Crime & Federalism

Judge: "There's No Shame in My Game"

Mike — 2012-04-24T23:21:42-07:00

Obama's Race Problem

Mike — 2012-04-03T14:39:26-07:00

When a wanna thug was shot by a wannabe cop, most thoughtful people shrugged their shoulders. On a ten-day school suspension for drug use and trespassing, Trayvon had swung at a bus driver, robbed a house, and was casing a joint when a cop reject who had been arrested for domestic violence met him.

There is no bigger message beyond this: Bad things happen when two violent assholes meet.

President Obama's quick allegations of white racism, however, reminded me of Obama's support of those who advocate violence against whites.

In 2008, members of the New Black Panther Party waited outside polling booths with night sticks:

One of them, [witnesses] say, brandished a nightstick at the entrance and pointed it at voters and both made racial threats. Mr. Bull says he heard one yell "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker!"

In the first week of January, the Justice Department filed a civil lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring voters with the weapon, uniforms and racial slurs. In March, Mr. Bull submitted an affidavit at Justice's request to support its lawsuit.

When none of the defendants filed any response to the complaint or appeared in federal district court in Philadelphia to answer the suit, it appeared almost certain Justice would have prevailed by default. Instead, the department in May suddenly allowed the party and two of the three defendants to walk away. Against the third defendant, Minister King Samir Shabazz, it sought only an injunction barring him from displaying a weapon within 100 feet of a Philadelphia polling place for the next three years—action that's already illegal under existing law.

Who is Minister King Samir? Who is the man Obama protected?

Behold the man:

The same news agencies posting pictures of a 12-year-old version of Trayvon must not have had access to that video. Otherwise it surely would have been major news.

White Knights, Dark Prisons

Mike — 2012-04-02T15:01:40-07:00

A woman was riding on the DC metro when:

He then pulled out a lighter and started sparking it in my face.

I told him to get the lighter out of my face and leave immediately or I would call the police right then.

He laughed and got his buddies involved.

One of the teenagers apparently was shaken by what was unfolding and tried to get his buddies to leave, but they continued assaulting me. The other five surrounded me, yelling threats and racial insults in my face.

The one with the lighter kept sparking it about an inch from my eyes to threaten me. When we got close to the next stop, he shoved the lit lighter into me and tried to light my hair and clothing on fire.

No one would help her:

Several grown men diverted their eyes and ignored the incident altogether. I asked if anybody saw what just happened and could get off to be a witness with me, and nobody even answered me. I thought to myself, I know some of you men on this train have to have daughters, sisters, wives that you wouldn’t want this to happen to.

Several commenters (read dragnet's) note that since women aren't especially helpful to men, men should return the favor.

A few people have responded to dragnet with this argument:

Don't worry there is always plenty of space for pussies in our society... Namely you. Not all of us can be decent human beings and stop thinking about ourselves for two minutes. I really feel sorry for the females in your family with your mentality. Hopefully none of them encounter the same kind of issue as the woman above. If they do; you better hope some of those "white knights" are around for their sake.

Here's the reality from someone who "isn't a pussy."

If you're going to fight just one guy, you need to do extreme violence. This means immediately knocking him the fuck out or chocking him unconscious. There's no hitting a guy and walking away. You must take him out.

I made the mistake of treating "men like men" a few months ago. A guy got into my face, went to assault me, and I threw punches. He backed away, wanting nothing to do with me.

He then sprinted around the block, and sucker punched me at full speed. Less (re)learned. If you're going to fight, you must take the other guy out.

Now if there are six guys, the only way to go in the situation is as follows: Assume they are acting in concert. Attack the one closets to you. HURT HIM. Immediately start going after the other ones. You cannot, in a self-defense situation, afford to wait to see if he's your enemy.

You assume the worst, and you put EVERYONE on blast.

Now...What do you suppose would happen to a guy who got up to defend the girl, and started landing blows?

Probably he'd catch an assault case even if no one were really hurt.

If he go all agro on someone, shit can happen.

It's not that hard to kill someone. You hit a guy, he falls back into a subway seat on his back, and he's paralyzed.

Or you hit him, he falls back, slams the back of his head on the floor, and he's dead.

As the Trayvon case teaches, we'd be told that the Subway 6 were "just boys being hunted down by white lunch mobs!"

Manslaughter.

Prison.

Now, in times past, people recognized that "shit happens." Fifty years ago, if I stepped in and something bad happened, I'd be OK.

Now-a-days, that's not the case. When someone is hurt, someone has to be held accountable.

So I wouldn't have done anything.

If a chick were getting raped, yeah, I'd likely step in - because in that situation, extreme violence would be allowable even under our pussified legal system.

Otherwise, I'm minding my own business. The media, government, and women have shown time and again that a man's reward for doing the right thing is usually prison.

Why I Started Juicing

Mike — 2012-03-28T23:07:59-07:00

Trayvon Martin and Conversations About Race

Mike — 2012-03-26T21:18:25-07:00

When Geraldo Rivera suggested that George Zimmerman was as focused on Travyvon Martin's hoodie as his skin color, people shrieked. I shrugged my shoulders.

Although I'm white as snow, I wear hoodies with the hoods up. Growing up, teachers would call me a "hood." My dad would get pissed at me for "leaving the house looking like an idiot."

To this day, I have an assortment of hoodies, including ones adorned with a certain technology company's logo and even a James Perse.

When you wear a hoodie with the hood up, girls move across the sidewalk. When they get into an elevator with you, there's an awkard silence. First they move to the other side of the elevator. Then then look down at their iPhones, as if closing their eyes to the violence that is about to befall them.

There actually is something spooky about a hoodie.

A hoodie adds gives the illusion that you're 20 pounds heavier than you actually are. It also puts the imaginary bulk in the masculine place - on your neck and shoulder girdle.

When police are short guys for a line-up, they'll throw a hoodie on the skinny guy to make him appear more like the bulkier, t-shirt clad suspect.

I also could see myself in Trayvon's shoes. If some nosy fuck ran up on me, asking why I was doing in the neighborhood, I would have said, "Who the fuck are you?"

This isn't make-believe. One day I was sitting in a dog park when a woman approached me. Mistaking me for someone else, she said, "Clean up after your dog!"

I am the most polite guy you'll meet unless you, "Come at me, bro."

So fuck busy bodies like Zimmerman. He's not owed an explanation, and he approaches, he gets his ass kicked.

If I got shot, it wouldn't be a hate crime. It'd be what happens when you go "street" on a person instead of saying, as Trayvon could have told Zimmerman: "Hey, I'm visiting my uncle, and that's why you don't recognize me. Thanks for watching the neighborhood."

Then again, there's often no reasoning with people like Zimmerman. He probably would have asked for identification before effectuating a citizen's arrest.

Martin, like I would have, kicked Zimmerman's ass for being a busybody.

There are thus non-racial angles in the Trayvon Martin case. When you roll around wearing a hoodie, you need to have some self-awareness. People are going to think you're suspicious.

You can either acknowledge them as being of good faith. ("Way to watch the neighborhood.") Or you can get street.

When you go street on someone, you can get stabbed or shot. And it won't have anything to do with your skin color.

None of us can say what happened. To go hysterical in the face of ignorance is madness.

Marc Randazza, First Amendment Lawyer, on the Rush Limbaugh Fiasco

Mike — 2012-03-14T19:01:20-07:00

Marc Randazza, who I hired when a lunatic falsely accused me of defamation, recently gave his toughts on the Rush Limbaugh Slutgate fiasco. It's an excellent discussion on modern politics. No one wants to debate ideas. Instead, both the Left and Right attempt to shut down speakers. Marc Randazza also discusses concentration of media ownership.

The interview is here.

Judge Holden: On War

Mike — 2012-01-23T14:22:10-08:00

Judge Holden's speech on war brings Nietzsche into the Wild West. Blood Meridian has been a phenomenal read:

Every child knows that play is nobler than work. He knows too that the worth or merit of a game is not inherent in the game itself but rather in the value of that which is put at hazard. Games of chance require a wager to have meaning at all. Games of sport involve the skill and strength of the opponents and the humiliation of defeat and the pride of victory are in themselves sufficient stake because they inhere in the worth of the principals and define them. But the trial of chance or trial of worth all games aspire to the condition of war for here that which is wagered swallows up the game, player, all.

***

This is the nature of war, whose stake is at once the game and the authority and the justification. Seen so, war is the truest form of divination. It is the testing of one’s will and the will of another within that larger will which because it binds them is therefore forced to select. War is the ultimate game because war is at last a forcing of the unity of existence. War is god.

Brown studied the Judge. You’re crazy Holden. Crazy at last.

The judge smiled.

Might does not make right, said Irving. The man that wins in some combat is not vindicated morally.

Moral law is an invention of mankind for the disenfranchisement of the powerful in favor of the weak. Historical law subverts it at every turn. A moral view can never be proven right or wrong by any ultimate test. A man falling dead in a duel is not thought thereby to be proven in error as to his views. His very involvement in such a trial gives evidence of a new and broader view. The willingness of the principals to forgo further argument as the triviality which it in fact is and to petition directly the chambers of the historical absolute clearly indicates of how little moment are the opinions and of what great moment the divergences thereof. For the argument is indeed trivial, but not so the separate wills thereby made manifest. Man’s vanity may well approach the infinite in capacity but his knowledge remains imperfect and howevermuch he comes to value his judgements ultimately he must submit them before a higher court. Here there can be no special pleading. Here are considerations of equity and rectitude and moral right rendered void and without warrant and here are the views of the litigants despised. Decisions of life and death, of what shall be and what shall not, beggar all question of right. In elections of these magnitudes are all lesser ones subsumed, moral, spiritual, natural.

The judge searched out the circle for disputants. But what says the priest? he said.

Tobin looked up. The priest does not say.

The priest does not say, said the judge. Nihil decit. But the priest has said. For the priest has put by the robes of his craft and taken up the tools of that higher calling which all men honor. The priest also would be no godserver but a god himself.

Tobin shook his head. You’ve a blasphemous tongue, Holden. And in truth, I was never a priest but only a novitiate to the order.

Journeyman priest or apprentice priest, said the judge. Men of god and men of war have strange affinities.

I’ll not secondsay you in your notions, said Tobin. Dont ask it.

Ah Priest, said the judge. What could I ask of you that you’ve not already given?

The Banker's Manifesto

Mike — 2012-01-19T17:37:22-08:00

Some call this an "urban legend." Others will note that the truth can only be found in fiction.

Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. revealed the Bankers Manifesto of 1892 to the U.S. Congress somewhere between 1907 and 1917.

BANKERS MANIFESTO

We (the bankers) must proceed with caution and guard every move made, for the lower order of people are already showing signs of restless commotion. Prudence will therefore show a policy of apparently yielding to the popular will until our plans are so far consummated that we can declare our designs without fear of any organized resistance.

Organizations in the United States should be carefully watched by our trusted men, and we must take immediate steps to control these organizations in our interest or disrupt them.

At the coming Omaha convention to be held July 4, 1892, our men must attend and direct its movement or else there will be set on foot such antagonism to our designs as may require force to overcome.

This at the present time would be premature. We are not yet ready for such a crisis. Capital must protect itself in every possible manner through combination (conspiracy) and legislation.

The courts must be called to our aid, debts must be collected, bonds and mortgages foreclosed as rapidly as possible.

When, through the process of law, the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and easily governed through the influence of the strong arm of the government applied to a central power of imperial wealth under the control of the leading financiers.

People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. History repeats itself in regular cycles. This truth is well known among our principal men who are engaged in forming an imperialism of the world. While they are doing this, the people must be kept in a state of political antagonism.

The question of tariff reform must be urged through the organization known as the Democratic Party, and the question of protection with the reciprocity must be forced to view through the Republican Party.

By thus dividing voters, we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us, except as teachers to the common herd. Thus, by discrete actions, we can secure all that has been so generously planned and successfully accomplished.

R. Rex Parris Law Firm Gets $10.5 Million Settlement

Mike — 2012-01-12T16:07:02-08:00

Civil defense lawyers occasionally find this humble blog after Googling, "lawyers who have beat Rex Paris." Instead of learning about those alleged lawyers, they are likely to find reports of huge personal injury verdicts and awards.

Last week the Rex Parris Law Firm, with Alexander Wheeler as co-counsel, settled a personal injury action for $10.5 million dollars.

In 2009, the same duo obtained a record, $370 million dollar verdict against all around scoundrel Georges Marciano. $370 million almost makes the $135 State Farm settlement seem small.

Defense counsel looking for lawyers who beat Rex Parris will need to keep looking.

DHL Express and Consolidated Deliveries & Logistics to Pay $10.5 Million to Woman Severely Injured in 2005 Vehicle Collision, Announces R. Rex Parris

The R. Rex Parris Law Firm Wins Major Victory for Accident Victim

LANCASTER, Calif., Jan. 5, 2012 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The crash that almost killed L.M. was violent. Now, 6 1/2 years after L.M.'s vehicle was hit by a DHL package delivery truck driven by DHL driver Susan McKinley, Ms. M finally received justice in the form of a settlement agreement under which defendants DHL Express, Consolidated Deliveries & Logistics and other defendants have agreed to pay the plaintiff $10,500,000.

On the morning of May 23, 2005, Ms. M'S car was struck by Susan McKinley's package delivery truck in Lancaster, California. Ms. McKinley ran a red light while travelling over 50 mph and struck the front-passenger side of M'S car while M was waiting to make a left turn. Ms. M was trapped in her car for 10-15 minutes before she was extricated and airlifted to the hospital. She lost consciousness and remained in a coma for several days after the crash. She was initially hospitalized for over two weeks and then went between the hospital and a skilled nursing facility for another month. Eventually, Ms. M was discharged to intensive home health care, living assistance and physical therapy.

At the time of the crash, the defendant McKinley was in a DHL uniform driving her delivery truck that was used to deliver DHL packages. The investigating Sheriff's Deputy who accompanied McKinley to the hospital after the crash testified that McKinley admitted to smoking marijuana the morning of the crash. At the time of the crash, Ms. McKinley was on her way to the "CD&L" station in Lancaster, California, where all DHL packages that either went to or left the Antelope Valley were sorted and processed for delivery.

DHL and CD&L claimed McKinley was an independent contractor, not an employee, and that they thus had no liability for McKinley's conduct. The case settled on October 31, 2011 before the damages portion of the trial was to start and over a year after a seven-day jury trial in 2010 on the issue of whether McKinley was an employee or an independent contractor. "The jury that decided the employment issues found DHL and CD&L were Ms. McKinley's direct employers," said Alexander R. Wheeler one of M'S trial attorneys.

Ms. M suffered severe injuries in the crash, including traumatic brain injuries (subdural hematoma left frontal lobe), acute respiratory failure, a lacerated spleen, fractured left pelvis and sacrum and fractured ribs.

"The case is an example of the hard fight that injury lawyers must mount against companies that do everything they can to deny accountability and leave their innocent victims holding the bag. I am proud that we were able to represent Linda M and achieve a hard-fought victory against a team of corporate lawyers," said Alexander R. Wheeler.

About The R. Rex Parris Law Firm

The R. Rex Parris Law Firm prides itself on offering experienced representation with integrity and compassion. Our lawyers fight aggressively against corporate defense attorneys and insurance companies ensuring proper compensation for our clients. Between auto accidents, defective products and class action/employment law cases, the attorneys at R. Rex Parris Law Firm deliver outstanding results for hard-working families throughout the state of California.

CONTACT: Alexander R. Wheeler (661) 949-2595 awheeler@rrexparris.com

Lori Palmieri: A Lawyer Without Any Fight in Her

Mike — 2012-01-12T13:23:26-08:00

If you went by Lori Palmieri's website advertising her wares as a criminal defense lawyer, you'd think Michael Lewis was describing her when he wrote about Big Swinging Dicks.

Palmieri's website depicts a ghostly, almost intimidating figure with chilly blue eyes. Fans of Blood Meridian can only imagine her as a Judge Holden figure. Badges orbit around her head, as if caught in the gravitational field of her awesomeness.

Palmieri revealed that she is no fighter. She is a coward whose career mattered only when she was able to hide behind the shields of her office. With a "badge and gun," she was somebody. Stripped of official symbols of authority, she is a worm.

When Joseph Rakofsky sued her for speaking out against incompetent lawyers, what did Palmieri do? Did she insist that, as a Florida lawyer, she could be not sued in New York? (Long-arm statutes, how do they work?) Did she insist that she would fight when attacked, just as she would claim to fight for her clients?

No. She knelt down on her knees, and gave Rakofsky a virtual blow job. The text is so revolting that I shall not reprint it here. Her stench can be smelled on every coast. I link to it only as a case study in lawyer cowardice.

As with Martha Perry, Lori Palmieri did not disclose that she had settled her lawsuit with Rakofsky. Thus, her post was almost certainly required as part of a settlement agreement. (Whether Palmieri paid the $5,000 Rakofsky demanded of other defendants also isn't disclosed.)

Choosing a Tampa criminal defense lawyer is serious business. I for one would never hire a lawyer who, at the first sign of a fight, takes her knees and grovels.

Martha Sperry: Incompetent, Cowardly, or Both?

Mike — 2012-01-12T12:54:37-08:00

When Joseph Rakofsky filed a frivolous lawsuit against me and 84 or so other people for writing that Rakofsky is incompetent and unethical, settlement never occurred to me. There are First Amendment issues at stake. If lawyers won't stand behind their words, how can people untrained in the law ever speak?

As the author of the First Amendment and a lawyer himself wrote, "On matters of style, swim with the current, on matters of principle, stand like a rock."

There's also the issue of courage. When someone files a frivolous lawsuit against you, you must stand and fight. Otherwise, you're a miserable coward - a worm slinking on its belly.

When Joseph Rakofsky sued Martha Sperry of Advocate's Studio, she had a choice. She could fight. Or she could run.

She choose to run.

On December 3, 2011, Martha Sperry published an ingratiating post to Rakofsky. Perry kisses Rakofsky's ass and insults everyone who dares defend themselves from the frivolous attacks of a loon.

What Perry did not do, however, is disclose a material fact. She settled her case with Rakofsky, and thus her kiss-ass post was almost certainly mandated by the settlement agreement.

What sort of lawyer would fail to disclose a material fact to her readers?

Rakofsky seemingly demanded $5,000 from each defendant, as evidenced by St. Thomas Law School's decision to settle with Rakofsky for that very amount.

Did Martha Sperry write a check for $5,000 to Joseph Rakofsky? Or did licking his boots suffice?

It's clear that Sperry is a coward. It's almost certainly the case she's incompetent, since no competent lawyer would have settled a frivolous lawsuit brought against her.

We should now ask if Sperry is ethical. If Sperry was required to write her December 3, 2011 blog post as part of a settlement agreement: Why did she hide that fact from her readers?

I posted a comment to her blog, asking her whether she was required to write her blog post as part of a settlement agreement. She has kept the comment in moderation rather than address my question.

What does her silence say?

Anger

Mike — 2011-12-30T20:05:19-08:00

Holding in anger is the virtue of slaves. The Christian bias against anger exists because early Christians were slaves rather than masters. If early Christians had not been forced to hold their tongues (being gentle as doves and sneaky as snakes), Western men would have a healthier relationship with anger.

Aristotle approved of anger, when at "the right time, and for the right purpose and in the right way." As Dr. Bruce Banner was fond of saying, "don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry." People wouldn't listen, and yet they'd still blame the Hulk.

It is usually scoundrels and passive-aggressive who preach against anger. It is of course in their best interests to disarm the very people they seek to harm.

I enjoy being angry. It fuels my soul and moves my body. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry. Please make me angry.

Shane Reil's Integrity is For Sale

Mike — 2011-12-27T11:32:32-08:00

At Brown University, witnesses can accept payment before giving testimony in student disciplinary hearings. The favors and case received needn't even be disclosed. Consider Shane Reil, who sold out a fellow student to make connections with a Wall Street money man:

William McCormick is suing the University and two alums — a woman who accused him of rape in 2006 and her father — claiming that he was falsely accused and that Brown failed to give him a fair hearing because his accuser's father is a University donor and fundraiser.

Emails written in the days before McCormick was accused of rape and removed from campus — recently made public during the course of the lawsuit — highlight obstacles to adjudicating rape cases through university tribunals.

Hidden bias

The emails, sent between the accuser's father and her residential counselor, Shane Reil '09, show that in the days leading up to the rape allegation, the alum's father, a prominent financier, offered to discuss career prospects with Reil. A day after the email conversation ended, the female alum accused McCormick of rape. A week later, Reil authored a damning appraisal of McCormick in his witness statement for the University sexual misconduct hearing.

The "prominent alum" is Richard Dresdale, and he is indeed a valuable connection to have. It's thus unsurprising that Shane Reil would accept a bribe for his testimony. It was a sweet bribe, too:

In the emails, written after the father hosted Reil and a friend of his daughter at the home of another financier in Providence, Reil wrote, "(Your daughter) also expressed to me that you would not mind helping me trying to straighten out a path for my future." After discussing his career aspirations in the email, Reil added, "Thank you again for dinner, and for making yourself available to me as a mentor."

Yet shouldn't we expect Brown University officials to require witnesses to disclose bribes? After all, Reil's testimony was essential to Beth Dresdale's - allegedly false - rape claim. The rape claim seems highly specious, consideirng that Dresdale never called the police, considering there were no eyewitnesses other than the accuser, and considering that Brown threw away potentially incriminating evidence:

[T]he University did not allow a pair of boxer shorts allegedly worn by the accuser during the rape to be sent out for testing or admitted as evidence ....

Since there was no scientific evidence of a rape, witness credibility was essential. In a hearing seeking something higher than, "Burn the Witch," surely Reil would have been asked about any bias or motive. Surely Reil violated Brown's Code of Conduct. No, according to Brown University officials. Reil could indeed accept payment for his testimonial services:

Reil's nondisclosure of a potential source of bias does not violate any University rules governing disciplinary procedures. "There are no specific rules regarding disclosing relationships," wrote Jonah Allen Ward, senior associate dean of student life, in an email to The Herald ....

One has to wonder how many pieces of silver Jonah Allen Ward has received for his services? At least rich students accused of misconduct know whom to contact when they need to get a fix put in.

Private Actors Are the Biggest Threat to Free Speech

Mike — 2011-12-25T01:23:57-08:00

When most people think of the First Amendment, they think of the evils of government censorship. Yet the current greatest threat to free speech does not come from the Internet. It comes from litigious private parties. It's a dangerous threat because it's stealthy.

If the DOJ threatened to shut down Crime & Federalism, you'd all be livid. Everyone recognizes that the government should not be allowed to threaten free speech.

Fits would be thrown and apologies would be made.

What if a court threatened to shut me down. Would the threat be as obvious?

When someone files a frivolous lawsuit, he's trying to use the power of government to do what no other branch of government would do.

What happens when a private person tries using the power of the court to shut down a website?

One victim of private censorship is Clayton Cramer, a leading historian on the Second Amendment.

Clayton Cramer was almost forced to shutter his blog after Righthaven, sued him for copyright infringement.

Right Haven was a copyright troll. They purchased all of the Las Vegas Review-Journal and Denver Post's copyrights. They'd then troll the web, looking for websites containing LVR and Post articles.

Righthaven had many victims. Many victims included small website operators who did not themselves reproduce any copyrighted articles. Instead, commenters posted articles to the websites. Although clearly a website owner cannot be held liable for infringement

Righthaven is almost dead, because the Randazza Firm kicked the shit out of it.

But not everyone can afford legal help. Many people allowed Righthaven to extort it, as a purely economic matter. If defending a lawsuit costs $20,000 that you don't have, then putting a $5,00 settlement on a credid card makes sense (especially when you consider that the maxium exposure for copyright infringement is $150,000).

Even your humble narrator has faced threats of litigation, and actual litigation. Joseph Rakofsky, another private actor, filed a frivolous lawsuit against the American Bar Association, Washington Post, and about 80 other people - including me. (I'm proud to disclose that the Randazza Firm, the lawyers who shut down Righthaven, are defending me against Rakofsky's frivolous lawsuit.)

Now some of you will be hard asses. "Freedom isn't free." Cute sloan that is ignorant of constitutional text. Speech is supposed to be free. The First Amendment protects, after all, "freedom of speech." Read the Constitution. It's all in there.

If something is causing maritial strife, or if some parent has to choose beteween college fund payment and legal bills, there's a major problem.

Yet as highly as I think of myself (count the I's in this sentence!), I'm also humble enough to realize that I read far more than I write. People who run most websites are surprisingly civil, middle-class people who offer fascinating and diverse perspectives on life.

They also have family relationships to preserve. They had kids who need braces. They, unlike the Washington Post, don't have lawyers on retainer. Righthaven poses the greatest danger to the people we need most.

Not many of the sites I read are run by guys like me. Most are, you know, not looking for a fight. Sue me. I'll fight like hell, and if you think a civil lawsuit scares me, you haven't done much dilligence. Lawsuits only add to my life story.

But I'm a man with a calloused heart. Should speech only be free for guys like me?

Should speech not be free for a 17-year old?

Government censorhip is an evil we all recognize, unite to defend against, and thus usually defeat.

We haven't paid attention to harm private litigants cause. We need to start, we need to unite, and we need to take the firehouse to sewage like Joseph Rakofsky, Marc Stephens, and Righthaven.

Have You Seen This Bear?

Mike — 2011-12-22T12:24:23-08:00

$500 reward for replacement bear.

The World Still Isn't Ready for Nietzsche

Mike — 2011-12-21T13:21:17-08:00

It took less than 30 minutes to understand why the world isn't ready for Nietzsche.

The second lecture in the Great Courses series, "Will to Power: The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche," wasn't about any of Nietzsche's core concepts. There was no mention of the death of God, or the life of the ubermensch.

There was no discussion of Nietzsche's overcoming of tremendous sickness. Most of us lack the will to write a single book. Nietzche's will to write broke through walls of poor health:

His eyesight was wretched. Doctors advised him to read and write as little as possible, but he did not heed their advice, had terrible migrane headaches, took all sorts of pills, was sick to his stomach much of the time and in altogether terrible health.

No, the liberal professors from the University of Texas, Austin would have nothing to say of Nietzsche's triumphs though sickness.

Instead, they must let you know that Nietzsche is safe. Here is Lecture 2:

2. Quashing the Rumors About Nietzsche
Professors Robert Solomon and Kathleen Higgins invalidate the spurious rumors surrounding Nietzsche, for example, that he was insane, misogynistic, nihilistic, anti-Semitic, power-mad, relativistic, and amoral.

Anyone who would need those rumors quashed isn't ready for Nietzsche.

How to Become a Man

Mike — 2011-12-14T18:00:55-08:00

A bunch of misandrists and beta chumps spent time with 100 men who fight for fun.

Although the authors hate men and masculinity (calling it "putting on a convincining manhood act"), these great - do we not call the best of the worms great? - scholars did learn something about masculinty.

Namely, what is the sine qua non of manhood?

Putting on a convincing manhood act requires more than using language andthe body; it also requires emotion work. By suppressing fear, empathy, pain, and shame and evoking confidence and pride, males signify their alleged possession of masculine selves. Such emotion work may thus create an emotional orientation that primes men to subordinate and harm others. And by signifying masculineselves through evoking fear and shame in others, such men are likely to more easily secure others’ deference and accrue rewards and status. Managing emotional manhood, whether it occurs in a locker room or boardroom, at home or the Oval Office, likely plays a key role in maintaining unequal social arrangements.

The entire article is here, and the hat tip goes to Associates Mind.

Some Questions for Ain & Bank

Mike — 2011-12-12T12:32:45-08:00

Since you won't return a client's phone calls, I'll ask you the client's questions publicly:

You cashed his retainer on November 21st, but have not provided him with any work product. Why?
Your associate, Rebecca C. Shankman, promised that she'd return client phone calls within 24 hours. She has not promptly returned phone calls. Why?
Covington and Burling refers its clients to your family law practice. Do you think you deserve the respect that Covington gives you?

I have more questions, but since you seem too busy to answer a client's questions, I don't want to overload you with mine.

You Can't Teach Hungry

Mike — 2011-11-30T14:26:56-08:00

How one kid had 100 people help him occupy Boone Pickens.

Joe Jamail: On Investing for Lawyers

Mike — 2011-11-30T10:27:50-08:00

Several of my lawyer friends have become frustrated from a recent realization: The stock market is a scam. Well, at worst it's a scam. At best, it's a gamble. My friends wonder, "What should I do with my money?"

Billionaire lawyer and King of Torts Joe Jamail has some advice:

Lawyer Joe Jamail, with the bulk of his fortune in bonds and cash, expresses in colorful language a common tenet: Hedge funds are dangerous.

“I’d buy cocaine rather than buy that s---,” he says.

Jamail continues:

I usually don’t invest much in the market directly. I always look for price returns rather than income, because I make enough f------ money out of this sue shop--my law office. Most of my stuff is in bonds.

My dad told me, “Don’t buy any g------ stocks, OK?” He had a chain of grocery stores. He liked that cash coming in.

Best and worst investments?

Best: A law degree, no question about it. Worst: Airline stocks.

Where to park $1 million in cash?

In my mattress.

The Commute that Killed the Blog: Review of the Great Courses

Mike — 2011-11-28T15:07:02-08:00

The blog has died not for want of passion, but for want of time. A move has led me to a new job with a morning commute.

Also, my laptop broke. Sundays were my main blogging days. I'd spend 2-4 hours high on caffeine and sex, writing blog posts for the week. With a commute and without a laptop, something had to give.

I have, however, deeply enjoyed my commute. Self-discipline is the hardest of all forms to master. I wasn't reading as much as I should have been, and now a commute captures me for two hours a day. I can feed my brain Doritos, or I can learning something.

I've thus been burning through the Great Courses series, and although this may sound like an advertisement, I have no affiliation and earn nothing for my endorsement.

"Memory and the Human Lifespan" was awesome enough that I listened to several of the lectures twice. I'm 50% finished with "Origins of the Human Mind," and it's similarly excellent. On deck is "Will to Power: The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche," which has mixed reviews online.

Robert Greendberg is a Great Courses fan-favorite, and I understood why, while listening to, "Chamber Music of Mozart."

I spent a few years reading and thinking about consciousness, so I have an understanding of what to expert in a course entitled, "Philosophy of Mind: Brains, Consciousness, and Thinking Machines." It was, again, a fascinating looking at a perplexing subject.

Each course has been awesome, and I eye the catalog like a kid at Christmas.

Here are some tips.

Audio or DVD? Like you, I imagine returning home to watch a 30-minute lecture each night. Instead, I usually watch Sons of Anarchy. The road to a collection of unwatched Great Courses DVDs is paved with good intentions.

I tend to stick with the CDs. I really wanted "Neuroscience of Everyday Life," which was only available on DVD. I'll eventually watch it, but a CD would have been preferable.

The audio downloads work on an mp3 player, and last forever. I listened to the consciousness lectures while riding the stationary bike, two years ago. I can still access the lectures to re-listen to them. Pretty cool.

Wait for the 70% off sale. Every course goes on sale. There's no reason to pay full price. Sometimes, too, the sale price is still too high.

I paid $99.99 (less a 30% off coupon) for "Neuroscience of Everyday Life," which is now on super-sale for $49.99. WIth shipping, the DVD collection cost me $79.99, where as today it would only have costed me $49.99. I'm a little salty about overpaying, and am reminded that some sales are more equal than others.

Get coupons. Google, "Great Courses coupon code." (You should always use a "coupon code" search with whatever you're about to buy.) You'll land on RetailMeNot's page. You'll at least be able to find a working coupon for free shipping ($10 value).

They take longer to ship than suggested. Great Courses claims to same-day ship. In my experience, they take about 1-3 days to ship, and it takes about 7-10 days to receive my package. Since I go through 10-12 lectures a week, and since each course averages 24, I order a new set upon opening part two of the series.

The guarantee is awesome. If you lose or break a CD or DVD, they'll replace it. If a course doesn't do it for you, send it back for a refund.

In an era where scumbag companies try nickel-and-diming you, it's refreshing to find an honest company that adds real value to one's life.

My experiences with the Great Courses has been as positive and edifying as any other business relationship. I highly recommend them to you.

How to Frame a Man for Rape

Mike — 2011-11-28T10:18:48-08:00

In an era where every man is Tom Robinson, it's surprisingly easy to frame even a rich, prominent French politician for rape.

The 1%'s Enforcers Are the 99%

Mike — 2011-11-23T10:57:24-08:00

I wish this insight had been my own:

Cool thing about this incident is that the UC-Davis President's job is now in jeopardy and the UC-Davis president has control over the Campus police and so it looks like somebody has to be sacrificed, guess who those somebodies will be, hint, it ain't the President.

There are three more people sitting around today, two cops involved and their chief. They are now finding out and will soon find out for sure that they are simply pawns in a game (just like every other cop in this country) and that when their superiors are in danger they will be tossed to the wind if it protects their owners.....I mean bosses.

Penn State: Timeline of Events

Mike — 2011-11-14T15:26:14-08:00

There are a lot of dots to connect:

1969 — Jerry Sandusky starts his coaching career at Penn State University as a defensive line coach.

1977 — Jerry Sandusky founds The Second Mile. It begins as a group foster home dedicated to helping troubled boys and grows into a charity dedicated to helping children with absent or dysfunctional families.

January 1983 — Associated Press voters select Penn State as college football’s national champion for the 1982 season.

January 1987 — Associated Press voters select Penn State as college football’s national champion for the 1986 season.

1994 — Boy known as Victim 7 in the report meets Sandusky through The Second Mile program at about the age of 10.

1994-95 — Boy known as Victim 6 meets Sandusky at a Second Mile picnic at Spring Creek Park when he is 7 or 8 years old.

1995-96 — Boy known as Victim 5, meets Sandusky through The Second Mile when he is 7 or 8, in second or third grade.

1996-97 — Boy known as Victim 4, at the age of 12 or 13, meets Sandusky while he is in his second year participating in The Second Mile program.

1996-98 — Victim 5 is taken to the locker rooms and showers at Penn State by Sandusky when he is 8 to 10 years old.

Jan. 1, 1998 — Victim 4 is listed, along with Sandusky’s wife, as a member of Sandusky’s family party for the 1998 Outback Bowl.

1998 — Victim 6 is taken into the locker rooms and showers when he is 11 years old. When Victim 6 is dropped off at home, his hair is wet from showering with Sandusky. His mother reports the incident to the university police, who investigate.

Detective Ronald Schreffler testifies that he and State College Police Department Detective Ralph Ralston, with the consent of the mother of Victim 6, eavesdrop on two conversations the mother of Victim 6 has with Sandusky. Sandusky says he has showered with other boys and Victim 6’s mother tries to make Sandusky promise never to shower with a boy again but he will not. At the end of the second conversation, after Sandusky is told he cannot see Victim 6 anymore, Schreffler testifies Sandusky says, “I understand. I was wrong. I wish I could get forgiveness. I know I won’t get it from you. I wish I were dead.”

Jerry Lauro, an investigator with the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, testifies that he and Schreffler interviewed Sandusky, and that Sandusky admits showering naked with Victim 6, admits to hugging Victim 6 while in the shower and admits that it was wrong.

The case is closed after then-Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar decides there will be no criminal charge.

June 1999 — Sandusky retires from Penn State but still holds emeritus status.

Dec. 28, 1999 — Victim 4 is listed, along with Sandusky’s wife, as a member of Sandusky’s family party for the 1999 Alamo Bowl.

Summer 2000 — Boy known as Victim 3 meets Sandusky through The Second Mile when he is between seventh and eighth grade.

Fall 2000 — A janitor named James Calhoun observes Sandusky in the showers of the Lasch Football Building with a young boy, known as Victim 8, pinned up against the wall, performing oral sex on the boy. He tells other janitorial staff immediately. Fellow Office of Physical Plant employee Ronald Petrosky cleans the showers at Lasch and sees Sandusky and the boy, who he describes as being between the ages of 11 and 13.

Calhoun tells other physical plant employees what he saw, including Jay Witherite, his immediate supervisor. Witherite tells him to whom he should report the incident. Calhoun was a temporary employee and never makes a report. Victim 8’s identity is unknown.

March 1, 2002 — A Penn State graduate assistant enters the locker room at the Lasch Football Building. In the showers, he sees a naked boy, known as Victim 2, whose age he estimates to be 10 years old, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky. The graduate assistant tells his father immediately.

March 2, 2002 — In the morning, the graduate assistant calls coach Joe Paterno and goes to Paterno’s home, where he reports what he has seen.

March 3, 2002 — Paterno calls Tim Curley, Penn State athletic director, to his home the next day and reports a version of what the grad assistant had said.

March 2002 — Later in the month the graduate assistant is called to a meeting with Curley and Senior Vice President for Finance and Business Gary Schultz. The grad assistant reports what he has seen and Curley and Schultz say they will look into it.

March 27, 2002 (approximate) — The graduate assistant hears from Curley. He is told that Sandusky’s locker room keys are taken away and that the incident has been reported to The Second Mile. The graduate assistant is never questioned by university police and no other entity conducts an investigation until the graduate assistant testifies in grand jury in December 2010.

2005-2006 — Boy known as Victim 1 says that he meets Sandusky through The Second Mile at age 11 or 12.

Spring 2007 — During the 2007 track season, Sandusky begins spending time with Victim 1 weekly, having him stay overnight at his residence in College Township, Pa.

Spring 2008 — Termination of contact with Victim 1 occurs when he is a freshman in a Clinton County high school. After the boy’s mother calls the school to report sexual assault, Sandusky is barred from the school district attended by Victim 1 from that day forward and the matter is reported to authorities as mandated by law.

Early 2009 — An investigation by the Pennsylvania attorney general begins when a Clinton County, Pa., teen boy tells authorities that Sandusky has inappropriately touched him several times over a four-year period.

September 2010 — Sandusky retires from day-to-day involvement with The Second Mile, saying he wants to spend more time with family and handle personal matters.

Nov. 5, 2011 — Sandusky is arrested and released on $100,000 bail after being arraigned on 40 criminal counts.

Nov. 7, 2011 — Pennsylvania Attorney General Linda Kelly says Paterno is not a target of the investigation into how the school handled the accusations. But she refuses to say the same for university President Graham Spanier. Curley and Schultz, who have stepped down from their positions, surrender on charges that they failed to alert police to complaints against Sandusky.

Nov. 8, 2011 — Possible ninth victim of Sandusky contacts state police as calls for ouster of Paterno and Spanier grow in state and beyond. Penn State abruptly cancels Paterno’s regular weekly news conference.

Nov. 9, 2011 — Paterno announces he’ll retire at the end of the season then is fired by board of trustees.

Thinking, Fast and Slow

Mike — 2011-11-11T19:14:58-08:00

Years ago I reviewed Daniel Kahneman book, Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. Heuristics and Biases is a collection of graduate-school-level papers rather than a summary of research. Kahneman has finally written his summary of the research of cognitive bias, and it's pretty much the must-read book of the year.

Time or Money?

Mike — 2011-11-07T11:06:36-08:00

From an unlikely speaker, who spent so much of his time being a tyrant:

But another way to look at life is to look at it as a great shopping mall, not the usual kind, where goods are purchased with money, but one where such things as worldly success, love of music, enjoyment of painting, a six handicap golf game, a close relationship with your daughter, and many other similar things are also for sale. But the commodity with which they are purchased is not money but is time. And quite contrary to the way the capitalist system works with money and goods, every one of us is given exactly the same amount of time in each hour, in each day, and in each year. It is a limited amount, and it is impossible for anyone to be so rich in "time" that he can enjoy every single one of the things which time may buy. So there is a choice to be made, just as in purchasing goods with money, although the choice in the one case is far less obvious than the choice in the other.

Where is Your Obamessiah Now?

Mike — 2011-10-23T17:27:03-07:00

‎"I am a millionaire, but I never held a real job in my life.
I went to Harvard and Columbia.
I have one of the biggest private jets in the world take me wherever I want.
My wife wears $44,000 diamond bracelets.
I play golf every weekend at the most expensive resorts.
Goldman Sachs gives me millions of dollars.
When I retire, I’ll get paid hundreds of millions of $ in speaking fees by big companies.
I’ll make millions more as a board member of the corporations you are protesting.

MY NAME IS BARACK OBAMA, AND I AM THE 1%."

How Political Correctness Makes You Stoopid

Mike — 2011-10-22T12:49:40-07:00

When the economy is down, men tend to spend less on underwear:

Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan is a fan of the men's underwear indicator. The theory: men extend the lives of their undershorts during tough times to save money.

And when demand falls, prices usually fall.

Why then, the Business Insider's Sam Ro asks, is the price of women's underwear increasing?

Even Floyd Norris, a New York Times business writer, is confused:

What is going on? Cotton prices went up, as Stephanie Clifford reported a year ago. But cotton prices are lower now than they were then, and the underwear index is higher.

Would anyone care to explain why, as the economy went down, the prices of undergarments went up?

The commenters are stumped, too:

It's simple. The more people are stressed, the more they seek comfort. The closer something is to a person the higher the potential for giving comfort. The more comforting something is to a person the more they are willing to pay for it. Example cosmetics and underwear.

None of these people can reach the right answer, because their brains have been taken over by political correctness. Modern "thinkers" assume that men and women are driven by the same forces. If you view women and women as sharing the same hive mind, then you'd assume that the price of men's and women's underwear would follow the same pattern.

It's really easy to explain why women's underwear is more expensive.

Young women are earning, on average, more than men. Even cougars (women over 26) are earning more than their male counterparts. Sure, men are at the top of the pyramid. At the middle and lower levels, it's women who are winning.

Women are also earning more degrees than men. Women earning almost twice as many degrees as men are. The average non-cougar is almost certainly better educated than the men she's meeting out. (Note: Older men are in heaven, because younger men have no degrees, no money, and no prospects. It's becoming increasingly common for girls in their 20's to date men in their 30's. When I was in my 20's, I knew almost no girl who dated an "older" man. Now, it's so common that it's banal.)

Women, unlike men, are not interested in dating men who are "beneath" them. "Beneath" them means lesser educated and poorer. Girls with bullshit college degrees won't date men without a college degree. Because a man who hasn't sat through Women's Studies 101 is "uneducated."

All women want the same guy. They want the guy who is educated and has a little cash in his pocket. There are fewer of these guys each year. Thus, more women are competing for fewer men.

Sexy underwear is essential to snagging a good man.

If a girl's bra and underwear don't match, I'll sleep with her - but I'm not going to call her again. I expect girls to have sexy, cute underwear. It's not even negotiable.

Thus, women who want to date quality men are spending more on underwear.

Law Students: Become Part of the 1%

Mike — 2011-10-20T15:36:15-07:00

Here's how.

On the Need for Small Triumphs

Mike — 2011-10-19T19:29:26-07:00

Right before leaving work, I found a case that ruined an entire argument I had made. "How do I bill the client for the past 10 hours of work, in light of this new case? I should have found this case sooner. Do I disclose the case in the motion? The other guy is an idiot, and probably won't find it. Doesn't the adversarial process require the other person to find this stuff out? What about the duty of candor to the court." I felt like shit.

I started driving to the gym when I almost passed out. I had forgotten to eat. I stopped by the Shell station for a protein bar, and spent the next fifteen minutes on the road trying to rationalize not going to the gym.

Feeling detached, I pulled into the parking lot and grabbed my ticket from the machine. I pulled into a space, grabbed my gym bag, and went to grab my ticket - which the gym validates.

Fuck. I can't find my ticket. Jesus fuck.

I'd like to say I felt anger, as anger fuels me. I didn't have the energy for anger. I felt weary. Beta. If I had more emotions, I probably would have cried.

It wasn't that a replaced ticket, as the woman said, would cost $12.50. It was that everything was fucked up.

But I use the banal struggles of life to drive me to something more. Even small struggles can lead to increased life skills. "Find a way to talk the woman into giving you a replacement ticket, without paying the fee," I told myself.

"A replacement ticket is 12.50," she insisted. "But I just got here. The wind blew it out of my hands." She was sorry, but it was only $12.50.

I wouldn't leave. In sales, they teach: He who speaks first, loses. I stood silently.

"Where are you going," she asked? "To the gym," I replied, and she promised to let me out for free if the gym would give me a note proving I was a member.

The small victory gave me no energy. Because I had had less than 500 calories over the last 24 hours, my workout was shit. I was weak. I couldn't get a pump. I hadn't had enough water, so my stomach was bloated. I was too disgusted to even look at myself.

It felt like being stuck in traffic. Even when you're moving, you don't feel like you're getting anywhere. I ground through my workout, questioning my manhood and mortality. "So this is what getting old feel like..."

I had to finish my workout with cardio, and went to the dreaded stair master. After two minutes, I was exhausted. "Fuck this, I'm out of here."

Then I set a goal - an entirely arbitrary one. I was going to do 20 minutes on the stair climber.

At five minutes, I wanted to quit. "Just hold the hand rails. It doesn't matter. Just don't stop."

At 5:15, I started telling myself, "You haven't done this machine in a long time. Ten minutes will be a good start. You are already soaked in sweat and panting. Ten minutes would be great!"

Ten minutes came along, my lungs burned. My gums hurt, too, and my entire body was on fire. My legs itches due to increase capillary circulation of oxygen towards the skin.

Every 15 or 20 seconds, I'd look down. "Look, man. You're almost at 2 miles of stairs. Just stop at two miles. Twenty minutes, after all, is an arbitrary goal. It doesn't mean anything."

My inner id kept trying to get me to quit, and my super ego kept rejecting it.

Twenty minutes arrived, and I stepped off the machine. There was no sense of accomplishment. There was only the fatalistic sense that it was over.

I left the gym punch drunk, went home, and did laundry.

The next morning I felt like a G. I had energy, blood was circulating, and my performance at work was awesome. I found a way to deal with the case that ruined my previous night, and the workout in the gym went perfectly.

If I had gone home, the id would have had its way. Last night's trimph, while trivial and arbitrary, reset my entire being.

I always set arbitrary goals - even if they make no sense.

Even small triumphs feed the spirit.