?"

"Well, that's how uncle Henry wanted it."

"Oh...he wanted it on your mantle?"

"Yes."

"Why didn't he want it on his mantle?"

Do you see how these things will lead to awkward "who's on first" or "who's six feet under?" kind of conversations?

Oh, and Uncle Henry? If you are reading this please know that if you put yourself in one of these, you're not going on the mantle ok? It's tacky. You'll be put with the sports stuff in the garage.

But don't think Americans are the only ones with strange ideas of post-mortem containers. Check out what they do in Ghana.



Yes, that's a beer coffin.

I understand that a little more though because its individualizing it. I mean the guy liked beer and drank beer, and maybe worked in a brewery. There's another one that's shaped like a big cigarette because the guy liked smoking and owned a cigarette business. That's individual. It's not like Uncle Henry was on the Yankees, you know? Although it will be the officially licenced MLB Urn. Dear Lord, do we really have nothing better to do with our trademark attorneys?

Northern California

IMG_0602
Originally uploaded by cerf.sauvage.

Is a wonderful place. My GF and I took this on our last trip together down to Big Sur. Doesn't this look like an advert?

Live in Northern California, but move before it...uh..makes you drunk on wine and chubby on cheese. Mmmm. Cheese.

Here's just the coast line by itself, minus the ad for Napa Valley :)

Two Steps Back

After being reminded of the song "Opposites Attract" by some commentary on this post, I thought that "Two Steps Back" pretty much summed up how I felt when I saw this this headline:

Bush Signs Terror Interrogation Law

As I previously mentioned, this is some pretty scary litigation. It is just amazing to me that in the year 2006, we think that holding people without charge, putting people to death based on hearsay evidence and coerced testimony, and denying them habeas corpus is, as Bush put it "a way to deliver justice to the terrorists we have captured." There is nothing just about it. We are compromising the very principles that separate us from terrorism: the rule of law, respect for human rights and dignity, and the search for truth through due process. Why are we turning back the clock to the time of the inquisition?

Here's what the president had to say:

"It is a rare occasion when a president can sign a bill that he knows will save American lives," Bush said. "I have that privilege this morning."

I can understand how it provides post-hoc retribution, but how is this going to save lives? Indefinite detention might keep these specific guys out of the picture, but the hate it generates in the Muslim world and elsewhere will create more terrorism, not less. Torture, abbreviated justice, and death sentences will not provide a deterrent to Islamic fundamentalists who are willing to blow themselves up for their cause anyway in order to become a martyr. By giving these guys disproportionate justice via special kangaroo courts, we only play into the rhetoric of Al-Qaeda and other groups who claim that the United States is at war with Muslims.

There is also an interesting debate going on as to whether Congress has the authority to suspend habeas. (Post at Balkanization). To wit: Does the Suspension Clause present a non-justiciable political question? and if so, doesn't that render an explicit prohibition in the Constitution completely meaningless?

Que Lastima!

After 7 rounds of voting, the world can still not agree on who should have the "Latin American" elected seat on the U.N. Security Council being vacated by Argentina: Guatemala or Venezuela. I think that the U.S. has done Guatemala a disfavor by lobbying on their behalf, and it just plays into Chavez's North-South rhetoric. No one dislikes Guatemala, but by supporting the central-American country, the US has allowed Chavez to turn this into a proxy contest between the US and Venezuela.

I think it is high time that developing countries have a permanent place on the Security Council, not just an elected spot. However, I think it's pompous on Chavez's part to proclaim that he should be the porte-parole for all of the economically disadvantaged countries just because he's apologetically anti-American. While I'm sure that sounds refreshing to a lot of people on this earth, it should not in and of itself suffice.

Apparently China supports Venezuela because Guatemala has stronger diplomatic ties with Taiwan (yeah, real mature China). Russia is also supporting Venezuela because of "high-level" contracts Venezuela has with them to buy weapons (See petro dollars). Arab countries support Venezuela because of Chavez's anti-U.S. stance, and Mercosur wants to keep Venezuela in the fold even though its support of Bolivia's nationalization of its oil and gas assets is in direct opposition of the free-market principles Mercosur is founded on.

A compromise candidate might be necessary if this continues.

Tout cela dit, je suis très content que personne n'ait mis en question la candidature de la Belgique, un pays qui me sera toujours très chere. Le plat-pays qui a connu la perspective de Magritte mérite bien une place sur le Conseil de sécurité.

UPDATE 10.17.06: After 14 Rounds, Guatemala 108, Venezuela 76. Rumors of a new compromise candidate are getting louder.

UPDATE 10.18.06, 16.21 PT: After 22 Rounds, we're still in deadlock.

The House Always Wins. So Does the Senate.

President Bush today signed into law the SAFE Port Act which aims to strengthen our...well...ports. It provides funding and programs for improved cargo container inspection. Attached to this bill at the last minute, however, is a federal ban on banking institutions knowingly transferring funds to businesses or individuals that may conduct gambling operations in states and areas where gambling is prohibited.

This online gambling ban was previously a bill unto itself (known as the Unlawful Internet Gambling and Prohibition Act) but it had received such significant opposition in the Senate that it had been practically dead since July. In response, Bill Frist was able to have it tacked on to the SAFE Port Act: a bill that no one in their right mind would want to come out and openly oppose so close to the elections ("so senator, you oppose container security?").

If you look at the bill, the on-line gaming provisions are at the very end and have absolutely nothing to do with what preceeds it.

While this bill doesn't out-and-out prohibit on-line gambling, it does the next best thing via financial attrition; it makes it impossible to settle bets on-line via any banking system. Eventually a system is to be set up to block such transfers.

I don't like gambling. I've never been particularly lucky, and I enjoy the security of knowing that I will in fact receive something in return when I put money down on a table (aka "a purchase").

I have friends, however, who love it. They love the thrill, and an ex-flatmate of mine has actually started supplementing his income via on-line gambling. He has a gambling "problem" in the sense that he's so good at it, it's actually profitable.

I think this bill smacks of hypocrisy and Republican paternalism fueled by sense of moral superiority. First, people who are prone to abuse gambling are going to do it whether or not there is on-line gambling. There's still horse racing (provided by the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978), Indian gaming, lotteries (a state monopoly no less), and casinos, not to mention the dodgy illegal venues that I'm sure everyone has heard of.

Second, on-line gambling was making gambling cheaper through competition and low-overhead. Exchanges have lowered the costs betting by cutting out bookmakers, and payouts have risen accordingly. This made gambling less dangerous, not more.

Third, by eliminating credit cards you are eliminating a safe-guard that can establish age and betting limits. This can drive people to some of the more riskier options.

I think Internet gambling has risks. Verifying age is difficult, and since you have no idea who you're playing against, you could be more vulnerable to swindlers. But prohibition is not the answer and this would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater (should we outlaw on-line sales because of potential abuse?), not to mention that it never works (see 18th Amendment). Regulate it, but don't prohibit it.

This bill is not about protecting gambling addicts. It's about protecting brick and mortar gambling houses and the states own monopolies while galvanizing the Christian right with the Republicans under a veil of outlawing sin. This game is gettin' old. I fold.

See article.

UPDATE 10.16.06

I spoke with my friend who plays on-line Texas hold-em as a lucrative hobby and he said that he thinks he'll still be able to go through Europe, so all is not lost.

I might be giving away too much here,

stiff arm
Originally uploaded by cerf.sauvage.

but I just love this photo.

Go Bears!

"The Emperor's Children" by Claire Messud-a Recommendation

In late August, The Economist gave this novel a glittering page-long review. While I am hesitant to read anything that deals with September 11 (non-fiction seems too real and too spun these days, and any fiction seems disrespectful), I was intrigued. So much so, I pre-ordered it off of Amazon, a new event for me.

This is one of the better modern novels I have read in a long time. It follows a a group of friends from college (Brown) who are now in their thirties for about seven months, March through November of 2001 (thus lopsidedly straddling September 11). The characters' relationships with one another wax and wane as significant others enter the picture, and as jobs become frustrating or non-existent. Each character is prone to intricate self-reflection.

This book paints a picture of post-modern American life that (to me) hasn't been captured before (even absent the appearance of September 11) . Marina is the daughter of a prominent liberal pundit and commentator. Her friend Danielle has the most prominent and stable job, but is way over-skilled for the position she holds. Marina, born silver-spoon in mouth and blessed with good looks, struggles with completing a book deal that everyone really assumes she got because of who her father is. Though Marina's father, Murray, became well-known as a liberal journalist in the 1960s, he is still in demand as a lecturer and commentator. Through the book, however, it emerges that the man has had very few new ideas since his heyday and that he has just been republishing and recycling the same thoughts over and over.

I think the interesting thing is that each character seems to acknowledge in some way that he/she is (to borrow from Catcher in the Rye) a phony. Murray eventually asks himself if he is actually the genius that everyone thinks (or pretends to think) he is. Danielle knows that her job is not as interesting as she makes it out to be, but feels comfortable in the fact that while Marina is the rich and pretty one, she is the smart one with the stable job.

Messud does a wonderful job of capturing the malaise of the young, educated, and unfulfilled. She aptly portrays familiar human sentiments of the now; how everyone thinks that the undeserving often succeed but that they themselves are always entitled to have more: how often we become willing subsribers to systems (capitalism, class, mores) that we once abhored: or how habituated we have become to being forced to participate in systems or play roles unwillingly, just to get by.

The events of September 11 provide a shock to the characters, but each in a different way. Interestingly, it mostly prompts more navel-gazing in the characters, rather than any sort of external aggression.

I really haven't given too much away here. My only "critique" if you could call it that, is that the dialogue is too refined. No one really "talks like that." Even the over-educated. That said, I don't think Messud could have developed this story or painted the images she did any other way. Her prose and character development is amazing.

NY TIMES REVIEW (much better than mine)

Eat My Shorts, Kim Jong-Il

I was listening to NPR yesterday morning while they were reporting on the international community's reaction to the underground nuclear test that North Korea conducted. They had some brief audio of UN ambassador John Bolton's statement and his answers to a few questions posed by the media. I wasn't sure because I was wandering around my apartment, but I could have sworn that when he was asked if the US had actually provoked North Korea's nuclear ambitions by including them in the "axis of evil," he responded by saying "get a life." Surely I must have misheard.

I was looking at the news today, and lo and behold, there it was in the Guardian (full article):

Mr Bolton dismissed the notion that Pyongyang was driven to carry out a nuclear test by being labelled as part of the "axis of evil", saying those who believed this should "get a life".

Now I'm not saying that North Korea became a rogue state because Bush cavalierly included him in his now infamous "axis of evil" speech, but surely our F*CKING AMBASSADOR TO THE UN could come up with a more diplomatic, if not more relevant, response to this question than an out-of-date colloquial expression. If this is how he addresses the public, lord only knows how he speaks privately.

Bolton receiving Senate confirmation? As if! Well, maybe he'll get it. Not!

MOMA

IMG_0764
Originally uploaded by cerf.sauvage.

We also got a chance to go see the MOMA in its new (to us anyhow) location. It's exquisite. The collection really is amazing.

I don't know why, but I have this thing for Jasper Johns. I don't really love Pop Art generally, though I do like it and respect its ironic critique of consumer society. I heard this story of an interview he gave once, that went something like this (paraphrasing from memory):

"But why do you use the stencils (Johns frequently used stenciled numbers in his work)? Is it because you like them or is it just because the stencils come that way?

"That's what I like about them...that they come that way."

I thought that was just a delicious answer.

But in any event, it was moving to see some of his (and others') more famous work up close, such as this well-known piece "Flag."

I don't know the girl in front of it. She was just there and I thought it gave some sense of scale. I highly recommend going if you are in town. On Friday nights it's free from 4-8.

Going Back to Brooklyn...

I went and visited the GF in the NYC for a nice long weekend. She lives in a cute apartment in a nice part of Brooklyn. Two blocks one way, and it's quaint little patisseries and boutiques, the other way is gun shots and crack deals. One learns quickly which subway stop to frequent.

We had a bit of a melt down one night (I'll probably have to do a whole separate post on it to really talk about it), but other than that it was great to see her and I realized that I truly miss and love her. These are not words I throw around.

I think I might need a change of scenery anyway. I've been in the bay area for a long time now. Why am I not already in New York, you ask? Here's is a short list.

1. She didn't decide which grad school to attend until about a month before classes started, so I wasn't sure she was even going to New York (LA was also a possibility).

2. I am a new attorney, getting my feet wet. I'm not particularly good at what I do, and finding a job in a city where I don't know anyone (in the legal field at least) is frightening. The idea of taking another bar exam (which I might or might not have to do, granted) also makes me physically ill (it gives me the taste of coffee on the back of my throat).

3. Word on the street is that attorneys work crazy hours in New York. I might see more of her and the city if I just visited every six weeks or so.

4. Moving for somebody makes me nervous. While I am cognizant of it, I'm afraid if things went south for me (or us) I would (un)consciously resent her for making me move out there.

I'm starting to think that I really want to go though...or at least give it an honest shot.

My favorite New York story of the trip. I called a car service to take me to LaGuardia. This kid in baggy pants and a Yankees cap pulled up blasting music that I could only imagine was "Chingy" or something like that (I'm lame and out of touch, give me a fuckin' break here). I wasn't sure if this was the right car or not (little if any labels or markings on the van), but then he said " You goin' to the airport or what (question mark intentionally omitted)." Ah yes, this must be my ride.

He started yelling racial slurs at the guy in the car in front of us, who must have cut him off before he picked me up or something (I think my driver was latino, but I couldn't be sure). He turned up some hip hop track on the radio and asked me "you understand this? You feel this?" I said that I did, but I think he could tell I was lying.

He asked me how long my flight was. I said about five hours. "Fuck, I couldn't fly no five hours without smoking a blunt first.....hey, you wanna smoke? I already got it all rolled up." I declined telling him that I really did need to find my plane and that hanging out in the Cinnabon for 4 hours would not get me back to SF any quicker.

"Do you mind if I smoke?"

"Not at all"

We then got into a conversation about our respective "bitches." It was actually kind of...nice.... I told him how my GF gets jealous of other girls in my life, and that the irony was that while my past is flecked with infidelities, I haven't even thought about cheating on the current GF and wouldn't.

"Yo, I feel you. My girl is the same way. I told her, 'you know I used to be a playa, but I ain't foolin' around wit any other girls.' But now that I told her and came clean, bitch is crazy right? She's all up in my shit now and don't trust me."

He dropped me in the alternative drop off so that we could avoid the cops prowling the curb side. He gave me his card and said that if I ever "need to talk" to give him a ring.

As I staggered through security, somewhat confused, but at ease, I realized that I had a nice second-hand high.

For the Geek in You that Just Can't Wait

Supreme Court Transcripts are now available on the same day as oral argument. No more checking back weeks later to hear how Scalia and Ginsburg had an ideological argument with each another by asking rhetorical and hyperbolic questions of poor unsuspecting counsel.

The Supremes have already granted cert in a few interesting cases. Having the two newbies (Roberts/Alito) on this Court with two cases regarding the partial birth abortion ban on the docket makes me fidget.

Meanwhile, Back in the Former Yugoslavia...

Hope.

On October 3, with a 55% voter turn-out, Bosnia and Herzegovina elected their three presidents (Bosnian, Croat, Serb) with no scandals, and with International Observers declaring that it was free and fair. Congratulations to Haris Silajdzic, Nebojsa Radmanovic, and Zeljko Komsic.

None of the new presidents are from the nationalist parties that have historically won these elections. In fact, many Muslims voted for Zeljko Komsic, a more centrist Croat. Croat nationalists acknowledge that Komsic was elected legally, but they contest his legitimacy as leader.

While Radmanovic's party does seem to support secession of the Republika Srpska, there seems to be hope that the three presidents will be able to get along and help move Bosnia and Herzegovina forward. As one voter put it, "It is the first time that we have three presidents with class."

See full article from Le Monde.

Great Song, Great Film

I mentioned Nouvelle Vague before, and then I found this great little video of one of their songs. I don't know if the band did this themselves, mais ça tombe bien. The group's new album "Band à Part" shares the name of a Jean-Luc Godard film from the 60s (In English, known as "The Outsiders"). This is actually a scene from that film. Uncanny, non? As if they were made for each other.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekQZPozjCX8

Whatever happened to morals and values, INDEED!

This is complete plagiarism, but I just couldn't help but love this bit of, um, "news."

From US Weekly Today:

Nick Cheated on Paris with Pieces of Ashlee Simpson

Now we know why they don’t call them Backstreet Men. When Backstreet Boy Nick Carter learned that Paris Hilton was cheating on him with Sophia Bush's fiancé, Chad Michael Murray, he took the mature approach. According to PageSix, he waited until his then-girlfriend jetted off to Australia and then hooked up with Ashlee Simpson. "I'd fallen head over heels with this chick. Then, all of a sudden, three months go by and I got people telling me, 'Nick, you know what Paris is doing to you,' and I got a little upset," Carter said. "So then I just decided to fight back a little bit and started doing my own thing again. The result is I hooked up with Ashlee Simpson. When Paris came back from Australia, they talked to each other and she found out about it. "So I brought it up to her and said, 'You know what I did, and now it's your turn. Why don't you tell me what you did.' And she goes, 'I never did anything! I never cheated on you.' I had kind of started to really like Ashlee and I was thinking about the dating stage, then before you know it, f--king b-tch-face comes back." Carter, 26, told the New York Post he has no regrets, but the experience with Hilton left a bitter taste in his mouth. "I got so burnt over that whole Paris [bleep] with all this swinging and switching. Whatever happened to morals and values?"

Celebreties are hilarious. Look at this stuff. I truly don't understand the fascination with any of these people. Nick Carter? The Backstreet Boys? Why are we still talking about this? I also think Paris looks like a cross-eyed bird, who, because of her ocular deficiency, cannot get enough to eat. I'd be all over Ass-lee and her new nose. I bet I'd have a better chance with her sister though. She seems like she's a bit desperate of late.

By George I Think They've Got It!

Sometimes I feel lawyers get a bad rap. There are a few bad apples (I've met some mealy red-delicious in my day, believe you me), but generally I don't think lawyers are as bad as everyone makes them out to be. They are generally over-worked and sometimes a bit too argumentative, but other than that, I think lawyers have what it takes to be good people.

So when I read this article, I was somewhat torn. Apparently, young associates, with their crazy tattoos and nonchalant manner, are a threat to the good ol'' boy club of law firms. So much so, that they now hire outside help to train them the social graces that is befitting of the upper classes.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's nice for a law firm to pay for a class that teaches you about wine, but it's the end that frightens me. They're creating associate robots. Apparently, it's not ok to be ignorant about wine, have tattoos, or dress in anything but proper attire. How about having a diversity of ideas and perspectives? Don't get me wrong, some of the attorneys I've met have pretty poor social skills, but forcing them to take a class on etiquette and proper behavior? This whole thing smacks of Pygmalion. As in, you could be the most brilliant legal mind this side of Greenwich Mean Time, but it just won't do if you can't play golf and tell that funny story about when you and your Lacrosse team went up to your parents summer home on the cape. Remember that? Oh, James, bring the car around will you? It's so hard to find good help these days.

I Have a Nip/Tuck Problem

I don't know if it's the fact that I secretly admire Dr. Christian Troy, the fact that I resent myself for secretly admiring Dr. Christian Troy, or just the unpredictable insanity that attracts me, but this is the only show that has ever religiously commandeered my attention once a week.

It had me at "Tell me what you don't like about yourself." No...rather, it had me at the first show of the first season, when Christian bangs the girl who waters the plants (and they basically show it) and they play a Bebel Gilberto song, Sem Contenção, a personal favorite. The Gotan Project also seems to be a regular feature on the show now too, which I enjoy independently, but I think goes great with the show.

I love it for the girls that turn out to be boys, and the girls who are obviously boys who teach us a little something about ourselves, boy or girl (Insert Blur song here).

I love watching Christian be Christian, periodically displaying a conscience. I like watching Sean be a hypocrite. I love how Matt has so many fucking issues (Why is it always the rich kids that are messed up in the head?). And poor, poor Annie, who always seems to get punished for seeming well-adjusted.

Last night they played a song by Nouvelle Vague, another one of my favorites. Maybe it just makes me feel cool that I recognize the music and it thus reaffirms the relevance of my own existence. Hmmmm....what would Brooke Shields say about that?

Or perhaps I should ask myself, "WWXD?"

That's right, "What Would Xenu Do?" as they are now dealing with Scientology. Could it get any battier? I mean better?

Epilogue to My Mugging

So yeah. I was walking home around 11:30pm on Friday. About two blocks from home, a guy who was walking in front of me spun around and pulled a gun on me.

I hesitated, and looked around, but no one else was in sight. Seeing my hesitation, he waved the gun in my face and said "this ain't no game." I gave him my bag, which had my wallet and ipod in it. He took my phone but let me keep my keys (thank god). He ran off and I flagged down a pickup that was coming. The guys inside let me call 911. About 15 seconds later a cop drove around the corner (coincidentally I think). I didn't see where he went, but based on what the guys in the pickup said (as far as I can remember), I think he might have gotten into a waiting car and took off. The police swarmed the area, but no luck.

I was impressed with the police response that night, but the follow up has been pretty poor. I was told to call the robbery department today (Monday). I called at 9:30, but the lady said they hadn't processed any of the reports yet. I called back a few hours later, and she asked me "what information do you want?" I told her that the officer who took my statement said to follow up. She said "well we haven't arrested anyone yet, so we don't have anything new."

Most of my day at work was spent figuring out how to get a new phone, making an appointment at the DMV, etc. I'm still a little frazzled, but mostly just irritated. Irritated that I have to get a new ID, new membership card to my gym, etc. I guess that's petty, I mean at least I didn't get shot.

I think I'm just kind of frustrated with humanity; that people do this, and that you can work hard, pay rent and do everything right but then in a split second, someone can take everything from you.

My girlfriend got held up about 6 months ago in a different part of the city. Those guys were never caught. We both live in pretty nice areas. In my girlfriend's old neighborhood they called a town hall meeting because there were several people who were robbed, and a few burglaries where the people were home. I think SF is getting more dangerous. I think she's safer in Brooklyn. Seriously.

Apologies

I just got robbed at gun point in this fair city, so it's probably going to be a while before I post anything else. I'm fine, but la vie quotidienne is going to be more of a hassle for the days to come, so I am guessing I won't be on here for a while. So for those of you who read this (perhaps all 3 of you), I apologize in advance.

A Right Without a Remedy.....

I'm not sure why everyone is reporting that the "compromise" between Bush and the rebel GOP Senators on the interrogation and questioning of detainees is win/win. Seems to me like the Senators completely caved on the Geneva Conventions. Bush wanted to redefine what was prohibited, and from my reading of the compromise, it does just that; it narrowly defines the conduct that would lead to a breach of the Geneva Conventions. I'm not sure where they got these definitions, but it does seem to give the CIA a lot of leeway to go ahead with some of the more controversial techniques.

Not only does it limit the definition of "grave breaches," it also gives the president the exclusive right to promulgate any additional rules regarding the Geneva Conventions that are not grave breaches (i.e., higher standards). So unless Congress changes this law, only the president can extend the offenses punishable as breaches of the Geneva Conventions. Yeah, I'm sure he'll get right on that.

It also states that

"[n]o person may invoke the Geneva Conventions or any protocols thereto in any habeas or civil action or proceeding."

So basically, and correct me if I'm wrong here, the only way the Geneva Conventions can be enforced is if the Attorney General decides to bring criminal charges. Detainees cannot affirmatively use the Geneva Conventions. It does seem that this renders the Geneva Conventions meaningless if the administration du jour decides not to press charges. How does that old adage go? A right without a remedy is no right at all.

It goes on to state that

"[n]o foreign or international sources of law shall supply a basis for a rule of decision in the courts of the United States in interpreting the prohibitions enumerated in subsection 2441(d).

I think this means that courts cannot cite to international or foreign decisions for their rulings. This seems extreme given that foreign and int'l decisions could provide guidance as to how to apply the conventions to specific factual situations (assuming any of this is actually enforced). Why limit ourselves to our own scarce jurisprudence on the subject when other jurisdictions have been interpreting the conventions for years? This self-inflicted myopia is appalling.

I'm going to stop here because my blog has been way too serious of late. Much better analyses than I could ever have done can be found over at national security advisor and balkanization.

And another thing

Ahmadinejad also stated this

"The Islamic Republic of Iran is a member of the IAEA and is committed to the NPT. All our nuclear activities are transparent, peaceful and under the watchful eyes of IAEA inspectors. Why then are there objections to our legally recognized rights?

which I heard him reiterate on an interview with Anderson Cooper. That Iran is in full compliance with everything and that it is not fair to deprive Iran of nuclear energy. The latest report from the IAEA sates, however,

27. Iran has been providing the Agency with access to nuclear material and facilities, and has provided the required reports. Although Iran has provided the Agency with some information concerning product assays at PFEP, Iran continues to decline Agency access to certain operating records at PFEP.

28. Iran has not addressed the long outstanding verification issues or provided the necessary transparency to remove uncertainties associated with some of its activities. Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities; nor has Iran acted in accordance with the provisions of the Additional Protocol.

That's NOT the same thing there Mahmoud.

Fire, Brimstone, and the Twelfth Imam

I had a chance to read the transcripts of the speeches that Bush, Chavez, and Ahmadinejad made before the General Assembly of the United Nations. Bush's was fairly predictable, but Chavez and Ahmadinejad had some truly interesting remarks.

Chavez and Ahmadinejad made some fair points. First, they criticized the United States for allowing the continued bombardment of Lebanon. By not agreeing to support an immediate ceasefire, the United States basically paralyzed the ability of the Security Council to do anything. I agree. I think the United States' policy during the destruction of Lebanon was horrific.

Second, they both believe that the composition of the Security Council is out-dated. I think this is a fair criticism. The Security Council is made up of the victorious countries from WWII. The five permanent members no longer reflect the balance of power in the world, and it should be opened up. Its decisions, which are already starting to be see with a sceptical view, will truly begin to lack any sort of legitimacy as the developing world begins to throw its weight around in other weights (trade, regional organizations, etc.)

Chavez and Ahmadinejad made some other more memorable remarks though. Chavez stated

The devil, the devil himself, is right in the house. And the devil came here yesterday. Yesterday the devil came here. Right here." [crosses himself] And it sells of sulfur still today." Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, from this rostrum, the president of the United States, the gentleman to whom I refer as the devil, came here, talking as if he owned the world. Truly. As the owner of the world.

(full transcript). Now I'm no fan of Bush myself, but I think calling any world leader "the devil" is inappropriate diplomatic decorum. Mr. Chavez, I think you made some good points. I have visited Caracas and you have a beautiful country with great music. I also applaud your program of redistributing your nation's oil wealth. I wish Halliburton would follow suit. But calling someone the devil doesn't help any more than referring to countries as taking part in the "axis of evil." They are both examples of meaningless hyperbolic rhetoric.

Ahmadinejad also dropped a gem. He stated

O, Almighty God, all men and women are your creatures and you have ordained their guidance and salvation. Bestow upon humanity that thirsts for justice, the perfect human being promised to all by you, and make us among his followers and among those who strive for his return and his cause

For those of you who are not familiar with Islam (my familiarity is only passing, so correct me if I'm wrong here), this needs a little context. In Shi'a Islam (the kind practiced in Iran), they believe that the descendants of the Prophet Mohamed (PBUH), called imams, were all secretly murdered (by the Sunni, those who refused the legitimacy of the Prophet's cousin as rightful ruler). All except one. Shi'ites believe that the Twelfth Imam, Muhammad al Muntazar, “The Awaited One,” escaped and disappeared, and that he will return on Judgment Day. Similar to the role played by the second coming of Jesus Christ. This is to whom Ahmadinejad is referring to when he says "perfect human being promised to all."

So in essence, it seems that Ahmadinejad is asking for the Apocalypse. Now I'm not sure if this is how Shi'ites normally end their speeches (Bush said "God bless you"), or if he were just wishing in his own way for the world to be made perfect, but coming from a man who says that his country has the right to nuclear materials, all talk of Armageddon should be post-poned for a different debate I think.

All of this "God" and "Devil" and "Twelfth Imam" stuff scares me. And I really don't think it has a place on the floor of the United Nations.

Subtle, Time Magazine, Really F'ing Subtle

My mom gave me a subscription to Time magazine this year. I didn't ask for it, mind you, I think she got it for free and just has it delivered to me. Normally, I find Time to be a bit light on substance, even on rather pedestrian subjects, such as this one.

They have some interesting articles that are short enough for the bathroom, and I like that one page they have with a random assortment of statistics, numbers, and interesting quotes of the week. Sometimes, though, I find their covers a bit much. Like this one.

While I agree that al-Zarqawi was a pretty evil person, we KILLED him. We aren't bowling here. We shot a f'ing missile into a bunker and KILLED him. I think that just putting a cross over his mug perpetuates the simplistic outlook that many of us harbor over the war on terror: "Hey maybe if we just get all the main bad guys, it'll all go away. Here's one, check him off, yee haa!" I also just find it crude and disrespectful, not of Zarqawi himself, but just of life in general. Killing people should be considered a necessarily evil...not something to put on a "to do" list and then cross off.

But this week's takes the cake.

That's right, "What War With Iran Would Look Like." What the hell kind of cover is this? What would a war "look like?!?!" That's an awful casual reference to war...like "hey, how does this war look on me? Do you think it will deter further terrorist acts or does it just make my hips look big?" I can understand how one nutball journalist might think this is a good cover for a magazine. But the entire publication? What are we trying to do here? All subjects should be open for discussion, but plainly asking what war with Iran would "look like" right under a picture of Ahmadinejad is incredibly brazen and, I would posit, irresponsible. The parenthetical ("and how to avoid it") is not sufficient to take the punch out of the hawkish question.

Maybe Time is now run by the boss of the Daily Bugle from Spiderman, you know that guy who makes covers that depict Spiderman in a menacing light just to sell papers? That guy?

A New Sun Is Rising in the Empire of the Rising Sun and the Empire Upon Which the Sun Never Sets (whew!)

Tomorrow the Liberal Democratic Party of Japan will elect a new leader, and at the end of the month Junichiro Koizumi will officially stand down as prime minister. Koizumi has become the face of Japan for as long as I can remember (well since 2001, like I said before, I can never remember to take my ginko biloba). With his crazy hiar and very unjapanese-like disdain for conformity, he has changed japan for the better. His greatest contribution, I think, was his charisma and ability to appeal to the people. By speaking to the electorate directly, Koizumi went over the heads of the insulated Japanese politicians who used to make decisions between themselves, and thusly empowered the democratic system.

Tony Blair is now being criticized by his own party for not stepping down soon enough. Blair has been in office since 1997 (even ginko biloba would not help me remember that).

Regardless of what you think of these men, the faces of two of the most influential countries in the world are soon to change. Not to be a fear monger myself, but with change there is uncertainty, and the change of the leadership of these countries will have profound effects around the world.

Wedding in Sonoma

My girlfriend and I attended a wedding in Sonoma this weekend. It was beautiful weather up there, but I drank too many of the crushed and fermented version of these.

These are Merlot grapes.

Highlight of the wedding/reception. The groom is a bit of a wine/spirit freak. In the early evening, they served several varieties of port chosen specifically to go with the chocolate covered strawberries they also served. Pretty magic.

I still can't figure it out first year....

I can't comment on your page. It's impossible. I loved your experience with freecycle though...

I can't believe the twit who was trying to guilt you into giving him/her the new one! It's FREE for f's sake! The nerve! If they have enough time to guilt other people, maybe they should work on getting a better paying job.

Oh my god...I just channeled my father. I am so sorry.

If freecycle is at all like craigslist, there are nutjobs aplenty! Good for you for trying to give stuff away.

P.S. If you have a spare HD TV, my church needs one :)

Hypocrisy, exhibit # 1256899912A

So it turns out the U.S. military has been holding AP photographer Bilal Hussein without charge for the past five months.

How in the world are we to expect Iraqis to trust the "security" that we are aiming to provide, or their own legal system if we sweep up thousands of Iraqi citizens and hold them without charge outside of the legal system that we expect every Iraqi citizen to respect? I understand that there are, and always will be, security threats, but arresting and holding people without charge is not a good way to win the hearts and minds of anyone.

We are sending Iraqis and the world a horrible message. We have (post-hoc) justified this awful war by claiming that we are going to stabilize Iraq and bless it with democratic institutions and the rule of law. Yet, we ignore those same principles in our own actions. We are, in essence, saying that the rule of law and due process is good policy for YOU, but as long as we're in your country, they don't apply to US. Acting above the system of law that we ourselves have put into place is not only incredibly patronizing (and Iraqis, having lived under colonial rule before, are no strangers to despising a two-tiered system), but it also demonstrates that the system's creators do not truly believe in their own creation. This is like the principal of a public school sending his kids to boarding school.

I have no doubt that some of the people swept up in these things might have ties to terrorist organizations. But if they do, the government (as in the supposedly sovereign Iraqi government)should be forced to put forth that evidence. Keeping all of this "confidential" does nothing but render any sense of justice a farce. If you want to win the hearts and minds of the people, put those who can be proven guilty on trial, and show the Iraqi people and the world the evidence against them. Acting just will win the war on terror, not doing our best imitation of the regime we claim to have justifiably replaced.

Dear "first year"...

As I have been banished to the commentary hell that is Blogger Beta, I cannot actually comment on your ethical delimma. But if I could, this is what I would say,

Jeeze, that is not the enviable position to be in.

Part of why I had to kick out "Craig," was because I was worried I might eventually have to give a statement or give testimony against a roommate/friend. Well, that, and he was just an unbearable dickface....

As unsavory as it might be I would do the interview, cooperate, and be as honest as you can (as in honestly honest). Otherwise, worst case scenario you might wind up being charged with obstructing justice or perjury or something down the line, and that would be problematic for when you have to go through the "moral character" background check the state bar does. But you're in D.C. so I'm not sure how that works. But it can't be good, and no "friend" would ask you to take that risk for him/her.

That said, there's no need to state anything that you don't recall, and you shouldn't speculate. Perhaps your friend didn't tell you stuff, or at least no details. Be honest, but you don't need to go out of the way to opine as to what may or may not have happened if you weren't there and she didn't tell you.

That's my two cents (as in not legal advice). Good luck and I hope it works out.

"Bloody Hell" or "The Perils of an Unwritten Constitution"

The United Kingdom's Constitution is not actually a single written document. It is rather a collection of old gentlemens' agreements and written laws that carry no greater authority than do regularly passed statutes; constitutional law can be overturned by a mere act of parliament. This stems from the idea of "parliamentary sovereignty," which if you think about it, is ultimate "people power." If sovereignty comes from the people, as it purports to do in most constitutional democracies, the the will of the people should be able to trump a rather vaguely written instrument conceived of over 200 hundred years ago, right?

In practice, however, the idea that constitutional law can be overturned as easily as any other statute makes me, and I believe I speak on behalf of most other americans here, VERY uncomfortable.

Case in point. On September 12, 2006, a man confessed in open court (the "Old Bailey," to be exact) to having murdered a girl over 15 years ago. He is currently awaiting sentencing.

The man actually admitted to having murdered the girl six years ago, but charges could not be brought against him because he had already been tried and acquitted for the girl's murder in 1991. Similar to the prohibition in our Fifth Amendment, the UK prohibited "Double Jeopardy." Generally one cannot be charged and acquitted more than once.

Until now. Based on this one case, and because of the extremely determined family of the dead girl (understandably), British Parliament decided to toss the Double Jeopardy rule, originally enshrined in English law in 1187 (that's not a typo folks) out of the window in its "Criminal Justice Act of 2003." Well, to be fair, it only applies to about 30 odd crimes and just makes the exceptions to the rule a whole lot bigger. For instance, there needs to be "new" and "compelling" evidence. "New" does not, as it does here in our habeas statute, refer to evidence that could have been previously discovered. "New" means just that. Anything "new." So if a cop thinks of something "compelling" 10 or 15 years later, I guess the previously acquitted suspect is pretty well fucked.

To paraphrase our administration, this seems like an activist parliament. Throwing out an 800 year-old rule on criminal procedure based on one case? This seems like "result-oriented" thinking to me. In the long run, this might not make much of a difference. After all, there are a myriad of exceptions to the rule here, most of which escape me right now because I don't practice criminal law and I have forgotten to take my ginkgo biloba. I guess it's the principle of the thing. What if Congress could just get rid of one of the amendments? Does that frighten anyone else?

I almost forgot

Here is my date and I on our way to my high school reunion. Nothing like that wind-blown look for your coat of wool. I mean hair...wind-blown look for your hair.

That wasn't so bad....

In fact, my high school reunion was rather fun. I don't think I want to stay in touch with any more of the people than I already do, but it was nice to have everyone in the same place at the same time. There was only a few inappropriate ass grabs, but I think it was from a girl who thought I was gay anyway.

This is a picture of a dear chillin in my mom's front yard. Did I mention that my home town is a bit..uh, in BFE?

This was a happy accident. A friend couldn't figure out how my camera worked. This is actually me and my friends from high school. A guy who was one of my better friends in high school showed up who I hadn't seen since graduation. He was Mormon, but had no problem mixing drinks for the rest of us at our parties. Good guy to have around. He's doing well, but it was good to hear that he had fallen off the wagon for a while...after the mission...and going to BYU. I'm the one rockin' the H&M blazer.

This is a good example of what a bar in this town looks like. Snowboarders and random drunks all in a bar with a vague pan-island theme. White people get bored in the mountains.

Here we go...

I'm off to meet up for my ride to my home town for my reunion. I've been asked to give a toast during dinner. At first I thought I might try to be serious, but I don't want to stand up there like an asshole. I decided to share a few memories, take the piss out of a few of my friends and then sit down.

10-year highschool reunion

Oh my fricking god. My high school reunion is this weekend. I am so old. There's a part of me that doesn't want to go. Not because of any pent-up or repressed feelings, but my hometown is just a pain in the ass to get to from San Francisco. It's about a 6 and 1/2 hour drive.

BUT, I have a full head of hair, no belly, and a job, so really....I have to go, right? I'm actually looking forward to it. I keep in touch with a few of the guys...and I can't remember the last time we were all in the same room together.

Once again, I get f*cked by the curve

Sorry to bring down the average everyone. Maybe I should move to a city where a degree is a bit more...um...scarce...I remember something about diminishing returns from my old econ classes.

See the full article

While I am still jaded...

I decided to change the display name. Apparently "jaded j.d" was the name of a blog in Virginia. Much apologies, I never did google it, and just assumed that I was being creative. So I decided to now call myself "the default attorney."

This is not just totally random.

I feel that this is the role I play at my firm. This past week two of the other associates were on vacation. Another one was sick. And then there's this senior associate who doesn't really seem to have to do anything he doesn't want to do, and only works on one case. So when all hell breaks loose on a case, they come to me.

None of them were large projects, but several of them have been on-going for some time and I have no background knowledge what-so-ever. I don't like working when I completely lack any sort of big picture context. So inevitably I have to do some background into the case, find the template for the pleading, who are co-counsel is, who has to be served, etc. What would have taken the attorney who is normally assigned to the case an hour takes me three. And since they're coming to me in the first place, that means that it's always some sort of crisis, and the filing is time-sensitive. This makes me stressed.

So I am now the default attorney, because when no one else is around, they just give crap to me. Now I really sound like a jaded j.d.

P.S. I might also have to work this weekend. The fact that the partner did not get the irony of working on labor day is what pains me most.

P.P.S. Go Bears!

FU Craig

To be fair, I have bought a few file cabinets off of craigslist without incident, and have found several great roommates over the years, many of whom I still stay in touch with, even from my college years. Two of my latest adventures with craig, however, have ranged between frustrating disappointment and a truly horrid experience. Let's start with a roommate that my flatmates and I found off of craigslist.

Let's call him Craig. Craig seemed cool at first. He was funny and quick-witted. He had tattoos but a real job...and he was a D.J. on the weekends. Cool, but not too cool. He seemed like a good counter-weight to the other three roommates who were all different shades of boring professionals.

Little did we know.

Fast forward a few months. I get a call from Craig in the middle of the day, saying that if the cops contacted me regarding a female friend of his, to say that I didn't know anything. Which was true. I didn't. Apparently a former friend of his had started to consider pressing charges for rape. He said that it was all just a lie. I didn't know what to believe, but I knew that this was not good.

Then the drugs really started. He would fairly regularly be on something at any given moment. His favorite was acid, which meant that on Tuesdays (yes, Tuesdays) I would often come home to pounding industrial trance (or whatever the fuck his sub-genre of music was), with him running around the flat with no shirt on, but a fuzzy vest and a woman's wig, and toilet paper hanging out of his ears.

It became a chore to go home. I didn't want to see him, I didn't want to hear that "dope new track." A good day was when I would come home and he would still be passed out from the night before.

Then one day I came home and he had bandages all over him. One was around his head. It reminded me of cartoon characters from when I was a kid. You know, when they had a toothache and they would have that bandage around the bottom of their jaw, and it tied at the top?

"What happened?," I asked.
"I got into a fight."
"Really, with who?"
"Nah, I'm just kidding...I got plastic surgery"

Now at this point I thought the fight story sounded the more plausible, but I was wrong. He had gotten some liposuction and a chin tuck, or whatever it's called.

"Hey man, would you mind keeping your phone by your bed? I might need something during the night, and I might not be able to get up."

Something else I learned...the wounds left over from lipo? They seep and ooze. For the next week, there were soiled gauze bandages spread around everywhere.

Then the coup de resistance. A few months later, he tried to solicit a prostitute. How did he go about this, you ask? Why the great bazaar that is craigslist of course! The girl came over, took his money and said that she was under age and that if he ever said anything, she would go to the cops. Later in the day, she came back with some "friends" asking for more money. Nothing else ever happened, but we kicked him out.

She must be a real looker

From SfGate:

HIT-AND-RUN: Within half an hour, 14 pedestrians picked off one by one on streets of San Francisco

A day of hit-and-run horror that started with the death of a Fremont pedestrian and erupted into half an hour of chaos on the streets of San Francisco ended in the arrest of a 29-year-old driver described by some relatives as mentally disturbed but by police as apparently rational and unrepentant.

At least 14 people were hospitalized Tuesday in San Francisco after the driver of a black 2004 Honda Pilot cut a path of destruction from the Tenderloin to Laurel Heights, striking pedestrians and a bicyclist in at least 11 locations starting at about 12:45 p.m.


...

Wow, glad I moved from the Western Addition. In a report last night, a member of the driver's family stated that the driver was "stressed out" about his arranged marriage in Afghanistan. I guess this is just another reason to question arranged marriage. Jesus.

Technorati Profile

My girlfriend just moved to New York City

for grad school and I feel 1) sad that my favorite activity partner in crime is gone and yet 2) incredibly relieved. Her impending move had been hanging over us for the past month or so and led to many arguments ("you're not prioritize me enough") and just over all stress. I think I'm relieved to have some time to myself. As soon as she left, I went and took the placement exam at our local Alliance Francaise and I'm going to start up salsa classes again.

Now, does this demonstrate that I did not feel comfortable leading my own life and doing things that I wanted to do, which I think is a bad sign, or is it that I just have more free time now?

I will say this. She is joining me for a wedding up in Sonoma in September, and I said that I would come out to visit her in October. The French class I would take is only offered on Saturdays. When I told her that I would come and visit her when my French class was over in mid-October, she said something like "you don't want to come visit me sooner?" This irritated me.

Am I selfish?

Gracias Manu Chao, mille fois merci!

In my past life (circa 1998), when I lived in Paris and led a much more interesting life, mes amis introduced me to Manu Chao. It was some of the most innovative and eclectic music I had ever heard. He is one of the more famous musicians in the world (outside of the U.S. at any rate, can't get it on itunes for example) and I would put him in the "living legend" category. He is a wonderful musician who sings in several languages and infuses his music with a postive message of solidarity and social consciousness. Not like "we are the world" but more like a french resistance song. It gets you excited about seeking out injustice. This summer, Manu Chao traveled through the U.S. for the first time in 4 years. I hopped on Bart over to the People's Republic of Berkeley to see him at the Greek Theatre, and it was the best concert ever. It lasted for over 3 hours and it was too short. He had the crowd excited, entertained, and dancing. I don't even know how many encores they did. You could tell that he and his band enjoyed performing and that they were (I think) pleasantly surprised by the enthusiasm of the crowd and how familiar we all were with his music. At one point, someone threw a EZLN flag on stage and he wore it for the rest of the show. Je ne me rappelle pas d'un autre concert qui m'a autant fasciné ou amusé. Merci beaucoup beaucoup Manu Chao.



P.S. Manu Chao also produced an album for Amadou and Miriam, two blind musicians from West Africa. Beautiful.

An apology to Lebanon

Belated, but sincere.

I find the United States' unwillingness to seek an immediate cease-fire to be disgusting. Truly, unequivocally, disgusting. The justification given, needing to find a way to a "sustainable" ceasefire, lacked any sort of logic. Why does the search for a sustainable ceasefire necessitate the continuance of violence? And by violence I mean the death of Lebanese civilians. Was the United States hoping that Israel would eventually just destroy Hezbollah, and that this was worth the civilian death toll? Mission decidedly unaccomplished. While I in no way condone the military arm of Hezbollah, Israel's knee-jerk and incredibly disproportionate reaction to the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers was destructive and accomplished nothing. In the end, Hezbollah has emerged the relative winner of this war with no victor. As soon as the bombing stopped, Hezbollah was in the streets, assessing the damage and arranging funds and materials for those Lebanese who had lost their homes. What was that about winning hearts and minds?

Poor Lebanon. So lauded by the west when it had kicked out the Syrians and used by the U.S. as an example of a Middle-Eastern country on the righteous path. Yet we stood back and watched while Lebanon, with its new and fragile government, was pounded by Israeli attacks. See what you get for good behavior Lebanon? Nothing. You get American made bombs...dropped on you. What have we done? Created another reason to hate us, that's what.

An email from a lebanese friend of mine

She sent this to me during the conflict.

"Just minutes ago, Israel dropped 20 bombs within a 5 minute period on a residential neighborhood in the heart of beirut, a 10 minute drive from our apartment in beirut. Six residential buildings were brought to the ground, the number dead is unknown at this time. What goes through the bombers' mind??"Lets kill as many people and destroy as many homes in Lebanon as possible...after all we unfortunately will have to stop bombing tomorrow per the UN resolution...at least for a short time before we can come up with another excuse to eliminate our neighbors, Muslims and Christians alike."What is wrong with them???"