Bloggin big willy style

2008-04-29T11:55:00.000-07:00

The Belated Reading Week Post

Ah, the joys of being a Third Year law student. I have two serious classes (Remedies and Sales), an externship (five units), and a bar exam primer course (Basic Bar Studies). All of my classes ended yesterday, and the only thing I have left is a paper (18 pages on a topic that I can write a book on) and two finals.

Despite the hard work, confusion, commute, frustration, getting back up to speed on summary judgment procedure, and having to take a significant amount of time out of my week to work the externship, I found it extremely rewarding working at the Court of Appeal.

As for Basic Bar Studies, I felt it was a waste of time despite the fact that the professor is one of the best professors at my school. The class was more of a "here is a basic outline, here is an MBE book, do the reading on your own. When you come to class I'll give you a quiz and a bar exam question and that's it." The other problem was that the class was on a Saturday. This semester I had classes on Monday and Wednesdays, and the extern ship on Tuesday and Thursday. I tried to use Friday to prepare for Saturday, and by Sunday I was cramming for By Monday and Wednesday classes. It was not the best use of my time to say the least. Moreover, my remedies professor, shows about as much emotion in class as a toaster.

I recently came across a post on the Law School Academic Support Blog mentioning the mindset of most third year law students. We're so busy trying to line up jobs in order to pay off our loans, prepare for the bar exam, make plans for graduation, and put our own lives in order to prevent total crash and burn by July. Most of us just want to pass, and have consigned ourselves to just doing the minimum required to get by. Every "One L" I have seen has had their nose buried in flashcards and outlines for the last week. Most of the Third Years I've seen have just buried their noises in canned outlines and briefs. I think I still need to finish my outlines out least. As for after finals, I've already made plans to get out of town the week between my last final and commencement as It will be the only week I'll have off between now and the Bar.

One more thing, if you are a law student and you are reading this post, let me give you a word of advice, live at home with your family or significant other during your first and second year of law school, but move as far away as you can during your last year. Not a day goes by, where I am reminded about commencement, or asked about my plans for the Bar, or whether I've lined a job up for after graduation. Personally, I hate giving answers to questions I have not given a whole lot of thought to. I've been forced to take things one day at a time, and I've buried my calendar a long time ago.

I'll probably have a post later today on Sales and Remedies, just to get it out of my system. W.

2008-02-04T14:12:00.000-08:00

Not even done with Law School and I'm worrying about the Bar Exam?

I'm in my last semester of law school. You know, the semester where 3L's have to be dragged to campus kicking and screaming. Anyway, at my particular law school the bar exam is a big deal, mostly due to the fact that the passage rate is so low, yet the students are quite capable. In the past couple of weeks our "Dean of Bar Passage" has sent numerous e-mails to 3L's about preparing for the bar, not to mention holding meetings with us, in order to "understand the immense importance of the task we are about to undertake." A number of 3L's, including myself, are taking a basic bar studies class, in order to have a warm up and exposure to certain concepts prior to taking Bar/Bri over the summer.

Well, to put things in perspective, I know the bar exam is nothing like storming the Beaches of Normandy, but it is extremely important. But there also is a disconnect between Law School and the Bar Exam. The bar exam tests bar law, whereas law school tests "law school law." Basically what this means is that if one attempted to write their exams in law school like they are writing for the bar exam, they may pass, but the grade may not be that great. A law professor would likely mention the lack of analysis and deficient rule statements.

There have been two bits of wisdom that I have received from practicing lawyers regarding the bar exam. One, "There is the law you learn in law school, the law you learn for the bar, and the law you learn in practice. Never ever get the three mixed up!" and two, "The bar exam is an exercise in diligence not brilliance."

Well the clocks ticking, but I'm not going to look at it until May.......WDR.

2008-01-05T15:01:00.000-08:00

WHY I'M VOTING FOR OBAMA.

A little less than four years ago, I had an opportunity to work the Democratic National Convention in Boston. Being involved in politics, at least at the local level for as long as I can remember, the experience was awesome and inspiring. However, being a veteran of two political conventions, one comes to realize quite quickly that the days of back room dealing and smoke filled rooms to appoint the party's nominee are a relic of the past as most modern conventions are elaborate productions designed to showcase the nominee and his policies.

Throughout the four days of the convention, a number of elected officials and party officials gave speeches; some were televised, and most were not. But there was one speech that I continue to remember to this day. It was from a relatively unknown state senator from Illinois, who decided to run for the U.S. Senate. Now, I was following some of the other senatorial campaigns at the time, particularly the rather contentious South Dakota race between John Thune and Tom Daschle, as I was a Political Science major, and I vaguely remember the interesting turn of events in the Illinois Senate Race, after the GOP nominee, Ryan was forced to drop out of the race after the revelations made by his wife at the time, Jeri Ryan, but I digress. I was working in the bowels of the Fleet Center, when his speech began. At first, I really didn't hear it until one of my co-workers asked me to turn up the volume on one of the monitors that were set up in our office. What I heard however, was a breath of fresh air. It was a speech of hope, a speech that was more than mere platitudes and empty promises; it was a speech that was significantly different then the other politicians who spoke before him.

The speaker was Barrack Obama of Illinois, a native of Hawaii, with a white mother from Kansas and a black father from Kenya. Obama stated that he was "the embodiment of the American dream" as nowhere else would a man of his heritage would be able to do so much so fast. The crowd of delegates, normally ruckus and constantly talking, fell silent and gave their undivided attention to Obama. The cadence of the speech was measured; it lacked the "umms" and "ahs" that so often punctuate the speeches given by President Bush. It was a voice of intelligence and assurance. A voice that has the ability to tell the world “America is ready to lead again."

Barrack continued. He spoke of the need for service. The need to be "my brother's keeper, my sister's keeper," and the need to provide hope and to maintain faith in simple dreams. The crowd was rapt with attention. I had goose bumps. From there on out I realized that change cannot be expected from more of the same, change only genuinely comes from one outside of the beltway.

At the end of the convention, my brother and I stood at the podium where just hours earlier John Kerry had given his acceptance speech. The confetti was still on the floor and balloons were being kicked around by the few convention and campaign staff still hanging around. I stood there wondering if John Kerry would really be able to beat George W. Bush. Of course, we now know the result. Osama Bin Laden is still at large. Justice for the 3,000 who died on 9/11 is just a fleeting memory. The war in Iraq continues to rage on. The national economy is being held together by a thread. While, the rights and guarantees entitled to all under the Constitution are being whittled away by a president who wields his veto pen as a sword to stifle progress and protect his friends.

I like Hillary, but is she electable? Honestly, no. Bill burned too many bridges with the base of the Democratic Party, and she is reviled by the Right. If the Swift Boat attacks were vicious against John Kerry, just wait to see what will be unleashed against Hillary. John Edwards is good too, but I also believe that he will not be able to weather the storm of GOP attacks. Dodd and Biden are good too, but as Biden recently said "electability is more of a popularity contest." Both Biden and Dodd have tremendous sway in their respective roles in the Senate, the presidency is a bit of a stretch.

Watching Obama's speech from Iowa reminded me of that night in Boston. We are not Red States or Blue States, there is not a Latino America or a White America, there is not a Christian America or a Jewish America, we are the United States of America. Obama embodies this message. That is why I will be voting for Obama as the next President of the United States of America.

2007-10-11T20:51:00.000-07:00

Just a minor musing.....

Al Gore + Nobel Peace Prize = Next President of the United States? It would sure beat the current lot of Republican nobodies!

2007-09-11T16:51:00.000-07:00

Never Forget - 9/11/01

2007-07-21T12:21:00.000-07:00

Guten Tag!

Been a little busy the last few weeks. Between classes, Vienna, Beer, Munich, Bertchesgaden, Salt Mines, Salzburg, and then later Berlin, I am somehow finding some time to study my material pertaining to Fundamental Rights in the US and Europe. I'll write a more lengthly post when I return, but here is a picture or two from my trip.

2007-07-01T23:48:00.000-07:00

Wheels Up.

Entering my Third Year of law school, I am finally doing something I've always wanted to do while I was in undergrad, Study Abroad. But the problem is that once you are in law school all the problems of adulthood and a professional education tend to accumulate which means paying the bills, setting the e-mail to "out of the office," tying up loose ends as the distance and time involved in travel makes it difficult to get things taken care of, and packing stuff that I think I need now (but will become a headache while abroad). I've been to Europe before, but this time I really will have an opportunity to enjoy it. My last visit to Munich was a quick visit to the Marienplatz, beers at the Hofbrauhaus, and then back on the bus. This time I'm going without a tour guide (and possibly without a net). Then I'll be in Austria, studying fundamental rights of the US and Europe under Justice Kennedy, for three weeks. A quick trip up to Berlin, and then back down to Munich. Berlin has always been on the "to-do" list for sometime, not only because of the WWII aspects and the Cold War history, but also because of the modern mystique of visiting a city that was once divided into two.

But the magic mystery tour does not stop there my friends. When I get back I'll have about a week to relax and then it's off to San Francisco, to undertake my duties as the ABA Representative for Western State. So much for the slow summer, I can see the rest of it rolling down the runway.

Bon Voyage......WDR

2007-06-06T22:32:00.000-07:00

DUCKS 2007 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS (ABOUT FRIGGING TIME!!!). BTW. WHO SAID SOMETHING ABOUT A CURSE? GO DUCKS!!!!

2007-05-16T00:21:00.000-07:00

(Credit: Boingboing.net via medialibel.org)

See Ya Jerry......

After hearing of the passing of Jerry Falwell, I couldn't pass up this opportunity to bring up one of the numerous cases covered in my Con Law class over the past semester. Basically, A public figure cannot claim Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress for a parody advertisement absent actual malice. It's the price one pays for being a public figure, and quite honestly the cost of doing business.

Besides my appearance with him via satellite on CNN's Crossfire (No, not the Paul Begala, James Carville v. Tucker Carlson and Pat Buchanan slug fest) In which I received a compliment from him. (We'll more of "I have no doubt that these two are fine young men...") during an interview concerning a minor piece of litigation I was involved in the late '90's. (Google's amazing, you should try it some day).

Not to sound like an echo of my brother (which usually happens without even trying), I wonder what Peter is going to say at the Pearly Gates? ("Tinky Winky" no, really? You can't be serious. Wait here, I need to run this by the Big Boss first.)

WDR

P.S. As for Spring Law School Grades, they are slowly trickling in. I might or might not comment on them in the near future.

2007-05-05T16:18:00.000-07:00

Law School Finals Blogging Series
Welcome to the Suck - Spring 2L

Two exams in, and I'll be honest to anyone who is interested in listening, that I really don't feel that great about them. I don't feel horrible like I did after my Civ Pro II exam where My brain went totally blank. And I really mean blank, I couldn't even remember my name for a few seconds and had a splitting headache afterwards. Or, like I did after my Con Law I exam, where I felt really good, and nailed the son of a bit#$. So far with Con Law II and Corporations, I feel like I was disorganized in my Con Law Exam, but most of the stuff was covered. The multiple choice was not too bad either compared to the Mid Term. But for Corporations, the multiple choice threw me for a loop, and I know I missed at least one, the second essay was not too bad. The fact patten was really obvious and the essay was probably intended to give students the opportunity to redeem themselves after the first essay. The first essay however seemed like a doozy, which really pisses me off. First off, I spent the last two weeks reviewing the exams that were made available on the course web page, and guess what, the essay was based off a recent decision of the Del Supreme Court that recently overruled Cal.Corps.Code s.2115 that subjects foreign corporations (in this case DE Corporations) to CA law. (see Vantage Point Venture Partners 1996 v. Examen, 871 A.2d 1108). The exam was off of a single comment that took up no more than 30 seconds of class time! UGH!!!!

Now, before I waste anymore of my precious time this Saturday I just have to put property and Fed Tax, plus the remaining 7 pages of my International Law Paper in the can (with about 24 hours to finish it in between my property exam and the deadline). Talk about cutting it close.

WDR.

2007-04-23T17:11:00.000-07:00

So much for a better week......

After last weeks horrific shootings at Virginia Tech, the NASA domestic dispute at Johnson Space Center, and the Blue Angels Crash this past weekend, you would think Monday would be a fresh start. But alas it was not to be. Today started off with the announcement of the Death of Boris Yeltsin. Love him or hate him, he was the first president of the post soviet Russia. and his announcement on New Years Eve of 1999 that he was stepping down practically eclipsed the coverage of the events around the world. Then later this afternoon it was announced that David Halberstein, a Pulitzer prize winning writer, was killed in a car accident up near San Francisco. To put it bluntly, this just sucks.

So to take my mind off the sucky news, I'm going to bury my head in my books and prep for finals. Exam #1, Con Law II, is in T-9 days and counting.

WDR.

2007-04-21T21:58:00.000-07:00

FINALS BLOGGING SERIES: FIT*

The following is a short practice exam answer that was prepared for my Federal Income Taxation class. I'm awating feedback from my professor, but I think I hit all the highlights.
---------------------------------------

Under §61(a), any income derived from any source whatsoever is taxable. Income includes income realized in any form, whether in money, property, or services. §1.61-1(a). More specifically, an undeniable accession to wealth, clearly realized, and subject to the Taxpayer’s (TP) dominion and control, will be deemed income for purposes of §61(a). Glenshaw Glass. The finder of treasure trove, to the extent of its value in United States currency, constitutes gross income for the taxable year in which it is reduced to undisputed possession. §1.61-14(a). Here, Legolas will have income upon finding the ring as he took dominion and control over the ring by placing it around his neck. The ring increases his wealth, and there is no indication that Legolas’s possession of the ring is conditional. Even if Legolas were to argue his possession his conditional, under the claim of right doctrine he would still be required to report the ring as income in the year it was found, even if there is a possibility that another person may clam the ring in a later year. Cesarini. Much the like the found money in the piano in Cesarini, Legolas will be required to report the fair market value - what a willing buyer would pay a willing seller, with neither under a compulsion to buy or sell, and both having reasonable knowledge of relevant facts – as assessed by Gandor concerning the ring, here $20,000. §20.2031-1(b).

As for the transaction with Frodo, the amount realized (AR) in sale of the ring is $40,000, $25,000 in cash and $15,000 for the horse. §1001(b). Income includes income realized in any form, whether in money, property, or services. §1.61-1(a). His adjusted basis (AB) in the ring sold is $20,000. §1012. Legolas gain realized on the sale with Frodo is $20,000. §1001(a). This gain is recognized unless there is some provision in the Code that would postpone recognition. §1001(c).

Unless excepted by another provision in the code, Legolas will be required to report the gain realized from the sale of the ring to Frodo as gross income for the 2002 tax year under §61(a).

------------------------------------

I'll post the post game recap, as soon as I hear back from my professor.

WDR.

*Standard Rules apply (not for legal advice, nor even close to what a polished answer would look like. You mileage may vary.)

2007-04-09T22:51:00.000-07:00

FINALS BLOGGING SERIES: PROPERTY II*

The Recording System or "that check ain't worth the paper its written on..."

Here is a quick outline on The Recording System:

Establishing Chain of Title

Grantor-Grantee

documents affecting parcel of land are recorded in order of the grantor and grantee
Searches are ran until root of title is established (either CL or Statute)
Gap --> Burden falls on seller to clean up chain of title.

Tract index

Documents affecting parcel of land are listed per index for parcel.

Recording acts

Purpose: Establish priority persons have to parcel of land

Types

Race: i.e "First in line saves a dime"

First to record prevails

Race/Notice: i.e "Tag! Who said we were playing tag?"

Subsequent BFP/creditor who first records prevails against person claiming prior unrecorded interest as long as purchaser did not have notice of preceding interest upon acquisition of interest.
Notice established

Constructively: Purchaser deemed to know all matters contained in legally recorded deed records, w/o search.
Actual: Physical search of records, etc...
Inquiry: Purchaser hears or sees something that a normally prudent person would inquire about.

Notice: "At closing time, it's all mine"

Subsequent BFP/creditor prevails over claimants as long as subsequent purchasers acquires title w/out notice of prior claim.

Primary purpose: Protect subsequent bona fide purchasers for value.

* Standard Rules Apply (See below)

2007-04-09T18:32:00.000-07:00

FINALS BLOGGING SERIES: CON LAW II

OK , "we're back in the tree again." It is the wonderful time of the year when caffeinated beverages are a must and sanity is for those who don't know any better.

Today's subject is....First Amendment: Content Based v. Content Neutral Regulations. The "abbreviated" prompt is included below.

Please note: The following is provided for (1) my personal purposes to get the pre-exam writing jitters out of the way, (2) not intended to provide legal advice in any way, shape, or form, and (3) not for any further publication, copying, borrowing, referencing, etc.. without contacting the author, and (4) may have errors. It shouldn't, but last I checked, I'm human and mistakes do happen.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chicago adopted an ordinance prohibiting all picketing in residential neighborhoods unless it was labor picketing connected to a place of employment

Discuss the constitutionality of this ordinance under a content-neutral/content-based approach. Do not discuss the "public forum" issue. NOTE: 500 Word Limit.

Is the Chicago City Ordinance allowing labor picketing a permissible speech regulation under the First Amendment?

The Chicago city ordinance will be held unconstitutional under the First Amendment, as applied to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment, since the regulation impermissibly distinguishes between the types of speech allowed based on the viewpoint advocated by the speaker.

Under the First Amendment, as applied to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment, the government is prohibited from distinguishing speech based on the ideology of the message being expressed by the speaker. Laws that prohibit types of speech, or impose differential burdens upon speech because of the viewpoint being expressed are deemed content based and are subject to strict scrutiny. Such regulations are subject to the “most exacting scrutiny” and are presumptively invalid. The regulations must be necessarily related to a compelling state interest, and are so narrowly tailored to serve that end. (Boos) Additionally, the regulations imposed must not “unnecessarily circumscribe protected expression.” (White) Laws that merely regulate speech with no concern to its content are subject to an intermediate scrutiny test. Whenever the government seeks to regulate speech in public places it must be subject matter neutral.

The City of Chicago regulation is prohibiting all other types of picketing in residential neighborhoods, except for labor picketing, essentially distinguishing permissible forms of picketing from impermissible picketing based on the subject matter being expressed. Such a regulation prohibits other forms of constitutionally protected speech. A similar situation was presented in Boos, where the Court held Washington D.C. may not enact an ordinance restricting speech due to the message being conveyed by protesters deemed to bring a foreign government into “public odium.” Whenever the government seeks to regulate speech in public settings it must be subject matter neutral. Here, the ordinance bans picketing in residential areas unless it conforms to the subject matter expressed in the ordinance. This ordinance serves to prohibit other forms of peaceful picketing, such as school board protests, from taking place in residential areas. No content-neutral purpose for the regulation is provided, such as the need to limit secondary effects of speech, which could possibly provide a compelling state interest for the regulation. In essence, the City of Chicago is controlling the opinions, messages, or ideas of picketers in violation of the First Amendment.

-----------------
Post Game: Prof mentioned there was a slight confusion between Content Based restrictions and viewpoint based restrictions, but other than that no problem. (4/21/07)

2007-03-18T17:59:00.000-07:00

THIS BLOG POST IS A CONTRACT, PLEASE READ IT AS IT MAY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS.

Ok, As a law student I am a little bit intrigued that a person can claim that just by visiting a web sight or archiving a copy of a web page that a contract is formed with the one providing the material. If a federal court were to buy this argument, then the Internet it self is in danger.

Here are the terms of a contract posted on the front page of a particular website (addresses have been removed to prevent the person from receiving any credit)

(The following is for fair use and editorial purposes only - So Sue Me :-p)
---------------------------------------------

EMAIL THE (STUPID SITE OWNER) *** Our client lists are confidential. Please do not ask who disclosed certain information to ****. This information is not available to the public and will be vigorously guarded from disclosure to protect those clients whose children remain at risk of state-sanctioned kidnaping of their children.
Information included on these pages is not legal advice, we are not attorneys. You are advised to consult with an attorney on any legal matters.
Any legal documents on this site were prepared and/or drafted by attorneys or under the supervision of an attorney, or by pro se respondent parents and/or subject children and are published here with their permission. Any phone calls or other oral communications with our staff may be recorded at our discretion. Any person engaging in conversation with any of our staff is presumed to have given express consent to be recorded. ALL MATERIAL ON THESE PAGES IS COPYRIGHT 1996-2007 ************** reproduction without written permission is prohibited.

IF YOU COPY OR DISTRIBUTE ANYTHING ON THIS WEB SITE, YOU ARE ENTERING INTO A CONTRACT. SEE COPYRIGHT NOTICE & SECURITY AGREEMENT (READ BEFORE ACCESSING THIS WEBSITE) - Copyright 1996- 2007, ********** and individual contributors where appropriate. The content if this web site is intended to generate income, it is not free if you intend to archive, copy, print or distribute anything electronically fixed herein.

Reproduction and distribution prohibited without permission. This web site is licensed to be viewed on a computer only.Permission and limited, non-exclusive license to reproduce this web site, by any method including but not limited to magnetically, digitally, electronically or hard copy, may be purchased for $5,000 (five thousand dollars) per printed hard copy page per copy, in advance of printing. We accept Visa, Mastercard, American Express, check, money order or cash. WE DO NOT ACCEPT GOVERNMENT PO’S - this fee schedule specifically applies to any state agency, employee, contractor or CP$ service provider or any person listed on ********** Bad Advocates pages. CP$ agencies and coconspirators have found this site to be extremely valuable, preferring the contents of this site to any other site. Hence, the premium price. Family Rights activists or advocates may obtain reduction or waiver of license fees .

All online purchases are nonrefundable. In the case of a dispute involving a purchase, the purchaser agrees that the record of electronic delivery generated by the online document delivery service shall constitute incontrovertible proof that the item charged was delivered to an authorized user of the credit card or online payment service account. If the card owner contests the charge the document was delivered and we are charged fees for a charge back, cardholder agrees to pay to us the amount of the purchase plus $50 or double the purchase price, whichever is greater, upon demand.

If this intellectual property is stolen, infringed or used to harm any member or associate family of any Family Rights group, the copyright holder will seek appropriate remedies under applicable laws. Anyone visiting this site consents to jurisdiction and venue remaining in El Paso County, Colorado.

--------------------------------------

Here are my thoughts on the above listed text. (1) Merely visiting a website is not enough for one to be bound to a contract, while it is true that one may enter into a contract via electronic submission, usually there is some intent to be bound by the transmission, such as the placing of a market order by a automated computer program. (2) The author of the webpage is the one most able to prevent the page from being archived. By inserting a "no follow" link, or certain code in the webpage, archiving can usually be prevented. (3) Other methods exist to prevent "copyrighted" material from being copied, such as providing a password for a secured section of the site in exchange for payment and agreement to terms of service. (4) If a federal court were to recognize her argument as valid, this could have devastating consequences for the Internet as a whole. Plus more than just computers have the capability of accessing the web. And (5) No one can consent to jurisdiction and venue just by visiting a website, it is possible that the webpage itself is hosted on a server outside the jurisdiction. Additionally such contact is insufficient to rise to the level of "minimum contacts."

BTW, "not legal advice? Cases are cited and interpretation is given, I think that is just about enough to be "legal advice."

WDR.

2007-03-08T22:25:00.000-08:00

Law School Frustration - FLP Style

“The only difference between a rut and a grave is their dimensions.”

"Get in the boat, do your job, and come back"

Ok. I need to vent. One of the biggest gripes about the ABA accreditation process is the lopsided focus on Bar Passage rates. A law school can have an outstanding faculty, stable finances, impressive credentials, and still not get the ABA seal of approval just for having low bar passage rates. My current law school, in response to both the recent ABA site visit and dismally low bar passage rates, has imposed new graduation requirements in order to receive a JD degree. Traditionally, when schools make fundamental changes to grading or graduation requirements, polices only go into effect for the matriculating class. But, not at my school. The policy has gone into effect for everybody except graduating 3L's. The policy requires students to earn what is called "foundation law points." A student will earn one point for each listed class in which the student earns a 2.5 or above on a 4.0 scale. Full time 2'L's will need 3 points to graduate, whereas Fall incoming students will need 8 points, and must earn a certain number in the first year.

Now I'm not against the purpose of the policy. Improving bar passage rates has positives for everybody. The reputation of the school goes up, hiring prospects increase, and, to paraphrase my corps professor, there is "more beer for everybody." However, the implementation has been, for lack of a better phrase, an utter disaster. As I understand it, the administration has given the faculty free reign to develop this policy, but it has devolved into a situation where the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing.

As for the student response, well, as expected, it has not been pretty. The forum this afternoon turned into a shouting match. It was a situation were cooler heads needed to prevail. Solutions needed to be presented, and I'll commend one professor for attempting to strike a middle ground. Whatever solutions are going to be proposed are not going to appeal to everybody, and everybody must understand this. I second the need for a joint faculty student committee to address this problem. It would allow the process of refinement to continue and minimize distractions throughout the rest of the semester.

A lot of information is available on the internet about the academic factors involved in Law School. Some of it is disparaging while some informative. But in the end, the ultimate x factor in the whole process is the student. The one best able to steer the ship and control their destiny.

The point of this post is to get my gripes out of my head and to return to my primary focus, which are my studies. Between the ABA site visit and the new policy announcements, academics, which should be first and foremost, has fallen to the wayside. After tonight, this whole debate is purely academic. No one earns a 4.0 for debating grading policies in law school.

2007-02-20T20:17:00.000-08:00

LAW SCHOOL BLOGGING SERIES

Well, here we are six weeks into the semester and I have a midterm in t-1 week in Con Law and another Midterm (online at least) for Corporations. What has been a nice change of pace from last semester is that my Con Law professor is requiring weekly short essay quizzes from his students, unfortunately he is still leaning way too much on the text. We read the material outside of class, we read it again in class, and we then review the material after class. If it doesn't stick, Tough luck.

As for pending projects:
- 1. 25pg Paper for International Law - Topic: Generally, the International Legal Ramifications of the recent ASAT test by China. The growing militarization of space, and the present outer space legal regime has been thoroughly discussed by numerous scholars so it is not like I have to stretch for material. I'm currently in the process of writing the outline for it. I would really like to have a publishable manuscript after I am done with it.
- 2. Federal Income Tax - OK, Not my most exciting class, but it is one of the law classes where one can definitely have a "right" answer - Current topics: The income tax treament of Gifts, Bequests, Devises, and Inheritances and the Sale of a Principal Residence. This class is very statute intensive. Besides, do we really need Sec. 1012 to remind us that basis = Cost, and Glenshaw Glass to tell us that income is an accession to wealth clearly realized subject to the taxpayers complete dominion and control.
-3. Corporations - Ugh, were do I begin. I have a morning class with a professor who is not a morning person. Each class starts on average 10-15 minutes late and we have just started the material for week 3. (About 3 weeks late.)
-4. Property - Class is definitely not the place to learn the material. I enter class thinking I know my stuff and then leave class totally confused. Today, was Common Interest Communities and Associational Standing for the ability to change and impose CC&R's. I think I have figured it out however, the prof does not want the obvious answers, but the stuff that only a psychic could divine from the sacred text, I meant case book. I'm in the process of pouring over his last exams to figure things out.

Oh, and did I mention I'm registered to take law class in Salzburg, Austria this Summer. I'll book the flight eventually. Now back to studying, already in progress. ---WDR.

2007-01-23T18:35:00.000-08:00

Quick SOTU Post -

Hey Shrub! You have lost the right to invoke 9/11 until you actually DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT ? I.E. Where's Osama?

And if I hear the term "up or down vote" one more time........UGH!

WDR

2007-01-23T17:53:00.000-08:00

Welcome Back - WSU Spring Semester 2007

Well, here we go again. It's time to take the red pill and see how far this rabbit hole goes. As of last week, I officially cleared the hump of my law school studies.

A brief comment on Fall grades. If there was something besides obtaining my Juris Doctor Degree and passing the bar that I wanted to do during Law School it was at least to do well in one class (Its law school, one has to be realistic). I know it is bad practice to discuss grades, but I thought that with a 4.0 in Constitutional Law that I would have at least won the Witkin in the class (I don't know if we do AmJurs anymore). Alas, it was not to be. I just reviewed my exam from last semester and did surprisingly well. But, after looking at the breakdown of the grades and to quote Maxwell Smart, I "Missed it by that much." ONE STUPID POINT. No, a better performance on the final would not have saved it, as I had the highest essay score for the class per the grade breakdown. And to make matters worse, there was only two A's earned in the class. The culprit was an online midterm where the answers were close, closer, and closest.

Oh well. Over the next week I'll try to review my other exams.

WDR

2006-12-16T17:44:00.000-08:00

FINALS BLOGGING SERIES – POST GAME RECAP

The old law school adage is that they work you to death the second year. Well, halfway through the second year and I will admit the adage is true. Five classes with five exams at three hours each, by the third one I was feeling pretty punchy, and by the fifth one I probably wrote something about the relationship of the coarse theorem to the introduction of character evidence. In other words, I was baked, flambéed, and fricasseed, and it probably showed up on the exam.

On an aside, I personally believe that the traditional way of grading students in law school is a joke. In undergrad, pop quizzes and multiple examinations were routine. By the end of the course, everyone in the class was at least familiar with the material. In law school however, grades are all dependent on one three-hour exam. Law school professors justify this method of grading two ways. First, they argue that this is how the bar tests the material, and by golly if the state can do it for the bar exam I can do it for my class. Or the second, which is that law schools traditionally test the material this way so why mess with tradition. In my opinion as a student, both of these reasons breed malpractice and discontent. The bar exam is a different beast in itself and should have no bearing on how grades are determined in law school. Grades in law school should be based on three factors. First, it should be based on how well a student has mastered the material. This can be tested in a number of ways, from pop quizzes, the true use of the Socratic Method in presenting the material, or through short fact patterns given weekly to students in which the professor provides feedback.

Second, theory is one thing, practicality is another. A good quote pertaining to law school is this, “the law you learn in law school, is different than the law you learn for the bar, and is different than the law you learn in practice. Never get the three mixed up.” While the ABA sets “academic standards” that cover everything up to and including the number of toilets (not really, but it is that detailed) the standards are silent on providing practical experiences to students. I would require that an externship or internship be completed as part of one’s law school education. A lawyer’s duty to perform pro bono work should be reinforced in law school.

Finally, professors gripe and complain about making copies of past exams available. They are even more appalled by making model answers available. I would require that past exams and model answers be made available to students. First, many are way too detailed for purposes of a three-hour exam but they allow a student to see IRAC in practice. Second, it provides insight on the professor’s phrasing of the rules. Finally, they help to provide focus to a student’s studies, if the student should focus on policy or rules by writing to the preferences of the professor. When professor’s openly gripe about the poor quality of student writing, in many instances they share some of the blame.

I would like to say that I am not a superstitious person, but I was wearing my lucky Oxford University rugby shirt during every exam. I don’t know why, it just made me feel smarter, plus it served as a bit of a mind screw for my fellow classmates. For the record, I did not attend Oxford, but if they were thinking I did, I’ll start wearing a Harvard baseball cap as well. I am not holding my breath for grades, but if I was able to eek it out this semester, I will be a very happy man.

BTW…..The next Law School related post will not appear on this blog until after the New Year. Don’t even ask about grades.

2006-12-08T01:00:00.000-08:00

FINALS BLOGGING SERIES – EXAM WEEK SERIES

(This post is written in the Exam Format that is required for my PR Class)

No use of the word clearly or words of similar context
A preliminary statement setting out the issue to be addressed and the jurisdiction
Strict Adherence to the IRAC Format

In order to properly assess the level of preparedness and capability of Western State Law School Students, final exams are administered on a biannual basis for those students attending Fall and Spring Semesters. Midterm exams may be administered by the professors as warranted, however all classes are required to have one final exam. All references to exam procedures are according to the rules as set forth in the student handbook and other authorized communications as necessary.

I. Is there a duty for law students to type their exams while in law school?

For the ease of administration of exams and the importance of accuracy of grading, students may, but are not required to type their exams while in law school.

Under the academic standards, as set forth in the Student Handbook, a student has the option of either typing or handwriting their exams. While the student handbook does not set out a preference for the use of either procedures, many professors stress the need to type rather then handwrite as it is useful practice for the bar exam. (See Student Handbook, Exam Procedures) From the student’s standpoint, the ability to type one’s exams allows for the student to focus more on outlining and preparing a “stellar analysis” on exams. (See Sheppard, Syllabus to Property I). Furthermore, the ability to type one’s exams allows students to maximize one’s time, by being able to make quick corrections and to move sections of one’s answer on the screen during the course of the exam.

However, the need for students to type exams may also lead to further difficulties. Many students have been able to complete their education via the built-in spell checker and grammar checker of Microsoft Word, and do not have the sufficient language and grammar skills to ensure clear and concise prose. Furthermore, students may feel more inclined to include more material, rather than less, in order to fill up time and address issues that are not relevant to the issues being tested. Students may also have difficulty typing or have difficulty concentrating in nosy room full of keyboards. In addition, those who handwrite exams are more inclined to take the time necessary to outline model answers prior to writing in order to prevent complete rewrites in the middle of exams and to clear up one’s handwriting as well.

In conclusion, while a student is not under a duty to type exams, it is a method that is preferred by the professors and provides important practice for the bar exam. As such, students should type their exams.

a. If the student’s computer encounters technical difficulties, is a replacement computer authorized?

While a replacement computer during the exam is not authorized due to the need to install examsoft software and to complete the necessary registration process. A replacement computer may be procured prior to resuming subsequent exams.

Students who encounter technical difficulties during exams in which their laptop becomes unusable are required to resume the exam through the use of pen and bluebook. (See Student Handbook, Use of Examsoft Procedures). However, students who have adequate time to procure and prepare a replacement computer in the interim may do so. (Conversation with Bonnie)

Difficulties of a technical nature, such as a frayed power cable that is an obvious safety and fire hazard due to sparking, will require a student to obtain a replacement computer. (Yes, this actually happened to me.) While the purchasing of a replacement computer during exam week may take away time necessary to adequately prepare for exams (see II. Infra), a student may be able to procure a replacement laptop through a family member, i.e. a brother who just happens to have a spare lying around. (Why he has a spare is beyond me.)

Under the rules as set forth in the student handbook, a replacement computer is authorized, provided as student is able to install the necessary software prior to commencing subsequent exams.

II. How many hours of study are needed before the material sinks in?

Adequate time to prepare for exams is dependent on the students study habits and focus, Students who are enrolled in five classes and attempting to work a law clerk job may suddenly find that there are more than 24 hours in a day and sleeping less than 6 hours becomes the norm. However, stress has been known to effect people differently, and the student may end up sleeping more and losing focus, by turning to such activities such as blogging.

III. What if the student is starting to feel like crap, is he under an ethical duty to continue with exams without an approved withdrawal?

Cutting to the chase to get back to studying……Under the “Buck Up and Suck Up” theory a student is under an ethical duty to take the exams. Only in such cases in which the student is hospitalized and suitable alternatives to taking the exam cannot be devised, will the student be able to delay the taking of exams. Just because a student starts to feel miserable during finals, does not relive him of his ethical duty to complete exams in the classes he is registered.

One exam down, four to go. JUST GEEEETTT IIITTTTTT DONEEEEE!

2006-11-30T23:19:00.000-08:00

Message from Management ---

Until further notice, the finals blogging series has been suspended.

WDR.

2006-11-21T17:24:00.000-08:00

FINALS BLOGGING SERIES: CON LAW
Below are supposed to be four short questions with four short answers. As you can see, I forgot about the short part on the first two, but covered all the bases. Whereas on the second two, I got the short part down, but took some scalp with it. The model answers are from my professor.
---------------------------------------------------------

1. Standing
CQ: Does a 19 year-old denied purchase of 3.2% beer from a state owned store under a law that allows women to purchase the same have standing?

In order for a party to have standing to sue in federal court, there must be an actual case or controversy between two adverse parties, the plaintiff has or imminently will suffer injury, the injury is traceable to the defendants conduct, and the injury caused by the opposing party can be alleviated by a favorable decision in the matter. An injury in fact is defined as a cognizable injury, and not one that is merely speculative in nature (Lujan). A party can also assert the claims of third parties, when the injured third parties are similarly situated to the one bringing the claim and the injured third parties are not likely to assert their own claims.

Here, James will have standing to sue as the state's stores refusal to sell him the beer is a cognizable injury due to the states unequal treatment of men and women of the same age group.

The Court has held in Boren that state laws prohibiting the sale of alcohol to males under 21 is a cognizable injury sufficient for standing purposes. A bartender was able to assert a claim on behalf of patrons who were unable to purchase 3.2% beer in Oklahoma, due to a state law that prohibited the sale of such beer to males under 21. The Court held the economic interests of the bartender allowed it to act as an advocate for those who were denied access to the market, i.e. the ability to purchase beer at his establishment. In addition, the injured third parties were unlikely to sue due to the costs involved.

While the state may likely argue that as a market participant it has the ability to determine whom it may or may not sell beer to, such regulations of the market have been held to be impermissible. It can be inferred from the facts presented that the law is applicable to all liquor stores operating in Calutopia. As such, James may bring such an action here on behalf of himself and others similarly situated. First, as the state has enacted a discriminatory measure due to gender, both James and the state liquor store are adverse to each other, meeting the actual case and controversy requirement. Second, James has suffered both a cognizable injury and injury in fact by the State's active discrimination against males under 21 by denying them the ability to purchase beer when women of the same age are able to do so. Finally, an injunction or invalidation of the state law by a federal court decision has the ability of alleviating the cause of the injury.

Absent some valid compelling reason for delineating based on gender by the state, James will have standing to sue.

2. Federal Power: Commerce Clause

CQ: Can Congress enact legislation banning smoking in all public places?

Under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, Congress shall have the power to regulate commerce among the several states. While the definition of Commerce has varied throughout the years, the modern Court has defined "commerce" as those "interstate activities that have a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce". This includes the use of the channels of interstate commerce, regulation and protection of persons or things in interstate commerce, and intrastate activities that have a significant effect on interstate commerce. However, the ability to enact such legislation is limited by the Tenth Amendment, which has been defined as enacting an affirmative limit on Congresses ability to control those things that do not have a significant economic effect on interstate commerce. A violation of the Tenth Amendment occurs when the federal government compels the states to enforce federal legislation using local officials.

Arguably, the regulation of cigarette smoking falls under the commerce clause power as the manufacture and sale of cigarettes is an interstate activity with a significant economic effect on the national economy. The Congressional intent for enacting such a statute can be inferred to include the costs of medical care due to smoking and its impact on federal medical programs, providing a rational basis for implementation of the legislation.

However, the states will likely assert that the implementation of such as law constitutes an impermissible encroachment on the states Tenth Amendment rights through inappropriate means. The program enacted by Congress, will have significant effects on the states, as enforcement of the law will likely be through state and local officials, not federal officials. Requiring the use of local officials to carry out a federal mandate has been held to be impermissible by the Court (Printz).

Due to the likely use of local officials to enforce federal legislation, Congress will not be able to enact this legislation.

Model Answer
Under the doctrine of enumerated powers, Congress may only legislate where there is an explicit or implicit enumerated authorization of power in the Constitution. The commerce clause has been the basis for regulations on behalf of the health and safety of the public since the Lottery Ticket Case. The Lopez test for the Commerce Clause power says Congress may regulate (1) channels (2) instrumentalities, or persons or things in interstate commerce and (3) activities with a substantial effect on interstate commerce, including by cumulative effect. "Buses, airplanes and trains" clearly fall within channels and also instrumentalities, persons or things in interstate commerce. Further, tobacco sales and related health costs have a substantial effect upon interstate commerce given the amount of smoking expenditures and the high costs of tobacco related diseases. Under the approach suggested in Morrison v. Olson, this law does not appear to regulate non-economic conduct traditionally subject to state regulation, that may be outside the scope of the commerce clause. Therefore, this legislation is likely within the power of Congress to enact. Alternatively, there is an argument that cigarette smoking is non-economic conduct and therefore not traditionally subject to state regulation. If so, then under Morrison v. Olson, this is not a proper subject for commerce clause regulation. Finally, there is no suggestion that Congress is trying to "commandeer" state officials or the state legislatures so there is no violation of Tenth Amendment principles.

3. Limits on State regulatory power

CQ: Is state legislation violative of the Constitution?

Step 1 - HSW - Police Powers
Step 2 - Preemption, Congressional Approval
Step 3 - Protectionist or Neutral
Step 4 - Under the Dormant Commerce Clause, facially neutral legislation that encompasses interstate commerce will be held valid unless the burden outweighs a legitimate state interest. Here, the state has a legitimate interest in banning indoor smoking due to the significant medical costs that are attributable to smoking. The burden imposed by such a regulation is minimal as it does not prevent operators of public transit from conducting business, and any fiscal impacts occurring because of the loss of business from smokers, would be incidental as to its local benefits. The State legislation will be upheld.

Model Answer
Traditionally, states possess general police powers to regulate on behalf of the health, safety and welfare of the people of a state. The state of Calutopia may legislate on behalf of the health of its residents. If this legislation is designed to prevent smoking related diseases from "second-hand" smoke, this is a proper legislative objective and permissible legislation under a state's police power. There are several constitutional considerations. Such legislation may be pre-empted by federal laws or regulations. In the facts, we are not told of any federal laws so we can assume there is no pre-emption issue. Further, since there are no applicable federal laws, there can be no federal approval of legislation that otherwise would violate the dormant commerce clause. Under dormant commerce clause review, the first consideration is whether the legislation is protectionist or discriminatory against out of state interests. As summarized in Philadelphia v. New Jersey, if the legislation is protectionist, it is per se invalid. Here, since the legislation affects all use of cigarettes in the state and does not appear to favor local smoking interests in favor of out-of-state smoking interests, it does not appear to be discriminatory or protectionist. Next, under the Pike v. Bruce Church balancing test, we must consider whether the burden on interstate commerce is clearly excessive in relation to the putative local benefits and whether there are reasonable nondiscriminatory alternatives. Here, there is a significant health benefit to non-smokers by keeping cigarette smoke away from the general public. While there is a burden upon out of state producers and sellers of cigarettes, when balanced against the health benefits, the health benefits might well out-weigh the minor burden upon interstate commerce in cigarette sales. This legislation is therefore not likely to violate dormant commerce clause principles. Since this does not involve the state in any actual economic activity of buying and selling, this would not involve the market participant exception.

4. Equal protection: Race as admissions factor

CQ: May race be used as a factor in state university admissions?

Under the Fourteenth Amendment Equal protection clause, no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Any racial classification, either benign or discriminatory, used by the government is subject to strict scrutiny analysis and will be upheld only upon the government showing a compelling purpose for such a classification. (Richmond) Also, The means employed by the university must not be so narrowly tailored so as to further a compelling governmental interest so as to prevent illegitimate racial stereotypes or prejudice as a motive for the classification. (Grantz).

The court has held in Grutter, the use of race as a one factor in a multi-factor holistic analysis for purposes of law school admission is not violative of the 14th amendment, as the methods used by the school did not protect or give an advantage to any one racial group. Also, there is a compelling governmental purpose in higher education to provide for a diverse student body, and the methods used by the school are narrowly tailored for the that purpose. The facts presented here are nearly identical to the facts in Grutter, the use of race as one factor among other factors may be used to promote a compelling state interest in encouraging diversity.

The state university admissions policy will be upheld as not violating the 14th amendment equal protection clause.

Model Answer
Since this is a state university, there is state action and the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does apply. The modern approach to equal protection looks to the classifications used by the law or regulation. This law, on its face, allows the use of race in student admissions. Since the use of race is explicit, there is no need to prove discriminatory effect and purpose under the Washington v. Davis intent test. Explicit use of racial classifications is subject to a strict scrutiny standard of judicial review, not the intermediate tier standard, or the deferential rational basis review. Under strict scrutiny, a regulation using race will violate equal protection unless the regulation's use of race is narrowly tailored or necessary to achieve a compelling governmental interest. Under the approach taken in Bakke and affirmed in the recent Grutter case, a college or university's interest in the diversity of its student body is a compelling governmental interest. Thus, the university has a valid compelling interest under strict scrutiny. Next, we must examine whether program is narrowly tailored. We are not given the details of the program, but if race is one factor among many and the program is similar to those in Bakke and Grutter, the program is likely to be found narrowly tailored and upheld. If, however, the admissions program were to consider race as a factor by assigning points to race in a point-based decision making process, then under the Gratz case, the companion to Grutter, the admissions program the point system is not narrowly tailored and would fail strict scrutiny. Similarly, racial quotas - a specified number of slots for a particular race - would not be narrowly tailored under Bakke. Thus, as long as this program does not use a point system and follows Grutter, it is likely to meet the strict scrutiny standard and be upheld.

2006-11-12T23:42:00.000-08:00

FINALS BLOGGING SERIES

I affirm, under penalty of perjury, that I had a very interesting post on the importance of checklists when preparing for law school finals. unfortunately, my computer decided to freeze up. Trust me, now is not the time for computer gremlins.......

Hanging oh so slightly over the edge........WDR.

2006-11-11T18:24:00.000-08:00

FINALS BLOGGING SERIES: EVIDENCE & CON LAW

I didn't blog last night, something about it being Friday, and just having too many things on my mind. After coming home from work, chatting it up with another Law Student on the train, watching my obligatory episode of Battlestar Galactica, and getting sidetracked on Digg, the last thing I wanted to discuss was the levels of scrutiny used by the Supreme Court to determine the validity of statutes perceived to be violations of the Equal Protection clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Admendments.

On an aside, they are Strict Scrutiny, Intermediate Scrutiny, and Rational Basis. Strict scrutiny applies when the suspect classification is Race or Ethnicity. In order for acts to be held constitutional there must be a compelling governmental purpose for such a measure. (see Korematsu where the Court held that the placement of persons of Japanese ancestry was valid as the government had a compelling purpose to prevent sabotage during a time of war. Of course, I agree with the strongly worded dissent by Justice Murphy, who states there were other less restrictive methods available to determine loyalty, and the singling out of a specific race was a "sweeping and complete deprivation of constitutional rights in the history of the nation." 323 U.S. 214, Murphy (dissenting). This case is hopefully to remain an exception, rather then the rule.)

Briefly, Intermediate Scrutiny and Rational Basis (RBT) are lesser forms of review in that under Intermediate Scrutiny, where the classification is based on gender or non-marital children, a law will be held constitutional when it is substantially related to an important government purpose. (I.e. Height and weight limits for police officers even though such limits may disproportionaly effect women, etc...). Under the RBT, the law must be rationally related to a legitimate government purpose when the suspect classifications deal with age, alienage, or wealth for example. (i.e. discrimination against a class of persons, such as non-related household residents for purposes of receiving food stamps because part of the class consists of "Hippies," is not a rational relation to a legitimate government purpose, such as preventing fraud. Additionally, the Court held that other measures of the Agricultural Act allowed for the prevention of fraud, thus concluding that the measure passed by congress did not serve a legitimate purpose. See Moreno 413 U.S. 528 (1973). In contrast, a state law requiring residents to see optometrists and not opticians to obtain eyeglass lenses, did serve a legitimate purpose however as (1) The law did not serve a discriminatory purpose, and (2) there was a legitimate public health aspect in making sure persons receive properly fitted lenses.Williamson v. Lee Optical)

The above is in no way intended to be a complete and true representation of the levels of scrutiny applied by the court. Any one using the above does so at their own risk.

EVIDENCE: PAST RECOLLECTION RECORDED

After posting the above, the rest is going to be in an outline format.

I: What may be used to refresh the recollection of a witness?

R: (1) Declarant Testifies (i.e. is witness), (2) Declarant has firsthand knowledge, (3) Declarant lacks sufficient recollection, (4) A memorandum or record is offered, (5) The record or memorandum is made or adopted by the witness, (6)Accurate, and (7) is read into evidence. (See FRE 803(5)

A: Note: PRR must be distinguished from Present Recollection Revived (FRE 612) where the witness is not required to have first hand knowledge of the statement. The document, or other stimulus, is merely used to jog the witness's memory and is not admissible into evidence. PRR (803(5)) however is admissible when the declarant witness has first hand knowledge of the facts at issue, the witness declarant has insufficient recollection, and the record accurately recorded facts known by the declarant witness.

Basically, the process to determine the admission of 803(5) Evidence follows the same procedure as 612 evidence up to the point where the witness/declarant lacks sufficient recollection. From there, the L must authenticate the document, determine the document was made or adopted "at or near the time of the event while he events where still fresh in the declarants memory, and the facts recorded are accurate.

BUSINESS RECORDS: AKA RECORDS OF A REGULARLY CONDUCTED ACTIVITY

I: When may business records be received into evidence?

R: Such records may be received into evidence under a hearsay exception when (1) The person providing the information in the business record has first-hand knowledge and is under a regular business duty to acquire and report the information. (i.e. Nurses conducting bed checks), (2) Record, (3) Regularly conducted business activity, (4)Record made at or near time events occurred, person has duty to record, and it is part of the regular course of business to do so, (4) Business keeps record. (803(6))

A: Lutz basically explains the purpose behind the business records exception, since records prepared in the regular course of business are given credit and weight by others in an industry or trade, it would be impractical for the courts to do otherwise. Additionally, this requires that the preparer of the report have first hand knowledge of the facts supporting the report, and hearsay statements integrated in, a police report for example, are inadmissible as the officer was not the original source of information of the statements. Statements made by an outsider to the business that are recorded on business forms are considered hearsay, as there is no need for the outsider to be truthful in making the statements whereas an employee (or other business agent) regularly conducts the activity and business incentives to keep accurate records act as a "check" on the truthfulness of the statements made. (Vigneau)

ABSENCE OF ENTRY IN BUSINESS RECORDS

The business has a regular procedure to record the occurrence of an event and witness has conducted a diligent search of the relevant records. That's It.

Note: The Court in Palmer held that accident records are not reports, "Routinely prepared in the course of business." If they were, the exception would essentially swallow the rule, as accident reports prepared in anticipation of litigation would fall under the more liberal common law rule of "regular course of conduct which may have some relation to the business. The determination of "scope of the business is to be determined by 1) the inherent nature of the business and 2) Methods systematically used by the business. Today, some commentators consider this one of William O's worst decisions and it's holding is trounced by other aspects of the FRE.

PUBLIC RECORDS

A. Public Agency
Proper Foundation
Any internal or external record prepared by the agency is admissible for evidentiary purposes, as long as it has indicia of trustworthiness.

B. Matters observed and Reported according to duty
FHK of Gov employee/agent
Official Duty to observe or report
Agency has official duty to observe or report.

EX: Attorney seeks to enter into evidence a NTSB Report of a recent plane crash for insurance purposes. Under this rule, L may have the author of the report testify as to observations of the accident scene, but not as to matters of causation, as the author is an agent of a government agency and has an official duty to report on the conditions surrounding aircraft accidents.

C. Factual Findings.

Continuing with the above hypothetical, the L may also submit the NTSB report into evidence in lieu of placing the author on the stand. HOWEVER, a government prosecutor may not use this rule.
- The factual findings of a public record may be challenged through 1) the timeliness of the investigation, 2) Special skill or experience in conducting the investigation, 3) Whether a hearing was held or the level of which a hearing was conducted, 4) Motivational problems (I.e. Litigation)

So that's it for today. Trust me, I'm going to be up to my eyeballs in multiple-choice questions and practice exams for the next few weeks. Going somewhat crazy....WDR

2006-11-09T23:54:00.000-08:00

FINALS BLOGGING SERIES

After Action Report - My response below was a good start. It could use a little more development in regards to the common law view and the minority intent view and discussing the factors of categorization, rent, and repossession. And while I briefly skimmed the privity issues (Contract and Estates), my professor is a stickler for details this will not fly for the final.

For the final tally
Spotting Issues - 8
Rule Statements - 4 (Lacking sufficient detail to allow for a proper analysis)
Analysis - 4 (Needs more meat on the bones)

Ok, here is the deal. It's about T-4 weeks and counting until my first Final (Con Law I - Dec 4th), and I've yet to do actual practice exams. I've practiced multiple choice questions, at least, but the money is in the essays. So, for the next few weeks, and throughout reading period I'm going to write one blog post exam answer per class (or more) in order to give me an incentive to write. I might write a paragraph, I might just do a quick and dirty outline, or I may just play the good old "spot the issues" game but what I write here is for my own personal musings and is not to serve as legal advice. Besides, while the general rules are pretty much the same in most jurisdictions, I quote my CivPro professor when he states, "check your local listings."

Now for Landlord Tenant: Assignment and Delegation

Basic Fact pattern:
L --> T on a Tenancy for Years, leasehold estate - $800 Rent per month. Six months in, T --> A on same lease, $900 rent per month, payable to T. T skips and fails to pay L rent. L seeks back rent from A. A refuses to pay and wants to move out. L believes that A is bound by the agreement and must pay rent or damages. What are A's Options?

Is there an expressed provision in the lease between the leasor and the leasee forbidding the creation of subleases or assignments?

Unless otherwise stated in the lease agreement, leasees have the right to sublease or assign their interest to others. Here, there is no indication that L restricted the ability of T to create a sublease or an assignment with A. Assuming for purposes of analysis only, it can be said that L did not intend to limit T's ability to create an assignment or sublease with another person.

Does the categorization of the lease between T and A constitute a sublease or an assignment?
In order to determine A's responsibilities to L, we must first determine whether T and A intended to create a sublease with A or whether A was given an assignment to the premises.

Under the common law, an assignment is present when the tenant transfers his estate to another party for the remainder of the lease term, anything less, and the tenant is viewed as creating a sublease. Modernly, the intent of the parties governs in determining whether there is a sublease or an assignment. This distinction is crucial because under a sublease, only the tenant has privity of estate and privity of contract with the leasor. The subleasee is not responsible for the subleasors obligations to the original leasor, as this relationship is similar to a landlord-tenant relationship. In this instance, the subleasee would not be responsible directly to the lessor. Whereas in an assignment, the assignee is viewed as being in privity with the lessor and assumes all obligations possessed by the original tenant.

Here, while A will argue that the language indicates T and A had the intent to create a sublease between them, three factors indicate otherwise. First, the agreement between A and T indicated that A was to have possession of the apartment for the remainder of the term. T had transferred the remainder of his estate to A for the remaining term, making this factor highly indicative of the creation of an assignment. Second, A agreed to pay T in excess of the rent on the apartment. In Abernathy the Arkansas supreme court indicated that rent paid by the subleasee to the subleasor that is equal to the rent paid by the subleasor to the leasor, is indicative of an assignment. Rent paid in excess would likely be held to encompass this concept.

Finally, T's abandonment of the premises and inability to be reached, likely indicate that T did not intend to retain a reversion to the apartment currently possessed by A.

While the language between the parties indicate the intent to form a sublease, under the common law view, all aspects point to the creation of a full assignment between T and A.

Under an Assignment, what responsibilities does A have to T in paying backrent?
Under an assignment, the subleasee is viewed as being in direct privity with the leasor, and assumes all obligations that the leasor had under the lease. Under this concept, A would be held responsible for the back rent owned to L. Nevertheless, A may be able to avoid further liability to L by locating another assignee prior to leaving the premises. As the court held in Juilliard The liability of such assignee is terminated by a new assignment of the lease made by the assignee. Under this holding, all of the responsibilities assumed by A in the creation of the original assignment will be terminated upon the creation of the new assignment, thus absolving A of her obligations to pay any further rent to L on the remaining months of the lease. A may also be able to assert that the original agreement was entered into fraudulently to deceive A, however this theory may not carry a lot of weight.

--------------------------------------------------

-Well it's not pretty. I'll update this after class with what was missed and the class consensus on A's recourse with L. Personally, I think she is out of luck, but if the intent theory were to control, a sublease can have all the trappings of an assignment yet the subleasee is able to escape all liability.

I however subscribe to the Donald Duck Theory, "If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, then its a duck." So if it looks like an assignment, smells like an assignment, its an assignment. Pure and simple.

2006-11-08T21:02:00.000-08:00

Mission Accomplished

The trifecta is in the bag, The House, The Senate, and Rummy heading for the exits. It's doesn't get any better then this folks.

Preping my resume for a Summer Job in D.C......WDR

2006-11-08T19:06:00.000-08:00

What Not to do at the Supreme Court.....

Care of Dahalia Litwick of Slate.......

"Wait, there's one other person talking. For the first time in my eight years at the court, I watch as a spectator begins to shout, "Have you ever been a parent?" and something about Jesus and perishing, before he is tackled by court security and dragged out of the chambers. His screams can be heard for some time after he's been removed. It's quite distracting. I think from now on the court security guards should maybe carry Tasers."

The wackos are bad enough outside of the Court, now they are getting inside the court. UGH!

2006-11-07T22:45:00.000-08:00

DEMOCRATS TAKE HOUSE
Senate TBA......

2006-11-05T12:48:00.000-08:00

BA DA BA DA BA DA BA BUM BUM
Remember Remember the Fifth of November, the Gun Powder, Treason and Plot. I see no reason why gunpowder and Treason Should ever be forgot.

Happy Guy Fawkes Day

Cue 1812 Ovature.....

2006-10-10T17:08:00.000-07:00

Law School Status Update

You don't call, You don't Write.....

OK, I'll admit it, I've been a flake the last few weeks, and despite the previous post being nothing but borrowed words on a very important, if not crucial, topic I thought it was time to get a few things out of my head.

Yesterday was the first midterm of the Semester. Personally, I would have preferred to have the midterm prior to break, but with all of my classes running on average about a week behind (if not more) I don't really have a whole lot of say in the matter.

The exam was Con Law I. Which wasn't too bad, if one read the cases and reviewed their notes. Being a Political Science Major, and having taken Con Law in undergrad meant that I was familiar with most of the cases on the exam. So the questions concerning the extent of congress' power under the Commerce Clause as explained in E.C. Knight, or the absence of an "inhenent presidential power" concerning the seziure of the Steel Mills in Youngstown was somewhat repetitive.

The problem of running behind of course is that professors are having to be creative to catch up....So this means....ON LINE MIDTERM. UGH. So just as we are about to stress out and prepare for Finals in December we have to switch gears and prepare for another exam. It could be worse at least.

As for my only other midterm in Agency & Partnership aka Business Associations, that one is exclusively online. Open notes, Open book, hell its even open mind. I'm kinda leery of taking it as I'm still confused with the operation of Apparent Authority, Inhenent Authority, and Actual Authority, and the rights and responsibilities flowing out of each. I known I'm not the only one confused, (See Schinley Industries). The class is somewhat interesting, it even has a bit of a political undertone to it. I was especially interested in the case of Karl Rove (Yes "Turd Blossom" himself) v. Thornburgh. Where Rove sued the former USAG and PA Senate Candidate (Running for Heinz's seat after his death) after he stiffed him on the bill for work performed on behalf of his campaign committee. After finding that Thornburgh's "man friday" was an agent to Thornburgh, who acted as a liaison between him and the committee, the Court found an agency relationship was present and continued to determine the rights and responsibilities of the Agency relationship between the parties, eventually reaching the conclusion that the buck stopped with the candidate. Two main rules of prevention come out of the case, and are and absolute must for anyone thinking about running for office. First, the parties involved may utilize a contract stating that the campaign committee itself is soley responsible for any debt incurred, or Second, the committee itself can formed as a corporation, where only the entity is liable for any debts incurred. I guess this is one of the reasons why most campaign committees are "Inc".

My other three classes, Professional Responsibility, Evidence, and Property, do not have midterms. And unfortunately they have been prioritized accordingly.

PR can be summed up in Four "Golden Rules":
1. Get it in Writing,
2. Keep you clients in the loop,
3. Don't steal your clients stuff.
4. The buck stops with the Bar Card

Of course its a lot more complicated than this, such as the difference between concurrent conflicts and succesive conflicts and the meaning of "Substantial Relationship" or what is "Material" or not (Note: ABA MR: Rule, whereas CA: Case Law).

This class also seems like a more detaied offshoot of A&P, as a fiduciary (trust) relationship is created upon the presence of an agency relationship. Essentially, the lawyer is a fiduciary to the client and is entrusted with protecting client confidences, maintaining loyalty to the client, and being competent in handling client matters.

Evidence: About 7 weeks in and we've only covered relevancy and impeachment. Nothing like three hours of hypos to completely waste precious class time.

Property: A subject that should be very elementary, as everybody learns the basis for this subject in Kindergarten. Possession is 9/10ths of the law. And the right to exclude (as least in California) is one of the key aspects of property. We've also covered such entralling topics as Estates, Waste, and Concurrent Estates. This class is also very rule intensive, as most, if not all of future interest law, is derived from the common law. The old favorites such Fee Simple Absolute, Life Estates, Vested Remainder Subject to Defeasance, Contingent Remainders and Executory interests. And of course the Rule Against perpetuities, "No interest is good, unless it must vest, if at all, within 21 years of some life in being at the creation of the interest."

None of the rules make any sense, but when you are dealing with wealth and how to keep it, nothing ever makes sense.

So much for wasting my time. Now back to my Con Law Reading....Already in progress...WDR

2006-09-30T10:50:00.000-07:00

Giving proper credit to the Washington Post, and Professor Erwin Chemerinsky, the following Editorial is reprinted in its entirety. Please write your Senators and tell them to oppose this Bill.

Legislating Violations of the Constitution

By Erwin Chemerinsky
Special to washingtonpost.com
Saturday, September 30, 2006; 12:00 AM

With little public attention or even notice, the House of Representatives has passed a bill that undermines enforcement of the First Amendment's separation of church and state. The Public Expression of Religion Act - H.R. 2679 - provides that attorneys who successfully challenge government actions as violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment shall not be entitled to recover attorneys fees. The bill has only one purpose: to prevent suits challenging unconstitutional government actions advancing religion.

A federal statute, 42 United States Code section 1988, provides that attorneys are entitled to recover compensation for their fees if they successfully represent a plaintiff asserting a violation of his or her constitutional or civil rights. For example, a lawyer who successfully sues on behalf of a victim of racial discrimination or police abuse is entitled to recover attorney's fees from the defendant who acted wrongfully. Any plaintiff who successfully sues to remedy a violation of the Constitution or a federal civil rights statute is entitled to have his or her attorney's fees paid.

Congress adopted this statute for a simple reason: to encourage attorneys to bring cases on behalf of those whose rights have been violated. Congress was concerned that such individuals often cannot afford an attorney and vindicating constitutional rights rarely generates enough in damages to pay a lawyer on a contingency fee basis.

Without this statute, there is no way to compensate attorneys who successfully sue for injunctions to stop unconstitutional government behavior. Congress rightly recognized that attorneys who bring such actions are serving society's interests by stopping the government from violating the Constitution. Indeed, the potential for such suits deters government wrong-doing and increases the likelihood that the Constitution will be followed.

The attorneys' fees statute has worked well for almost 30 years. Lawyers receive attorneys' fees under the law only if their claim is meritorious and they win in court. Unsuccessful lawyers get nothing under the law. This creates a strong disincentive to frivolous suits and encourages lawyers to bring only clearly meritorious ones.

Despite the effectiveness of this statute, conservatives in the House of Representatives have now passed an insidious bill to try and limit enforcement of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, by denying attorneys fees to lawyers who successfully challenge government actions as violating this key constitutional provision. For instance, a lawyer who successfully challenged unconstitutional prayers in schools or unconstitutional symbols on religious property or impermissible aid to religious groups would -- under the bill -- not be entitled to recover attorneys' fees. The bill, if enacted, would treat suits to enforce the Establishment Clause different from litigation to enforce all of the other provisions of the Constitution and federal civil rights statutes.

Such a bill could have only one motive: to protect unconstitutional government actions advancing religion. The religious right, which has been trying for years to use government to advance their religious views, wants to reduce the likelihood that their efforts will be declared unconstitutional. Since they cannot change the law of the Establishment Clause by statute, they have turned their attention to trying to prevent its enforcement by eliminating the possibility for recovery of attorneys' fees.

Those who successfully prove the government has violated their constitutional rights would, under the bill, be required to pay their own legal fees. Few people can afford to do so. Without the possibility of attorneys' fees, individuals who suffer unconstitutional religious persecution often will be unable to sue. The bill applies even to cases involving illegal religious coercion of public school children or blatant discrimination against particular religions.

The passage of this bill by the House is a disturbing achievement by those who seek to undermine our nation's commitment to fundamental freedoms laid out in the Constitution. Should it come up for a vote, it is imperative that the Senate reject this nefarious proposal. The religious right is looking for a way to get away with violating the Establishment Clause and is now one step closer to this goal. The Establishment Clause is no less important than any other part of the Bill of Rights and suits to enforce it should be treated no differently than any other litigation to enforce civil liberties and civil rights

Erwin Chemerinsky is the Alston & Bird Professor of Law and Political Science, at Duke University.

2006-08-19T14:36:00.000-07:00

I've been busy.......really, really, really, REALLY, busy!!!

OK, so my last post on this blog was about one month ago. In that time I've been doing the following:

1. Working in Downtown L.A., for a firm to be named later, handling discovery matters as a law clerk.
2. Giving up half a lung and a kidney to buy by law books. (Why are law books so damm expensive when the cases are in the public domain and the publishers cannot claim copyright protection on them?)
3. Trying to attend political events. (Cheers to Drinking liberally first OC soiree. )
4. Going to some concerts, thanks to friends in high places. (Gnarls Barkley and Velvet Revolver.)
5. A trip or two out to Santa Monica, UK (I meant SM, CA but with Chelsea coming to town and the number of Expats, the union jack is flying somewhere there)
6. Trying to read said books in number 2. (When most of the books come in the weekend before classes, skimming is probably a better word for it.)
7. Oh, and attempting (somewhat miserably) to have a decent social life.

Starting Monday, I will officially be a 2L. Second year already, I barely recall finishing my first year, let alone surviving.

Law is like sausage........WDR

2006-07-13T21:24:00.000-07:00

Wha...ZZZ....Huh?

No I haven't fallen off the face of the Earth, but I have been super busy lately. I'll be posting some pictures of my post work sojourns into the wilds of Los Angeles soon.

WDR.

2006-07-02T23:05:00.000-07:00

Check Another Item Off the To-Do List of Life

Having a little bit of time off this Holiday weekend, my brother and I decided to head out to Westwood to catch the Los Angeles Film Festival. I lived in SoCal for over 20 years, I have friends who work in the Motion Picture Industry, I've been able to watch rehearsals for the Academy Awards live, and I've even auditioned for a TV role a few years ago just because a casting director saw a picture of my brother and I in the LA Times. But I've never taken an opportunity to enjoy some of the smaller films that never see the light of day outside of Hollywood.

When we got there, we missed the showing of "This Pictures Not Yet Rated" a scathing expose on the MPAA's Rating practices. So we took some time to check out the Technology pavilion and enjoy some free popcorn on what was "family day" for the festival. Let me just say that popcorn and chopsticks equals a great idea.

We then headed towards one of the theaters showing films during the festival. Where we lucked out and were able to get comp tickets to the "Shorts Program 3". I was quite surprised at the quality of the films and the stories behind each of them. One picture which was surprisingly good was an Argentian Film called "Side Walls". The movie told a story of two twenty-something apartment dwellers in Buenos Aires looking for love while dealing with the isolation of modern urban life. The characters were well-developed, and the use of "Where's Waldo?" made for an interesting sight gag at the end of the film.

Another good short, was "One Rat Short". This film was a CG film similar to Pixar's early works but with a darker twist. This film was ingenious in the fact that the director was able to convey emotions between the two lead rats without a single word being said. The only problem with this film however was that the white rat blended into the white walls of the lab, making it difficult to focus on the action on the screen. But, the crew of the film was handing out some nifty t-shirts at least.

Overall, all of the shorts were good and they deserve to be displayed to a larger audience. Hopefully some of these show up on Sundance in a shorts program.

And that's a wrap.........WDR

2006-06-27T21:34:00.000-07:00

Oh the places you will go....

This post is coming to you live (well somewhat delayed live) from a Metrolink train somewhere near Norwalk as I have joined the ranks of the undead, or those who go out of their way, loose sleep and run and gun in an attempt to make the train on time. Personally, I love mass transit. While it is possible to write a blog post on a crackberry in the middle of the eternal parking lot known as the 5 North, who would want to. Depending on what you drive though it may be cheaper. A ten trip pass to "ride the rails" costs $55.00, a monthly pass from the ANA costs about $187.00. If I drove an SUV, a metrolink pass would be the best deal on the planet. But passing up the opportunity to buy a sports car in my twenty-somethings in order to afford law school, I purchased a Civic instead. Great gas mileage, satellite radio, and I don't have to do the undead shuffle while cradiling my Tazo Earl Grey Tea, (Which is too hot when I make it and too cold when I want to drink it) and wretching my back lugging my laptop around through underground Los Angeles.

But after doing the math, a monthly pass for the train may not seem like such a bad deal.
I figure the daily commute into L.A. consumes about 2 gallons of gas each way (approx. 45 miles, so about 23 MPG). So operating my car would cost me roughly $18 a day (Parking is not much of an issue, work comps it). So five days of commuting would add up to about $95 or so in Gas about every two weeks or so. Total commuting expenses would be about $190-200 or so in a full-time month, while a train pass would save me $10 (but not the monthly car payment.

Then there are the other reasons. L.A. offers so many other cultural events, that if I want to enjoy one after work, and I took the train, I would be out of luck. But then the cost of parking for having my car would have to be figured in. Go Figure. So either way I'm screwed and out more of my hard earned cash.

I don't mind being a law clerk/paralegal, I don't mind working in downtown L.A. What I do mind is the two hour rush hour.

WDR.

2006-06-12T14:22:00.000-07:00

0-1 = It's Early, 0-2 = Damm, 0-3 = Scheibenkleister!

In a tournament were an early loss can seal the fate of a loser, Team USA better get their act together because it will not get any easier. While todays loss was not as bad as the 5-0 pounding given to the Stars-&-Stripes in 1990, a 3-0 loss by an experienced squad is just humiliating. Besides, only one team has advanced after losing in the opening round (Turkey).

Now, I will not claim I am a soccer expert in any sense of the word. I can't tell the difference between a striker and a midfielder, or what triggers a corner kick or a free kick, but like many Americans I understand the basic concepts of soccer from my YMCA Youth Soccer days. 1. No hands, 2. Get the ball into the net, and 3. Run like hell for 90 minutes. Today the U.S. mastered two of the three basic concepts of the game but failed to follow the most important one. SCORING!!! A 3-1 loss would have been a lot more palatable and a lot easier to explain.

But like many of the US Men's National Teams that have played in international events, todays team treated the opening game more like a vacation then a serious game. Team USA busted their butt to beat Mexico, aka: "El Tri", to make it into the World Cup, yet it is "El Tri" who is dominating. UGH! Take Team USA in the World Baseball Classic for example. Japan, Korea, Puerto Rico, and Cuba played some of the most exciting games of the tournament, while Team USA portrayed the typical American problem of believing the other teams are going to bow down to the Red, White, and Blue. Don't even get me started on the Men's Basketball and Hockey Teams (Primadonas). It is a lot like the classic bumper sticker "Keep Honking, I'm Reloading." While many of our elected officials complain about other countries, the international teams have been improving to the point where they can compete on the same level as us. Or maybe we have become soft and lazy without having to compete with an international superpower like the old USSR.

I'm more of an internationalist then others. I believe that Sport is where the modern war is fought, not just on the beaches of some distant shore. If this country really wants to gain respect in the world, we must do it on the field of play and not through bullets and bombs. That means investing in youth sports programs, recruiting talent, and creating a healthy competitive atmosphere both domestically and abroad.

I think we have a decent shot at a draw with Ghana, but Italy is a whole other matter.....WDR

2006-06-04T22:01:00.000-07:00

Dear Supporter of Mr. 29 Percent....

Normally I don't comment on such trivial matters, but taking a page out of the OC weekly playbook I've decided to write a letter to the person who decided to mutter, "traitor" while I was enjoying my nice refreshing Iced Mocha at my favorite Coffee Hangout in the OC. Does my 2 year old Kerry/Edwards sticker scare you that bad that you felt you needed to make a comment, or were you just a coward. Personally I felt there was no point in confronting you about it, because you would have dealt with it like any typical Republican, you would have quickly denied making the comment and act like everything is just peachy. Well, I know who I voted for and I am not afraid to let others know as well. In fact, it is exactly people like you that leaves me to keep the bumper sticker on my laptop after all these years. Besides, a snide comment is not enough to scare me in changing my personal political views. Hell, I've had to deal with whispers and juvenile behavior from grown adults for many years. So to you sir I say, "Only cowards fire pop shots."

As for the Primary.....

Having a little more time on my hands then usual, I've been able to become more involved in politics in the last couple days or so. Saturday, I attended the Westly Bus Tour stop in Huntington Beach. I had a great time cleaning up the beach and meeting with fellow democrats in the OC. (Yes, we do exist, in fact the OC is only second to LA in the number of registered Democrats)

With the Primary on Tuesday here are my following endorsements.

Governor: Steve Westly. I support him for a number of reasons. First, unlike Angeledes who went fishing for endorsements about a year and a half ago, Westly has been working the Grassroots, the Netroots, and has been genuine about garnering support for his run. Angeledes has always come off as smug and feeling like he is the prodigal son. It may be due to the fact that he was a former head of the State Party, but it means squat to the Joe Smoe voter. And second, there are not that many differences between the two, but as far as the polls are concerned Westly has the best chance of beating "the Gubernator" in the Fall.

Controller: Joe Dunn. All around great guy and willing to roll up his sleeves to protect the state of California.

United States Senate: Dianne Feinstein. This is more of a "P.U." vote due to her support of the RIAA against XM Radio. PVR's are legal, so why is there such an uproar over the ability to time shift radio recordings. Maybe because the audio is better than CD quality, and the user is not likely to go out and buy a CD if they are able to hear the track till they are sick of it.

2006-06-01T19:47:00.000-07:00

Flexibility

Flexibility. It prevents injuries before workouts, it keeps you sane when deadlines and schedules keep changing, and it is the quintessential trait in an employee. Employees are asked to be flexible and adapt and adjust to the changing conditions. A rigid employee when dealing with customers and even fellow employees can seem robotic and uncaring. It is also a mainstay of the law. If the laws were not flexible, everyone would get a speeding ticket for exceeding the speed limit. Without flexibility, even the innocents are guilty.

Hourly employees are asked to "be flexible." "Thanks for coming in early Bob" or "Thanks for covering the second shift" or even, "thanks for moving those crates." But unfortunately in the rigid world of management, flexibility is not a two way street. It is a word that is avoided, because they would have a lot of explaining to do to their bosses.

In "Collateral" Jamie Foxx's character is told to "roll with it" after the plans for Tom Cruise's character suddenly change. While reluctant to stick to the plan, Foxx and Cruise have an understanding that flexibility is a two way street. If Foxx refused to drive the Taxi, Cruise's job would be finished. I add the element of pop culture for a reason. First, in Southern California, rigidity is impossible. Getting on a freeway onramp is like a pull on the cosmic slot machine. A five-minute trip in the morning can become a thirty-minute trip in the afternoon. Recent traffic accidents have turned twenty-five minute trips into four-hour hell trips. Anyone who has ever traveled on the 91, 5, 10, etc............ Knows this quite well. Second, to attract talented people, employers have to be flexible. I have seen many great and talented people leave only to be replaced by those who love the company, but have no local knowledge whatsoever. And third, when the staff can adapt management looks good, but when management adapts to the staff, they look like pushovers.

This post is not intended to critique anyone or anything in particular, but it is intended to show how mediocrity is rewarded and exceptionalism is disregarded. Great people are forced to leave, while good people stay. Eventually, I was going to move on but I preferred for the departure to be amicable, but I kind of knew this was coming. Many of those who I have worked with were in the process of obtaining graduate degrees. They were the first to be shown the door. Others where in the process of obtaining bachelors degrees, they are on thin ice. The warning signs were present when a co-worker mentioned how he missed a final exam in order to go to work and that he would "just repeat the class."

When good companies wonder why they are unable to retain talented people, it all comes down to lack of flexibility.

WDR (JD in Progress)

2006-05-22T13:25:00.000-07:00

The Summer Slowwww Season.....

After surviving my first year of Law School, I was hoping to have some sort of Summer Employment in the law in order to apply the material that I have learned. Well, to use a legal euphemism, the jury is still out on this one. So the options are the following:

1: Keep my current employment and work my butt off over the Summer.

excitement Score - 2 (D-land during the summer, you figure it out)
Costs - 0 (Making money rather then spending money)
Career focus - -5 (Only If I can transfer to corporate would this become a positive number)

2. Register for Summer School (Advance Criminal Procedure) and pick up three units

Excitement score - 6 (It is still school after all)
Costs - $3400 ($830 a unit, not including books)
Career Focus - 8 (I've always wanted to do criminal work - this helps with the "Jail to Bail" aspects.)

3. Semester Abroad in Salzberg, Austria for International Criminal Law

excitement Score - 10+ (International Criminal Law in the EU, with a chance to meet Justice Kennedy while the World Cup is going on in Germany)
Costs - $4500+ (Not including airfare and personal expenses)
Career Focus - 9 (The subject is not really tested on the bar, but it would look great on a resume if I decide to work for the Feds)

4. Rest up after the first year and prepare to hit the ground running for 2L
Excitement Score - 4 (being born and raised in SoCal can make all of the summer options boring, besides I'm not much of a beach person)
Costs - negligible (food, movies, gas, coffee, etc...)
Career Focus - 0 (like soda, tastes great and provides a caffeine rush, but has no nutritional value whatsoever.)

So I guess I really need to make up my mind, choices choices........WDR

2006-05-02T18:19:00.000-07:00

First Year Finals - One Down, Three to Go.

Yes, that's right it only adds up to four. That's because Pro Skills II ended over a week and a half ago, so I only have to tear my hair out over three exams. Contracts was today. Which for some reason was not too bad. He could have made the exam a real monster by having us look at two fact patterns. Now I have to worry about Civil Procedure along with Crim Pro and Torts. CrimPro is not too bad as it is limited to Fourth Fifth and Sixth Amendments. My CrimPro class in undergrad covered all of this material in addition to the 7th and 8th amendments. I'll probably do OK if I read over my outline and go through a bunch of multiple choice questions. Torts on the other hand, I'm really going to need to review some of his exams to spot the issues and to ensure I cover all of the material pertaining to Strict Liability, Products Liability, Damages, and Defamation.

Anyway I've got to just "Get er' done!"

WDR

2006-03-11T20:55:00.000-08:00

Court: Bias has a price for Scouts
*headline c/o the Sacramento Bee

I guess "I'd told you so" didn't cut it.

When I was fighting my case from 1992-1998, the issue of losing public funds for discriminatory practices was on the back burner, but the answer from the scouts was always along the lines of "We have a national charter, and public support what do we have to worry about." Well the CA Supreme Court told the scouts that they could no longer be a private organization with public benefits.

I personally thought the CA Supreme Court decided to carve a special "boy scouts" exemption to the Unruh Act for the Scouts. But the decision in Curran (of which my case was folded into) planted the seeds which have bloomed into the recent decision of Evans v. City of Berkeley. Not to mention a Connecticut case that held it was legal for the state of Connecticut to withhold Public funds from the Scouts since they did not adhere to the requirements set by the state government.

essentially, the decision comes down to this, "If you want public money or access to public property, you better be able and willing to follow the standards as set by a municipal government."

You reap what you sow......WDR

2006-03-09T09:44:00.000-08:00

The following is something I wrote to myself to break my Midterm writing block. It didn't hit me in the first semester, but this semester it is hitting me hard. It's in a freewriting style, more so to get my brain and fingers to work together.

This is an attempt to break my writer's block, which has been plaguing me throughout midterms. I know I am knowledgeable about the material; I just need to relax, focus, and put together a logically coherent answer in order to do well. Take the facts as they are given, read them once to comprehend, twice to understand, and if you do not understand them the second time, read for a third time. Do not start writing until you know what the facts are. A misconstrued fact may affect your analysis of the issues. Also, focus only on the test. Be in the moment; do not worry about Civil Procedure or stuff you need to do after the exam. Only focus on the exam and nothing else.

Additionally, do not concern yourself with the length of other people's answers. It may look like they have spotted a number of issues, or they spent too much time on too few issues. Strike a balance and do only enough analysis as the facts and time permits.

Also, pace yourself. A marathon is not won at the start; it is won towards the end. Much like a marathon, the student who is able to pace themselves and focus on the really important issues will be able to finish strong and cover the most ground without falling flat on their face.

Exams are a mind screw as much as anything else in life. Everybody acts as if they know the material. Some are cocky; others are arrogant, doing anything to skew the curve. Keep you head on your shoulders, worry only about yourself, and you'll do fine. A little competition is a good thing, too much leads to paranoia. Once you get to paranoia then they have beaten you on the exam and you haven't even put pen to paper or fingers to keyboard.

An exam in many ways is also a mental workout. You need to remember to breathe and be careful not to go too fast or too slow. The brain is like a muscle, too much or not enough exercise and you can strain it like any other muscle in the body when you ask it do some heavy lifting.

Remember, these exams are only midterms. An ok performance, only means you have a little catching up to do. A poor performance means you have a lot of catching up to do in addition to reassessing what you are doing wrong and how to correct it. An ugly performance, well you get the idea, but you'll need to pull up on the stick and hope you barely scrape the ground.

What's done is done. Time has a funny thing of making future things seem far off, and past things unimportant. It is only when things are present that we tend to focus on them. Plan, Prepare, Prosper. If it means getting Q&A books or practice exam books, GET THEM. If every semester continues like this, you are going to go nuts!

2006-03-05T17:05:00.000-08:00

Does this thing work? Hello, Testing 1, 2, 3.....

No, I haven't fallen off the face of the earth, but I am starting to feel like Quasimodo after spending what feels like 12 hour days in the library this semester. I recently finished my first set of midterms for the second semester. Torts and CrimPro. The Torts exam wasn't too bad, I had the same feeling this time that I had after the final. I had no idea what I wrote about, I'm just hoping it makes sense. As for the CrimPro MT. I'll admit it, I panicked. I know the material, but the exam was a "racehorse." After reading it, and trying to outline an answer, I had a little less than an hour to address the reliability of informant information, RS to stop based on the information provided by an informant, an unlawful arrest, and violation of the curtilage of the home without a warrant, not to mention a violation of the plain hearing doctrine by the bungling officers.
As for the next set of midterms, Contracts and CivPro, I just want to get them over with so I can start working on my final appellate brief. The calendar says there is about seven weeks in the semester left, but the time is just going to fly on by.

BTW: I really can use a summer *law-oriented* job. I'm itching to get my feet wet and the prospects of staying at my current part-time gig over the summer is not very exciting.

WDR

2006-01-24T11:44:00.000-08:00

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. --- Ben Franklin

2005-12-31T20:53:00.000-08:00

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO EVERYONE!!

May 2006 be a far better year than 2005.

WDR

2005-12-16T23:42:00.000-08:00

Let the Waiting Begin....

As of Wendnesday, the first semester of law school is in the past. I can't complain, yet, and Monday morning quarterbacking will just get the nerves up. I waited in the lecture hall after the exams on purpose just so I could avoid the conversations about whether proximate cause was the main issue of question 2 in my Torts I exam, or whether the client in the Contracts I exam would have to pay for the expensive software that was purchased by the business partner. And the multiple choice questions in the Torts I Exam were the toughest Multiple choice questions I have ever seen in my life. (Anybody taking the multistate should be warned. My prof. Mentioned how he is sharing his question writing skills with the authors of the multistate exam!).

As much as I would like to have straight A's, I have come to the realization that survival is the name of the game of the first semester of law school. As with anything in life, some people will pick up on ideas and concepts faster than others. I tend to take my time to really understand new concepts, when all I really need to understand the material is a superficial understanding, of the concepts and a better understanding of the reasoning. Just passing my classes will make me a very happy person. While three hours may seem like a lot of time to write and formulate a suitable answer, in actuality it is the shortest possible time to put together a well reasoned answer and expect it to be coherent. Most of the time I had to get straight to the point and sacrifice elements of my answer that would allow it to make sense.

On an aside. Examsoft is the worst word processor based exam program on earth. For a guy with glasses, the standard font size is way to small and the output is different then what is shown on the screen. I prefer WYSIWYG word processors, and I wish our school would take the position of GWU where the students are allowed to use Word as long as they sign an honor oath. I handwrite all of my exams in undergrad, but the answer is still the same answer if one writes or types, and my handwriting qualifies for neanderthal chicken scratch.

Anyway, I know what I need to do next semester. Update my outlines on a more frequent basis, get case briefs down to no more than 1/2 a page (or just book brief), and start looking at practice exams and hypos earlier in the semester. I'll also need to free up more time on the weekends to keep up on the reading and to review my notes, not to mention finding a few dedicated people to form a small study group. Polishing the resume and putting some money into a professional suit for the summer silly season is also on the do to list.

All I can do is wait for my grades, and try to get out of town for a few days before I go insane. A few days in Vegas should help, or I may just take a day to go skiing instead. WDR

2005-10-10T20:56:00.000-07:00

A little heartfelt message from Anaheim,

YANKEES SUCK

Thank you.

WDR

2005-10-08T19:33:00.000-07:00

Ok, Nobody Panic......Too Late......P..A..N..I..C!!!

Two midterms down, two to go. Unfortunately I rolled the dice and ended up getting the split, Criminal Law and Civil Procedure. I'm not too worried about Criminal Law, since my CrimLaw professor is practically giving us the outline and I'm having flashbacks to my undergrad substantive crim law class (the advantage of having a CJ minor). My CivPro professor is doing the same thing, but I think it is under frustration, more then out of being nice. It kinda helps when one has been a part of two cases that have gone through the civil court system. A lot of my fellow students are finding this material abstract; I've actually seen it in process which is allowing me to comprehend the material. Here are the topics I can recall off the top of my head for Civ Pro.

Personal Jdx (Are their sufficient contacts with the forum state to bind the decision on the parties? - The first part of an in personam analysis) Territoriality Rule, Pennoyer, Consent, Implied Consent, Consent in fact, Consent implied in law, Hess v. Palowski (Implied Consent), Milliken v. Meyer (Domicile), Due Process Clause, 14th Amendment, In personam jurisdiction, Stream of Commerce, Worldwide VW, Gray v. American Radiator, Asahi, Brennan - Stream of Commerce, O'Connor - Stream of Commerce Plus, Purposeful Availment, Transitory Presence, Burnham v. Superior Court, Scalia and Brennan disagreement (Just gotta love those plurality decisions, Scalia - Presence is tradition, a court can have jdx over anyone who is physically present within the state borders (Just gotta love Scalia standing on his history soap box), Brennan - Benefits and protections in addition to physical presence) Purposeful Availment, Int Shoe - Minimum Contacts "continuous and systematic contacts with the forum state such that jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice" Helicopteros (also Perkins)- General Jdx, contacts with the forum state are so systematic and continuous that it would not offend due process to hold the defendant to jdx in the forum state when the cause of action does not have any relations to D's contacts in the forum state. A single contact may be enough for jurisdiction based on its quality and nature. McGee - Issuance of a single reinsurance certificate was enough for the insurance company to fall under the Jdx of CA, as the regulation of insurance policies fell under a substantial state interest, and the state had an interest in providing a forum for a state resident to enforce her rights, cf. Hanson v. Denckla, where administrative functions in maintaining a trust by the Plaintiff from FL were not enough for the DE administrator to be brought under jdx in the forum state. Burger King. In determining sufficient contacts with the forum state, the court will only look at the activities of the defendant and not the unilateral activities of the plaintiff. Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Targeted Contacts - Calder v. Jones (Activity was targeted to the forum state such that the defendant would reasonable be expected to be hauled into court in the forum state.) See also Revell v. Lidov (combination of General Jdx issues and targeted activities)

In Rem and Quasi-in-Rem jdx - QIR type 1, global determination of ownership of the property (seizure of the property is to determine the rights to the property, and not to affects the rights of the owner of the property) QIR type 2, Seizure of the property to act as a hook to bring an out of state D within the Forum state for matters of litigation, the hearing itself pertains to the rights of the party. Shaffer v. Heitner (Application of Minimum Contacts (Int Shoe Std.) to in rem matters.) Put a serious crimp on the in rem wing of personal jdx. Their has to be a connection between the property being adjudicated, the cause of action and the forum state. The case concerned a Greyhound shareholder who possessed one share of stock, brought a sequestration proceeding against greyhound shareholders. DE statue stated that stock is considered property in DE. Cause of action occurred out of a breech of fiduciary duty in OR. No DE Shareholders possessed land in DE or resided in DE. Due Process requirement (Is it fair? - the second part of an in personam analysis) - Long-arm statue, enumerated and full-extent, (CA is an example of a full extent statue) Nexus test - is there a sufficient contact between the D, the cause of action and the forum state such that jdx would not offend "traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice."

Notice and service of process
Rule 4. National Dev. Corp (Service may occur at "place of abode" that contains a "sufficient indicia of permanence,") Service of process (development from Capias Ad Respondum) would in most cases be upheld if the person is physically present in the vicinity of the residence at the time of service of process. One can have many residences ("place of abode"), but only one state citizenship (See Mas) Conn. V. Dohr - Attachment procedure that relied solely on the statement of the plaintiff was a violation of due process as it creating a burden on the D. The case arose from a CN statue that allowed a P to attach property in order to protect possible damages. SCOTUS found the statue uncons as it created a pre-judgment financial burden on the D. Rehnquist believed that use of a lien would not be a burden if the P were to post a bond to mitigate for any damages for an erroneous attachment.

Subject Matter Jdx Diversity of Citizenship, Federal Question Jurisdiction, Removal Jurisdiction, Supplemental Jurisdiction, Mas v. Perry, Randazzo, Belleville Catering, FRCP 4, 1332 (D/C statue), 1331 (Federal Question Jdx), 1367 (Anti-collusion statue), 1441, 1446, 1447, (removal statues). Diversity of citizenship (1332 & A.III s.2) -Strawbridge Complete diversity requirement No P can be from the same state as any one D. (interpretation of the D/C statue and not the constitution (See 1332 v. A. III s.2)

Mas v. Perry- 1. State citizenship A person may only have one state citizenship. It may only change when
1. One obtains domicile in another state, and 2. Intends to remain there permanently. Intent is derived from a number of factors.
2. Amount in controversy requirement The amount in controversy is determined via a "good faith" determination of the plaintiff. The matter can only be dismissed if it appears to a "legal certainty" that the plaintiff will collect less than the required amount (St Paul Mercury)

Courts will allow an aggregation of claims as long as there is one Plaintiff and one defendant, with no limitation on the type of claim. However, the courts will restrict aggregation when there are multiple D's unless the claims are "separate and independent" (I need to check on this one)

For class actions
Citizenship is determined by the person representing the class, for the AIC requirement each person in the class must have a claim for over $75,000.

Corporations
Corps are determined to be citizens of both their state of incorporation and the state of its principal place of business (Randazzo, see also J.A. Olson) The principal place of business is determined through the use of two tests, 1 "Never Center" (Scot Typewriter) and the "place of operations"( ) True Diversity must exist between the D and the P. (See Strawbridge) Partnership Partnerships take the citizenship of its members (Belleville Catering). If the court is unable to determine the citizenship of its partners, it will dismiss the case. (Defendant refused to disclose the citizenship of some of its partners)

Parties may not create citizenship by assigning a person for purposes of creating jurisdiction, i.e. collusion (1367) If this occurs, the court will look at the citizenship of the assignor not the assignee. If it is a matter of probate, the administrator or the executor will take the citizenship of the deceased, for matters where a guardian ad litem is appointed, the guardian will take the residence of the person they are representing.

Domestic Exception
While not codified into law, the courts will not hear domestic matters, as state courts are seen as better suited to matters of custody, divorce, etc... (Ankenbrandt).

Federal Question (A. III s. 2 & 1331) Mottley - Well-pleaded complaint rule In order for the federal court to have jdx over the matter the federal question must be central to the plaintiffs claim. It cannot be raised as part of a defense, nor will the court look at the counterclaim if it includes a federal question. The court will only look at the Plaintiff's complaint.

How central is the federal issue to the complaint? Progression from Osborne, Federal question is an ingredient of the case, to American Well Works (Holmes- Creation Test, The federal claim creates the cause of action) to Smith, The construction/application test, where the federal claim is based on some construction or application of federal law. Of course the Court really loves splitting hairs, in Moore the court allowed the use of the construction/application test over Justice Holmes objections (Shoshone mining brought up the issue of the centrality of the federal ingredient. In that case, the Court refused to allow a claim, as it would have deluged the court with federal claims as all land claims west of the Mississippi, would have some federal ingredient.)

Does the federal issue allow for a private cause of action? see Merrell Dow. Congress did not intend for a private cause of action under the FDCA. Claim was brought up as part of a state negligence claim. See also Grabel, where the Court allowed for a state claim (a quiet title action) to be heard in federal court. Court formed a narrow exception substantial federal issue that allowed for a state cause of action that significantly turns on a federal question, that will not upset the federal/state seperation of judical power.

(OK, There was a lot more in this post, but Blogger ate my section on Removal and all of the formatting ("We don't need no stinkin Bluebook")). Oh well, I'm not graded on this post at least.

No notes were referred to in writing this post, I swear, Scout's Honor.

WDR...

2005-09-06T23:55:00.000-07:00

Winds of Change

Where is the Limo? I know it was parked here earlier.

2005-08-31T15:00:00.000-07:00

Musings of a Fustrated Law Student

Now I admit I am guilty of this to sometimes but....

READ THE FREAKING CASES BEFORE YOU GET TO CLASS!!!!!!!!

It has been less then three weeks, but already the number of students who sit in class like gawkers at a traffic accident is appalling. It's even worse when the professor calls on them. Facts spew out with no purpose and are way too detailed in most cases to be of any use. I so want my professors to cut them off and say, "Too Much.... Next!"

Ugh. This 1L thing is driving me nuts.

WDR

2005-08-24T21:29:00.000-07:00

Doing the Law School Luge

Week Two is almost over which is a good thing, but just when I feel I've caught up with my reading, case briefs, and basic notes, I hit the weekend and quickly fall behind. Everytime the week starts I feel like I have to climb the mountain again. Starting at the base, like what is consideration? or the difference between Actus Reus and Mens Rea, along with Strict Liability offenses. Even my CivPro class is starting to give me chills and don't get me started on Torts. Torts feels like juggling hand grenades (see Staples v. U.S. 511 U.S. 600 for a comforting assurance that hand grenades are in fact dangerous weapons). We are bouncing back and forth between the basic requirements for battery and breaking down legal rules. CivPro is at least somewhat interesting. I was able to catch some of the changing standards from Pennoyer through Helicopteros concerning in personam jurisdiction, but it still is a blur.

ARGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!

Back to Cooking the Books.....WDR

2005-08-09T08:11:00.000-07:00

Yawnnnn.....

Today is day six of what I have decided to call the Summer Insanity Tour. Six straight days of late nights and early mornings, with four being spent in San Francisco for the YDA by the Bay Convention and two being back at work (on my birthday no less). Not a single night in S. F. ended before 1 am. Now don't get me wrong, the parties were great and the workshops where really informative with some great presenters from victorious national campaigns, but I can only put up with so much networking. I'm a small group person. I rather know a few people really well, then a bunch of people superficially.

Of course the Summer Insanity Tour, would not be complete without a holiday or in this case my birthday. My birthday (gifts, dinner, cake, fireworks) lasted approximately 4 hours. I was able to cram it in between unpacking my car and getting my computer and stuff together for my law school orientation. Traditionally, I go out to dinner with everybody on my birthday, but alas it was not to be. I had a MANDATORY orientation class. I had to work all day yesterday and Tonight is not going to work either. So my birthday dinner has been rainchecked until further notice. But I did get a really cool cake delivered to me at work. After all of the craziness, I really could use 1 whole day off from work in order to get my books and school materials. I also have a 60 (that's right folks, 60) page reading assignment due Monday.

This morning started with a $1 billion dollar wakeup call. The signature dual sonic booms of the Space Shuttle gliding back to Earth. According to NPR the last time the Shuttle landed in Cali was 2002. It's great to see that the mission was a success as the shuttle's reentry kicked off the 6th day of the Summer Insanity Tour. At least I'll get a breather tomorrow.

WDR

2005-08-02T14:17:00.000-07:00

ROADDD TRIIIPPPP!

I would do my best Animal impression but I would like to be able to talk next week. Starting tomorrow, I'll be in the San Francisco for the Young Democrats of America national conference.

Considering I have less than one week before I start my law school orientation (whee!), getting law books (ugh!), working out my work and school schedules (something has gotta give) and getting a few more items for my office/room/chill pad/expanded walk-in closet (glorified hallway), I thought it would be best for me to take some time off and get away for a few days. Of course did I bother to purchase a plane ticket? Nope, I have a brand new car that is just itching for a road trip. Why fly when I can sweat it out driving on the 5 freeway with my own music and beverage service (ripped CD's, a fuzzy iTrip, and a borrowed Sat Radio receiver along with whatever soda I picked up from In-N-Out). I really have been stressing out, and I haven't even been grilled by my law school professors.

I'll have some post-trip pictures on my blog, or see Mike's Daily Lockup.

WDR.

2005-07-21T02:09:00.000-07:00

"Anatomy of a Dis-Appointment"
How the Bush White House Played the American Public In Selecting Judge Roberts for the Supreme Court.

By William D. Randall

Orange, CA - The announcement by President Bush yesterday that Judge John G. Roberts of the Federal Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. would be Justice O'Connor's successor to the Supreme Court represented a culmination of various political tactics that could only come out of the current administration. The American Public was played like a fiddle as the White House conducted the orchestra and the media danced to the music. Through various methods, such as stating that the President was considering a Hispanic or a woman for the Court, providing misinformation to the Democratic leaders of the Senate, and in selecting a man that would energize the right just before crucial midterm elections. In many ways, the selection of Judge Roberts to the Court represents the ultimate form of Washington cronyism.

Judge Roberts is a hold over from the days of George H.W. Bush, when he was a deputy solicitor general. It was during this period that Judge Roberts disclosed his take on Roe v. Wade, stating that the Court had no role in protecting reproductive rights, as the Constitution has no say on the matter. His view that the Constitution does not apply is flawed as the Right to Privacy, and the prevention of the state in interfering in medical decisions between a patient and their doctor, while not specifically stated in the constitution is protected under the Courts decision in Griswold v. Conn. The Court held that when the First, Third and Ninth Amendments are considered together the Constitution does create a right to privacy in marital relations. (Oyez) In addition, the Courts decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, while technically tightening the standards set by the Court in Roe, upheld the right for women to obtain an abortion as long as laws do not create an "undue burden." (Oyez) The Court has been tightening the reproductive rights allowed by Roe, but Judge Roberts would be hard pressed to throw out the judicial standard of Stare Decisis by holding a view contrary to the Court. Of course, when one is a Justice all bets are off.

While a Federal Circuit Judge, Judge Roberts has been upholding many of the actions undertaken by the current administration. The New York Times reports that he held U.S. Courts do not have the jurisdiction to consider a claim against Iraq, writing his decision in stronger terms then the other members of the Circuit. (Acree v. Iraq) He was also selected for his current position back in 2001, but Senate Democrats blocked him. He was re-nominated in 2002, when the Senate approved him without a voice vote. While Republicans can say the Senate unanimously approved him, the record will show that a vocal opposition will be present during his nomination hearings. Both Sens. Schumer (D-NY) and Leahy (D-VT) have already voted against Roberts in previous confirmation hearings. While the GOP will scream about how the Democrats are not playing fair, it is the role of the Senate to ensure that all questions are answered fully and truthfully, something that the current administration may find a little bit shocking.

Of course, the sudden announcement of Judge Roberts during the Rove Scandal is a move that could only have been crafted by the Architect himself. The use of media timing, suggestive leaks, and effective message management are all tools out of the GOP campaign playbook. The demographics of Judge Roberts looks like something that could only come out of the key GOP voter demographic. A white middle-aged male with conservative credentials haling from the Midwestern state of Indiana, a state with a moderate Democratic Senator and potential Presidential nominee, Evan Bayh (D-IN). While the President stated that he would take the First Lady's advice about nominating a woman, he apparently adhered to the first rule of conservatism, listen to your wife but don't do anything about it. The media took the bait and ran with it. The prime-time announcement of Judge Roberts was crafted to appeal to the voters directly and not to suffer any damage in the rinse and dry cycle of media spin that surely would have followed a mid-day announcement. More importantly, in the rush to cover the next big story, any rational discussion of the announcement will not be on the front page for very long. The obligatory campaign road shows, used by the administration for Social Security Reform, will no doubt be used by the administration to "sell" the candidate to the nation. I also expect to see a coordinated effort by various third party groups to drum up support as well. It is already been announced that religious groups are planning a "Justice Sunday II" to provide support to Bush's nominee.

The only way the music is going to change is if the Democrats are able to find three key questions that would not only expose weaknesses with Judge Roberts but would also create a public concern that their constitutional freedoms are going to whither away under Justice Roberts. If the Democrats are able to change the music, though polling, agitating the grass roots, and sticking on message, then the White House is going to find themselves in the middle of a protracted battle that will last way beyond October. The nuclear option is now back on the table, and the ticking of the bomb is setting the beat.

---------
(To my regular readers, I understand that this is a long post but the selection of a Justice to the Supreme Court requires more then just a simple four sentence paragraph as the protection of our rights and freedoms in any way, shape, or form eventually end up in front of the Court. WDR)

2005-07-15T00:31:00.000-07:00

"Now Making Apperences on Myspace"

I normally do not post, nor do I support Ad-sponsored networking websites but I decided to put up a page on myspace. I did this mainly for two reasons. 1. I know for a fact that there is more than one "William Randall" in the world so I wanted to get a jump on a variation of my name. And 2. The old standby excuse "because everybody's doing it."

You can see me at http://www.myspace.com/willran .

I will continue to use my personal blog however as a place for my personal musings and other things that I find interesting and intriguing.

WDR.

2005-07-13T23:00:00.000-07:00

Just Launch the Damn Thing Already!

Like my brother said, the fuel sensor light on the External Fuel Tank of the Shuttle is like the Check Tire light on my Mom's Car. If there is air in the tire, just ignore it and go.

I understand the need for safety, but this is already the second tank, and the second scrubed launch. It's good to play it safe, but if Lewis and Clark played it safe, I would have been writing this from New York!

WDR

2005-07-13T00:19:00.000-07:00

"Kick the Tires and Light the Fires!"

I have always been a big fan of the Space Shuttle. The thrill of exploration and the need for the human race to escape the grasp of Earth's gravity have been present ever since Jules Verne wrote about space travel in the 1800's. Personally I've been bitten by the exploration bug, attending both Space Camp and Space Academy. My Grandfather worked on the Apollo Moon Landing program, and I have friends with the Air Force who worked with the Vandenberg Launch Site Task Force, while the Air Force was considering a West Coast Launch site to put the shuttle in a polar orbit. I have also had the opportunity to meet aviation pioneers Paul McCreedy and John Glenn. Name any price, and I would gladly pay it to ride into space.

Tomorrows return to space is going to be thrilling, yet bittersweet, as it marks the Space Shuttle's return to flight and the start of the five year phaseout of the Shuttle Program. I hope NASA will have a replacement in less then five years, but the Shuttle program itself was plagued by delays, cost overruns, and bureaucratic mismanagement which lead to it's first launch in 1981, rather then in the mid 1970's. Anybody look at how the ISS is being managed lately?

The Return to Flight, while it drags up painful memories of the Columbia disaster, may be enough to reengage the public on the need for spaceflight and provide a reason to study physics, math, and other sciences while in school. I would much rather have billions of dollars invested in space exploration for the pursuit of knowledge, rather then the military in the pursuit of destruction.

Go Discovery!

2005-07-06T22:30:00.000-07:00

The First George W. Had It Right.

See this post on Taggard Goddard's Political Wire.

(That's George Washington in case you didn't know.)

2005-07-05T15:40:00.000-07:00

Start the Clock

The clock started ticking last Friday when Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement after serving nearly 24 years on the Bench. Not really known as a conservative or as a moderate, Justice O'Connor was the pivotal swing vote in many cases leading some to call the Supreme Court the "O'Connor Court." When arguing cases in front of the Court, many would try to convince Justice O'Connor to side with them, rather then trying to convince the entire Court. Her announcement, on the Friday before the holiday weekend, is going to trigger the most vocal confirmation battle in the history of Washington, with many Democrats (myself included) wanting to see potential candidates fully vented and investigated by the Senate Judiciary Committee prior to being subjected to a floor vote. If it means the use of the filibuster, so be it.

I have to admit that while most people would care less about the retirement of a Supreme Court Justice, let alone be able to name one, I have a personal stake in this matter. If another conservative justice is appointed to the court, many 5-4 cases, Such as Boy Scouts of America V. Dale will be decided 6-3, and it will make it nearly impossible to progress my issue to the federal level. While my case was of the religious nature, or lack thereof, many of the issues presented in Dale, such as the use of public accommodate statues similar to the Unruh Civil Rights Act, would have greatly helped in pursuing my matter further. O'Connor's swing vote lead to the reversal of the NJ Supreme Court. She also sided with the majority in Bush v. Gore (2000) to stop the Florida recounts. Of course she has also voted to up hold some liberal causes by agreeing that affirmative action can be utilized in the college admissions process (Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)).

Some of the potential candidates that have been listed by Slate and in the CQ Researcher (Subscription only, See: Jost, Kennith "The Supreme Courts Future." The CQ Researcher 28 Jan 2005: 77-100.) instantly give me the creeps. Let's start with the most obvious candidate, Current U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. The running joke among Republican staffers in Washington is that "Gonzales is Spanish for Souter." Justice Souter was appointed to the Bench by Bush Sr. in order to be a moderate conservative voice and instead turned out to be too liberal for right wing conservative tastes. Would Gonzales be as liberal as Souter? Not likely, Gonzales is know for writing the so-called "torture memo" that allowed for the use of certain interrogation techniques against prisoners at Gitmo so imagine what that would likely mean for civil rights. The fact that he was also a previous White House Counsel and counsel to Bush while he was Governor of Texas, brings up the classic Abe Fortas situation. Justice Fortas was so close to President Johnson that he was known for answering the phones while the President was away. Bush would certainly voice his displeasure if Gonzales were to step out of line and Bush would face sudden scrutiny from religious conservatives. He does have one plus however, as Slate points out, He has constantly held to uphold stare decisis , or the need for a court to adhere to previous decisions while forming a judgment.

The next contender is Michael McConnell, currently a judge with the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals and a former law professor at the University of Chicago. He may play well with others, he may have the backing of both liberal and conservative law professors, and he may have a "sunny disposition able to bring about change" (Slate), but it all means squat to me. He wrote an Amicus Curiae brief supporting the Scouts in Dale, he is questioning the Courts rationale in Bob Jones v. U.S. stating that the school's rule forbidding interracial relationships affected only those who choose to become part of the "religious community defined by Bob Jones" and he wrote a letter supporting a constiutional admendment to ban abortion. In all, he is a little too conservative for my tastes and he would have an extremely difficult time getting through a confirmation hearing.

The third candidate, and potential front runner is Michael J. Luttig. A former clerk for Justice Scalia and a judge on the 4th Circuit, Judge Luttig would fit the mold for a "Scalia Conservative." He is known for striking down provisions of the Violence Against Women Act (which was upheld by SCOTUS) allowing women to sue states for damages. He may also uphold tough anti-crime legislation since his father was shot dead during a carjacking.

A darkhorse option, that would allow for an easy confirmation, would be the naming of a sitting senator to the Court. Creating a senate vacancy in the process. Some are floating John Cornyn R-TX as a possible successor, but a co-worker of mine suggested Dianne Feinstein D-CA. She is not seen as being "far-left" and she has sided with the administration on a few issues. She defers from the President by supporting stem cell research. But she has also agreed to some conservative positions by opposing flag burning and limiting the ability of individuals to declare bankruptcy. Her moderate stances may at least lead the administration to take a glance at her.

While the Court is not seen as being the most political branch of government, it is capable of generating a lot of political controversy. The President has to weigh a lot of factors in a potential successor such as race, sex, region of the country, constitutional ideology, previous decisions, writings outside of the courts, the ability of a nominee to be confirmed aka "the Bork Factor." Senate Democrats also have formed their own set of criteria and will utilize all of their options to ensure a "mini-Scalia" is not brought to the floor for a vote.

The clock is running and the SCOTUS Draft of 2005 is currently in progress.

2005-07-01T15:30:00.000-07:00

"I visted MIT and and all I got was this lousy JPEG"

Come on all of you crazy bloggers, become a statistic.

2005-06-30T00:25:00.000-07:00

Movie Minute: "War of the Worlds"

Probably seeing my last movie of the summer, I went to see "War of the Worlds" at my local Cineplex. I was really interested in seeing how Steven Spielberg could retell an H.G. Wells classic after his last three movies, "A.I" (kind of stiff), "Minority Report" (great original story, good overall acting, and philosophically deep) and "The Terminal" (I'll see it eventually) and his great HBO series, "Band of Brothers" all were somewhat successful.

If you are not familiar, "War of the Worlds" is loosely based on the original H.G. Wells novel of the same name that tells the story of Earth being invaded by beings from Mars. Devastation ensues and humankind is left to its own devices to fend off the suffocating Martian offensive. The Martians can figure out how to fly through space, focus death rays, and terrorize billions of people, but they never figured out that a little antibacterial soap and some hand washing (or tentacle washing) could keep them from getting sick and dying, halting the invasion of earth.

The movie follows this same basic plot, with Tom Cruise (needs to see a shrink) going to and fro in his daily life. The blue-collar man trying to do the best to make a living while taking care of the kids during his court allowed weekend. The usual son hates dad, daddy's little girl who has a few issues of her own trying to survive while the world crumbles around them story grafted into the H.G. Wells story, except this time it takes place in an area that keeps getting its ass kicked, the greater Tri-State area.

The movie did not "wow" me as much as "Minority Report" only because of the imagery employed in the film. The acting was as good as it could be considering the high budget special effects it had to contend with, but the imagery kept me from really getting into it. I kept thinking of the events of 9/11 every time a piece of clothing fell from the sky, the scenes of memorial walls throughout the towns and cities, and the pressing need to utilize a military response without a full consideration of options. (On a side note: I wanted to see the U.S. go in to kick ass and take names of those who were responsible for the attacks, but in Afghanistan and wherever else Osama is hiding and not a war in Iraq that is just to finish a family project.) The imagery kicked up some of the 9/11 images in my head and made watching the film uncomfortable. The film is not a feel good movie, as nearly 2/3rds of the film deals with the worsening predicament of the main characters, a dark spiral that ends when the Martians are afflicted by earthbound organisms. The Tenth Mountain Calvary literally comes in to save the day by conducting a mop up operation in Boston.

In all, "War of the Worlds" seemed like a 21st century mash-up of many of Spielberg's previous films, and the tripods looked like something out of City-17 in "Half-Life 2". I would recommend the movie only under the pretense that you have no expectation of feeling good afterwards.

Overall rating:
RRR/RRRRR (5 R's being the Highest)

2005-05-30T20:59:00.000-07:00

One Legal Eagle Itching for takeoff

In a previous post, I mentioned that I would eventually reveal the law school I was accepted into. After 11 applications, a 6 week Kaplan LSAT prep course, 5 letters of recommendation, Numerous law school visits, 1 grueling LSAT and plenty of indigestion. I was accepted to just one school. Western State College of Law in beautiful Fullerton, CA. I was hoping I would have been accepted to McGeorge. They have a great Governmental Affairs program and their location in Sacto would have allowed me to work on legislative issues near to my heart. I also would have been able to move to an area that is cheaper to live and easy to adjust to. I was disappointed by the constant requests for financial aid information, only to be denied. I was also hoping for some good words from UNLV. But alas it was not to be. (A transfer after 1L may be an option).

Of course the one question (or more of a comment) I get from friends and family is, "Why Western, didn't they lose their accreditation?" I hate hearing it, but at this stage in the game beggars cannot be choosers. Yes, they did lose their accreditation but only for one year, they have since been reaccredited for a full five years. This will allow me to sit for the Bar in any state and pursue federal practice if I wish. Western also has a strong local reputation with many judges in the OC coming from Western, and it is the oldest law school in the County, surpassing Chapman in the number of graduates. Many Western grads are also active in state politics (another plus in my book.) It is also right across the street from my old haunt, CSUF, which will have a brand spanking new rec center soon. The advantages of being alumni are a discounted membership. Another factor is that my Dad is also Alumni from Western. I was hoping to attend another school, but I really don't want to waste another year.

I am still on the waitlist for Whittier, but I doubt that I will hear anything from them. The rumor mill is that Whittier set a hard cap of 150 for the LSAT this year and will only waive it in extreme cases. Of course, I'm not willing to wait and alienate my co-workers with a sudden departure.

This weekend marked one year since I finished my Degree. The master plan that I devised is in motion (while moving slower then I hoped). I miss school, not so much for the academics, but more for the social interactions that occurred when surrounded by those who share a common interest. Hopefully law school will fill this void and provide me with badly needed professional connections. Sometimes a slow drip can be more effective then a sudden chop, and everything goes off without a hitch.

"Behold the Turtle. He makes progress only when he sticks his neck out." (James B. Conant)

2005-05-25T23:15:00.000-07:00

Um, I Kinda Knew This Already.

Well the results are in and atheism squeaks by in a close one. I was quite shocked to see satanism so high on the list though. WDR...

atheism

83%

Satanism

75%

Buddhism

71%

agnosticism

67%

Judaism

58%

Islam

54%

Paganism

54%

Hinduism

46%

Christianity

29%

Which religion is the right one for you? (new version)
created with QuizFarm.com

2005-05-13T01:19:00.000-07:00

I know I need to go to sleep but...

I tend to do a lot of reading when I'm in the process of doing a lot of thinking. It's a bad habit from college and something that may get me in trouble in law school. I figure The more I read the more stuff my brain has to process and after processing so much stuff my brain crashes harder then a NHTSA crash test.

But I could not go to sleep without pointing out something that has been missed by the major news media. The elimination of a marine platoon in Iraq. Over a period two days one Marine platoon lost 60% of it's men to enemy action. Take the time to read this article from the Washington Post, and you'll see that the battle of Mogadishu in 1993 was just a precursor to some of the tactics the military is facing in Iraq. Sometimes the most dangerous enemy is the enemy who is not afraid of losing.

Mission Accomplished my Ass!!!

2005-04-28T13:41:00.000-07:00

Oyez Oyez Oyez...

(ed note: This post was edited on 5/2. The author's head was not so clear after the jet lag and the craziness of the trip.)

I really had a great trip to D.C. It all moved so fast that I barely remember it. While the weekend consisted of hitting all of the usual tourist attractions, the Air and Space Museum, the WW II Memorial, Georgetown, etc.... Unfortunately the rest is just a blur as we tried to cram in a weeks worth of stuff within four days.

But I can say I do remember a couple things vividly. Tuesday was really the best day of the entire trip. In the morning we went to the Supreme Court. Normally if one wanted to view the proceedings of the Court, you would have to line up outside where you would then be given a numbered pass that designated your spot in line. Once all of the tickets have been distributed, anyone else wishing to view the proceedings would be out of luck. Even after all of that you would be given five minutes to watch the proceedings and then you would be ushered out of the Court. But due to the fact that group of attorneys that were scheduled to be sworn in cancelled, my brother and I were able to view the proceedings. Through the nice people in the admissions office, we were added to the Marshal's list and had no limit on the duration of our stay in the Court chamber. We were able to witness the court issue two opinions from the bench. The first case was Small v. United States (03-750 U.S.). This case really was a matter of semantics on whether "any court" as it appeared in the legislation pertaining to the possession of firearms by a convicted felon meant both foreign and domestic courts or just domestic courts. The Court, acting in their roll in determining the intent of legislation, found that "any court" was limited to U.S. Courts and the conviction of Mr. Small by a Japanese court for possession of a firearm could not be used in applying a similar domestic statue to Mr. Small. The second case was Pasquantino v. United States (03-725 U.S.). This case determined that the federal wire fraud statues to apply to any attempt to defraud a foreign nation (in this case, Canada) from any tax revenue they may receive from certain transactions. The Court held that the wire fraud statues do apply and that they do not violate the common law revenue rule which prohibits foreign governments from enforcing the tax laws of other nations.

After the decisions were handled down. The Court then proceeded with oral arguments in the matter of American Trucking Associations, Inc., and USF Holland, Inc., v. Michigan Public Service Commission, et al. (03-1230 U.S.) and another similar case. The case, according to the oral arguments pertained to the ability of the state of Michigan to assess a tax or fee on interstate trucking companies that undertake intrastate trucking business within Michigan. The justices were pointed and knowledgeable about the issues. It is funny how lawyers who have been practicing law for many years tend to stammer and stumble while presenting their cases in front of the court. Most of the cases tend to be argued via the written briefs and oral argument serves to just clarify the opinions of the justices.

Prior to being a witness to history on Tuesday, we went over to meet with our Congressman for a staff-led tour of the capitol on Monday. To say that the capitol is just another office building is like saying fort knox is just another bank. I think it should be described as the National Legislative Complex at Washington, The place has more security than a military base, and unless you are used to it, it can be a bit unsettling at times. We toured the House side of the building and we made a stop in front of the sergent-at-arms office. Above his door was a quote that read "We build no temple but the capitol, We consult no oracle but the Constitution." I wish more of our elected officials would take the time to walk the halls of the capitol in order to realize that religion is not going to be the savior of America. But I digress. After the tour we then went across the street to the Senate office buildings to get gallery passes for the Senate. We were in luck as just as we walked into the gallery, Senator Boxer was preparing to give a floor speech about three or four issues. She named off the 25 casualties that occurred in Iraq and then went on to the controversy concerning judicial appointments. I agree with her when she mentions that Bush should stop complaining over having 90% of his nominees appointed to the bench.

On Tuesday night we then caught a baseball game at RFK. The Nationals played the Phillies that night in a game that included a monster blast to the seats above the right field wall. I'll post some pictures soon. No offense but RFK is a dump compared to other major league stadiums but it is cool that baseball is now back in the Nation's capital.

It was just four days in Washington, but it felt like a week. WDR.

2005-04-28T00:32:00.000-07:00

Ok I'm Bored

Written 4/22 somewhere over the East Coast of the United States

Here I am writing a blog post at 4:05am EDT somewhere over America while watching an episode of the West Wing on my way to Washington D.C. Why am I going to D.C. and missing two days of work in the process for the trip? My father had been practicing law for almost twenty years, and for the last five he always wanted to be admitted to the Supreme Court Bar. Within the last 3 months my dad completed the paperwork and next thing I know I have a date with the Marshall's office first thing Monday morning to get an extra pass into the chamber. Even if I can't get in, I always love D.C. and the fact that the capital of the free world is just a city 30 miles square on the Potomac River.

I plan to hit the usual highlights. The Smithsonian, the Lincoln memorial, and the Capitol. I also plan on catching a Nationals game at RFK. I'm going to do 2 weeks worth of stuff in 4 days.

Let the marathon begin....WDR

2005-04-20T00:54:00.000-07:00

We Interrupt This Program.....

I figured now would be a good as time as any to finally post something as it has been a busy weekend for me. Last weekend I (along with my brother) was a delegate to the California Democratic Party's statewide convention in Los Angeles. It was the craziest 72 hours I have had in a long time, but I really needed it. Friday was somewhat slow; my first official duty was to register and to pick up my delegate badge and my agenda for the weekend. I wasn't too excited about anything on the agenda, except for a few things. Dean's speech on Saturday night, the Hospitality suites on both Friday and Saturday, and some of the floor town halls (mainly just to hear the speeches of Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer).

The next meeting was a new delegate orientation. It really needed to be longer and more comprehensive. I would have included a brief video on the history of the Democratic Party in CA and a better discussion of the responsibilities of delegates. Starting with the first day of the convention, all of the delegates are now official members of the state central committee for a 2-year term, ending with the nominating convention. This convention was more of a procedural one as the only business we were really faced with was the election of a new Northern vice-chair and the passage of numerous resolutions pertaining to the proposed special election and the party's position on the Iraq war. However, I'll discuss that more when I get to Sunday.

I decided to skip the caucus meetings, as there was not a caucus that represented my interests. I don't think the party is quite ready for an atheist twins caucus, but it was my running joke throughout the weekend.

Friday night was the whole reason for showing up. The hospitality suites were hopping as L.A. Councilwoman Janice Hahn was hosting a dance party, and State Senator Joe Dunn hosted his Irish Bash with green beer and Corn beef sandwiches. The best part of being a democrat however is that we believe in welfare, the welfare of ourselves and others, and what better way to give back then by giving away FREE green beer. Other Suites had similar affairs, with the Teacher's association hosting a dessert and coffee bar.

Now I'm not saying conventions are about the parties (really they are) but after being a staff member for two national conventions, a volunteer at a previous Dems state convention in Anaheim, and now finely being a delegate in this one, I have realized that only a very small number of persons attend to do business. Many would like to get rid of the formalities as soon as possible and resume drinking.

Saturday was more of the same, except this time the floor sessions kicked off. For the first time the state party decided to experiment with a town hall format that allowed for more interaction between the delegates and the speakers. Much like other concepts, the town hall format was great in theory, but bad in practice. It must have been due to the speaker setup but half the time I was straining to hear the speakers, so I decided to spend more time in the exhibit hall instead. The only statewide elected official who I have numerous contacts with is State Senator Joe Dunn, who announced his candidacy for State Treasurer. I spent some time helping around their booth, and talking to the president of the Orange County Young Democrats, Tim who is a member of their campaign staff and a fellow co-worker of mine with OCVF.

Sat Night was the election for the California Young Democrats. I decided to skip part of the election (16 hours in L.A. will make anyone hungry) so I could catch some Dinner at the Original Pantry in Downtown. I figured I might as well beat the crowds. While it was a little pricey, the food was good. Just as I returned for the convention, the vote for president was just ending with our guy losing by 2 votes. (Only if the O.C. could organize more YD clubs could we have tipped the vote). The election would continue to last until about 10 pm. Finished with my duties there; I decided to catch the tail end of Howard Dean's speech. It was everything that the New Democratic message should be, "we fight to protect you, not to tell you what to do and how to do it." I also really appreciate his argument about framing the message in a way that we can win, by setting the message before it is defined by the other guys.

And of course no Saturday night would be complete without some parties. Again free beer would flow (not just from one suite) and delegates would be able to hob nob with top elected officials. Throughout the entire weekend, I was able to meet with the entire slate of constitutional officers and a couple well-known candidates as well, such as fmr Gov. Jerry Brown (More in politico mode and less in discussion of specifics mode).

Sunday was the only day were I actually had to do anything. Since there were so many new delegates, the process of voting on and submitting referendums was tedious to say the least. The Patrick Henry Democrats submitted two measures, one pertaining to Iraq and one pertaining to the nomination of the Bolte and Negroponte. If the public were to have seen the original drafts, I would personally have used the phrase "left-wing nutjobs." The modified measures were a lot more palatable, and I had no hesitation in voting for them. However when an objection was raised to the measure, I was appalled by the lack of decorum showed to the speaker. They started yelling and booing him in an effort to drown him out. The measure passed, but the chair did recognize him for the courage to voice his opinions. I also was in support of the Steroid measure, but I think the measure as amended may open up some major loopholes.

My only major gripe about the entire session is that there was too much complaining about Arnold and not enough discussion about solutions. I only wished the L.A. Times decided to run their article about Prop 13 on Friday instead of Sunday, as it was an intelligent discussion about one of the biggest mistakes in the I.R.R. process and how we should go about correcting it. Of course, I don't really see Arnold proposing any true structural solutions as well, except for how to structure a photo op.

Oh...Did I mention I finally was accepted to a Law School. I'll unveil "my final answer" in a future post.....WDR

2005-04-01T00:46:00.000-08:00

"Wow! He really doesn't like me"

The hazards of having a weblog means that other people, whether the like you or not, can take your personal photos and links to your (in this case my brother's) blog.

Well, the GOP has found me out and decided to paint us as "liberal, atheist, democrats." I take offense to the atheist part; I really have yet to find the adjective that adequately describes my personal religious philosophy. Trust me the only thing worse about being labeled as an "atheist twin" (makes a great heavy metal band name BTW) is trying to convince editors and reporters to not sink to sensational titles.

But now on OC Blog
My brother has been placed in the crosshairs, only because a misguided conservative misread his interpretation of the "West Wing." He said it was a question similar to the one posed to Vinick that triggered our case. For those who have no recollection of my case, it all started when a Den mother asked my brother and I if we went to church. So the similarities are quite intriguing to say the least. It is only when someone else believes that your personal religious beliefs are their business that it becomes everybody's business.

But here is my response to the gentleman who does not agree with us.

"Wow, you really don't like me. It only takes you about 6 months to run a "where are they now" story about us that the Register (in a very tasteful piece by the way) ran just as I was finishing my degree.

And as for the picture, If you think it pertains to the national strategy my brother and I are currently devising with Dean about religious outreach, You are sorely mistaken. It was just a quick snap in a hallway during a really busy convention. I wonder what you were doing while the New York Convention was underway? "

Much like typical Republicans, he is just about 600 years behind the curve.

UGH!!!......WDR

2005-03-30T19:09:00.000-08:00

"On My Honor....."

The recent controversy with Douglas Smith , a member of the National Leadership of the Boy Scouts of America, has shown the lows the organization has reached. The last line of the scout oath reads, To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight. I followed these words to the "t", yet some members of the organization continue to think they are just words and that they can be a tool to drum out those who do not subscribe to their declaration of religious principles.

Now here is where I point out the hypocrisy of the Boy Scouts position. In a letter written by a scoutmaster and lawyer who was opposed to the dismissal of James Dale from the organization, Douglas Smith stated "some intolerant elements in our society want to force scouting to abandon its values and become fundamentally different."(NY Times). Well it did not take an "intolerant element" to change the organization. It took Douglas Smith, and other men and women (yes there are female professionals in Boy Scouts) like him to change the Scouts.

Today I call for the national organization to revoke Mr. Smiths N.E.S.A membership, I also ask for them to rethink Mr. Smiths membership in the Order of the Arrow. As a model scout elected into the OA by my peers, I strived to be a role model to my fellow scouts. I am personally offended to know that persons like Mr. Smith are allowed to retain their membership in the Scouts while others like myself are being told that we are not good enough to be scouts.

Unfortunately, the recent events show how the BS has been put into the BS of A. Today is the day we chalk one up for the good guys.

William Randall
Eagle Scout
Brotherhood member, Order of the Arrow.

2005-03-25T20:45:00.000-08:00

It's so hard to take a bad picture of the Getty.

2005-03-25T20:38:00.000-08:00

"Art for Art's Sake"

The Getty Center is an amazing complex. In many ways it is the Louve of the west, with wonderful pieces of art and is by itself an amazing architectural masterpiece, with it's travertine marble surfaces and numerous waterfalls and fountains. It is a place I really enjoy visiting, even after a few near death experiences on the major freeways into L.A.

The Museum itself showcases many interesting pieces of art. Or at least pieces that appeal to me. The one piece that really caught my eye was one portrayal of vengeance and Justice chasing a murderer. I'm trying to remember the name of the piece, but it would be a great piece of art to have on display in my future law office. I was also engrossed by the numerous sculptures on display as well. One piece, "Winter" really caught my attention with the portrayal of old man winter, with his steely gaze and wavy hair.

The Getty is also known for it's rotating collection of photographs. One picture portrayed a 24 year old soldier during the Crimean war. The thick beard on his face showed an age way beyond his years, and the constant stress of war. The caption of the work noted that the man died a year later.

I am not much of an art critic nor do I have a deep understanding of fine art, but I do understand that many pieces of art are created for a reason. Some to woo a wealthy patron, others to bring wealth and fame to artists, while others are used for political purposes. Much like the current exposition that portray numerous paintings of Napolean and his numerous conquests during the Napoleanic wars. The painting showing napoleon on Horseback Crossing the Alps. Shows him without a speck of dirt, stepping over the names of Ancient conquerors. In real life he was a man with a short stature and an impatient attitude. Culture and Politics are in many ways symbiotic. Art and other tools of culture are used to revise history and to frame the portrayal of historical figures during controversial moments of time. Art was used as a tool of influence at the time much like the modern media is used today.

In all, it was a great trip to L.A., and it really helped to open my eyes to the many creative forces at work in society.

WDR.

2005-03-17T19:47:00.000-08:00

Just a Personal Musing...

Well, what can I write about? I could talk about the political ramifications to Major League Baseball due to the steroid scandal. Nope, No one can hit a little white ball with red strings without some type of enhancement, whether medicinal or in vision. So I'm going to avoid that one. I could talk about how President Bush's Social Security reform plan is dead on arrival (but then that would just shift the political focus back on the war in Iraq, where it should be). Now for my two cents on the matter (get it "two cents"!). Don't touch it. Instead, we should reform the estate tax so that a portion of the estate is rolled into Social Security. Considering that a majority of wealth in this country is held by those over 65, the upcoming "baby bust" (the reverse of the baby boom) will fund the the social security coffers without having to institute new taxes or increasingly risky investment schemes. The core issue however is not being addressed. The shift to a service economy, with low paying wages and limited hours, is leading to the decrease of Social Security funding.

So now that is out of the way, I could write about increasing social frustration to companies who are deciding to automate service sector jobs. The New York Times ran a great little article about how people are tired of putting up with vague terms and automated phone trees. I have always insisted on hitting '0' on the phone rather then sit through phone tree hell, for just a quick little question or transaction. Face to face interaction is needed to get shit done! (my blog, my rules)

Or, I can talk about the status of my Law School applications......Or not.

Well then that leaves the weather. Crap, it's supposed to rain tomorrow, so forget that.

How bout you?

WDR.....

2005-03-17T19:46:00.000-08:00

2005-02-17T23:03:00.000-08:00

Having Lunch With The Mayor

That must have grabbed your attention. Well I didn't actually have Lunch with Mayor Hahn, but Mike and I were in the restaurant at the same time he was taping a t.v. Interview for the L.A. mayoral race. We decided to leave the O.C. and get some culture in L.A. for the afternoon. We stopped at Schawb's on Sunset for lunch. The restaurant itself is like a "nouveau cafe," they had meatloaf, cobb salads, and apple pie, but the restaurant looks like a trendy nightclub. It needs a few months to work the kinks out however. My BLT had black spots on the lettuce, and the onion rings where a little greasy. But the corn batter and the thick pieces of onions made for a tasty side dish. The meatloaf was also really good. It had nice slivers of carrots and was nice and moist (Meatloaf can be messed up in a number of ways, being too dry is one of them).

Next on the O.C. tourist agenda was a trip to the Arc Light cinema. This theater is the Angeleno alternative to Gruman's Chinese or the El Capitan, which have become glorified tourist traps. Tickets are somewhat expensive ($11) but considering it's location in Hollywood and it's crisp screens and clear sound it is a good place to catch a flick. Since Constatine wasn't playing yet, we decided to see Million Dollar Baby. The movie was really good as it had everything an Oscar contender should have, action, drama, and a little humor, all wrapped up in an all encompassing story. I was skeptical at first about a movie that focused on a female boxer, but after watching the film, the focus on a female boxer was just one part of the story. Eastwood's work in this film should garner him another Academy Award (Yea I know Copyright AMPAS so sue me) as the original screenplay and the work of two veteran actors made this film far more entertaining and thought provoking then the butt-numbing Aviator.

Speaking of Oscar. After the film we decided to kick it around Hollywood and Highland, the site of this years Academy Awards. The bleachers are going up, but other then that, their wasn't a whole lot to see. Don't bother going to Starbuck's though. The official word is that they are going to be closed for the duration of the Awards.

Just being a backyard tourist .....WDR

2005-02-13T01:30:00.000-08:00

Time for an "Extreme Makeover"

I admit my blog is not one of the cleanest or most "well-defined" blogs on the World Wide Web today, but it really represents my personality. I started with what somebody else gave me. In this case the Blogger template. I added my personal touches, such as the bookshelf listing, and the Sesame Street Terror Alert graphic. And then I try to pass it off as being an original creation.

Well.........It's not.

So I'm thinking about doing a complete, that means from scratch, redesign of my site. I don't really need to do a lot as some of the most successful blogs use minimal graphics, despite the abundance of broadband, and a simple layout to focus on the text of the site. I admit, my HTML knowledge is extremely rusty and I would have do to a crash course on cascading style sheets and preparing XML feeds and all of the under the hood stuff that makes a blog accessible. I'm also going to have to follow through with it this time and make sure I can get this done.

Looking for the Sledgehammer......WDR

2005-02-03T14:59:00.000-08:00

My Take on the S.O.U.

Well my Groundhog's Day post was a precursor to my opinion of the State of the Union Address. Besides the obvious camera tricks which makes the speech a spectacle for the cameras and a showcase for modern American marketing practices, President Bush's call for Private Savings Accounts has more holes then Swiss cheese.

In theory I like the idea of Private Saving Accounts, I mean who wouldn't? You get to keep your hard-earned money and you don't have to share it with anyone else. Those who make more then a certain amount per year will have the chance to have a safe and secure retirement. But the main problems occur when the numbers are actually processed. According to the NY Times costly annuities will be required to ensure the accounts are paid per month, but the principal cannot be inherited. The cost of the program has been forecasted to reach $660 Billion to $3.5 Trillion over a period of ten years when the program goes into effect. Remember, we will most likely still be involved in Iraq, so any costs created by the new retirement system will be on top of the funds used for Defense, Homeland Security, and the remaining national debt which has reached record highs under the Bush administration.

I know Republicans will argue that the costs were because of 9/11 and their is no price in spreading and securing freedom around the world, but the fact is that we must control our spending and ensure that our social security system is stable and is able to cover ALL Americans. A recent Editorial in the L.A. Times by Benjamin Barber, mentions how the creation of private accounts goes against the very essence of Freedom and Republicanism. How can we be one nation, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all when we replace US with ME? I know that Social Security will have reduced payouts for my generation. This should have been known 20 years ago when the service industry started to take off in America. As the number of low paying jobs grew, less and less money is being put into the system. The common good must overrule individual passions. The American economy is starting to show signs of economic strain, the FED has had to raise interest rates, the market has been slow to show any major signs of growth, and the U.S $ is very weak in Europe and the U.K.

We must ensure that selfish greed is checked by the needs and wants of the whole. I'm not advocating a Soviet Style structure, but we must ensure that the common good is ensured and not the satisfaction of personal wants. When the common good is ensured, personal need is protected.

2005-02-02T21:04:00.000-08:00

Happy Groundhog's Day!

Phil: There is no way this winter is *ever* going to end as long as that groundhog keeps seeing his shadow. I don't see any way out of it. He's got to be stopped. And I have to stop him.

I'll Gripe about the S.O.U Later....WDR

2005-01-27T21:18:00.000-08:00

You have Won (well I have to pay for it) A NEW CAR!!!!

2005-01-27T21:03:00.000-08:00

Representing, the AH. Word Up.

OK, so I know I won't be a professional rapper anytime soon, but I will be representing my hood at the CA State Democratic Convention in L.A. in April. I thought the meeting was tonight, but due to a lot of things happening fast (one of which being my new wheels), I forgot the meeting was actually Monday. But I squeaked in anyway!

I would like to thank all of those who voted for me, and I would really like to thank those who suggested I should run. Frank, Susan, and J. Tilman, thanks for giving me the opportunity. I would also like to thank my brother for understanding that it is awkward for two people from the same family to represent one district. So in my first official duty as a delegate, Mike will be my alternate. Besides, he is going to be a great campaign manager when I decide to run for congress.

I'll know more about my responsibilities tomorrow, so wish me luck. Thanks All.....WDR

2005-01-20T20:52:00.000-08:00

The first day of a lame duck term starts today.

Yes, I turned my back to the T.V. when Bush took the oath of office today. After working so hard with the Kerry campaign both in Boston and in Orange County, the inauguration was more salt in the wound. Of course I watched the parade and some of the pomp and circumstance of the day because of the political scientist in me and to finally have closure to the last presidential campaign.

The first true test of the next four years will be the end of this month. Iraq is scheduled to have their first free and open elections. However it has been far from free. Candidates have been killed, voters are being intimidated, and attacks on our troops are starting to increase in pace. Much like the Tet Offensive, the elections in iraq are a golden opportunity for radical groups in Iraq to put up a fight. The difference however is that in Vietnam the NVA were an organized military force. The terrorist groups in Iraq have been referred to as "pathetic" (60 Minutes), due to their McGyveresque contraptions used to attack American forces.

Bush also has two domestic challenges as well. First is his ambitious Social Security overhaul. His call for individual retirement accounts is the pillar of his call for an "Ownership Society." This is great in theory. Why does one have to put their hard-earned money into a government run fund only to receive less then what they put in to it. We will be able to save our money and be able to have a larger return on our investments then what the government is capable of giving. But there is a catch. The catch is that we will actually want to save our money. Most young adults have to make a plethora of decisions of what to do with their scarce funds. Unfortunately the people who are going to need Social Security the most, the blue collar factory line/ service industry employee, are more likely to spend their earnings on 20 inch rims. Who really has the time to research investment options. If the recent election was any indication, the people who should be speaking up are too busy doing other things to care.

Bush also has underfunded his "No Child Left Behind" act leaving many of the states to foot the bill. Secretary Spellings is going to face a lot of pressure to ensure this program is fully carried out despite ever increasing budget restrictions.

I take great pride in the fact that second presidential terms are usually the great booby prize of electoral politics. Nixon was forced to resign, Reagan had Iran-Contra, and Clinton (unfortunately) had Monica-gate. I think the increased pressure from Sens Boxer and Kerry will lead to further scrutiny of the administration. Yet other factors are in play, that may mitigate the second term curse. First, congress is under GOP control. If any investigations where to occur a number of Republicans would have to partner with the Democrats to trigger any investigation. Second, conservative media outlets will move to protect the President by taking the protective angle on any critical story that may lead to pressure on the president. If CNN and the big three are talking about the lack of WMD's, Fox will be discussing the "pressing need for war." So much for unbiased reporting. Third, the Democrats will have to grow teeth and bite hard in order to invoke any response from the people. The GOP has been relentless in attacks and the Swift Boat group was just a taste of what they are capable of doing. Tough questions need to be asked, and they must be answered before we give an inch.

So as we embark on the next 1460 days of a second Bush term, let us not be afraid to ask the tough questions. We deserve answers. We deserve answers for the lack of WMD's, We deserve answers for the inability to bring OBL to justice. We demand accountability and competence from our national leaders. Until then, we must continue to be vigilant and fight for what is right.

One Fustrated Democrat......WDR

2005-01-01T02:03:00.000-08:00

Happy New Year!

Well, Welcome to 2005. Unfortunately, it has not begun on a very good note. Large swaths of the SE Pacific are flooded due to the devastating Tsunamis leaving the rest of world to worry about the dead. While those of us in the First World have the money to fund high tech alarm systems and broadcast equipment, many of those in the Third World where the only notice of the monster waves were the screams of those being swept away.

On CBC's the National, the editorial segment discussed how Canada called an emergency session of Parliament to address the disaster. Meanwhile our elected officials in Washington, mainly President Bush, proposed a paltry 15 million dollar aid package. My brother has a point when government will spend trillions of dollars on advance weapon systems but balk when they have to provide foreign aid and assistance to disaster areas. I have even heard the European Union initially believed the initial aid package was due to the impacted areas being primarily Muslim ( I don't doubt for a second that this may have been one of the reasons).

So as we enter 2005, I won't make any resolutions except for one. I resolve to enjoy life. To revel in its successes and learn from my defeats and to realize that life is fleeting. Everyday is a new day, and new opportunities present themselves. May 2005 be a great year, and not just an endless rerun of the last four years.

!Feliz Nuevo Ano! -- WDR

2004-12-16T22:45:00.000-08:00

This is what happens when you don't look at the car in front of you!

2004-12-16T22:43:00.000-08:00

Looking for Wheels

Due to a traffic accident, which is going to send my t-bird to either a scrap heap or to an auction yard near TJ, I've been researching my replacement options. Currently I've been looking at the Scion tC, only because it looks like a great value. It comes with a lot of standard options that would cost me an arm and a leg compared to other automobiles. But I'm afraid that when I go for a test drive, there will not be enough room in the car for a guy my size. I also have a penchant for pick up trucks, like the Tundra. Insurance and the price of current models on the market have made this option unfeasible for the time being.

Also I'm faced with the problems of having to calculate financing and payments. I would prefer to have gone shopping for a new car after having my job for about a year, but I've only had it for a week, so I really need to keep it. The T-Bird was my first car and it served it's purpose well. It helped to cut down on the costs of car registration and insurance A new car is going to eat up a large portion of my income that I would rather have saved for Law School. They always say that the devil is in the details, and this is no exception.

I've considered purchasing a used car, but it'll take me a lot of time and research to ensure that I'm not getting a lemon, which is really easy to do in SoCal considering all the driving needed to get around. The car I'm looking for has to match three criteria, it's affordable, it's safe, and it's reliable. I would like a car with decent mileage as well, as the cost of gas is still too high.

Hopefully, the other guys insurance company will be willing to up their assessment of the t-bird, taking into consideration all of the new costs I am going to accrue in acquiring a new car.

man, I miss MY wheels........WDR

2004-12-14T22:40:00.000-08:00

Five Day Report

It's been a few days since I last was able to put up a post on this blog, so now that I have a minute I'll write something......

Oh yea something.....

uh?

Oh yea the new job. Well so far it has been about four days in a classroom absorbing information about reservation systems, how to check-in guests, walk-in's, billing, room assignments, basically all of the behind the scenes stuff that occurs when you visit a hotel and why they know so much about you before you even arrive. It could be worse, I could have been selling churros!

I know it has nothing do to with the law, but it is a little bit more professional then my last job and it is full time with benefits. Graduating from school is a bit like a car accident (not like I've been in any recently). You get a little piece of paper and a swift kick out the door. The insurance cuts off, the money dries up, and all of the things you figure you want and need are dependent on any funds you can scrounge up. Plus now having the added expense of needing to make car payments in the near future makes a job a serious plus. Having access to health insurance, promotion opportunities, and stock purchase plans can have a big impact later in life. Maybe a lead or management position will open and I can move up.

I went with the safe bet (familiar surroundings, operational and location knowledge, somewhat corporate environment) rather then the risk. Hopefully it pays off.

WDR

2004-12-08T23:56:00.000-08:00

Time to Grab the Old Lunchpail

Well as of today, I have entered the world of work. The job has some nice benefits, even though the hourly pay is low for the industry, but after going nearly three months without a job I'll take it.

There are some pluses to this job however. I get to park in the same parking lot that I did for my last job, so at least the commute is familiar, and I'll be working in one of the nicest hotels in OC. But the selling point is....This job is not food service!!!!

I'll know more about my job after the weekend. It was somewhat interesting considering that every position I interviewed for turned into something else.

BTW, I'm being vague on purpose. It would be a shame to come this far and lose a job just because of a blog post. (If you are my employer and you are reading this blog, please see the notice at the top left of the page)

On the road to riches (Or at least staying out of the poorhouse)....WDR

2004-11-26T00:16:00.000-08:00

What I Am Thankful For

I'm thankful for my family, immediate and extended. To have the ability to go to my Grandmothers House on Thanksgiving and have a wonderful meal. Hold conversations with my aunts and uncles, and laugh about how bad I am playstation golfing.

I'm thankful for bit torrents. To have the ability to locate and download shows from the internet like a TiVo on crack, has helped me to have more control over what I want to watch, when I want to watch it.

I'm thankful for my college degree. Four years of work and I get a parchment with my name on it and a movie stars signature. I'm still waiting for this one to pay off.

I'm thankful for my parents. They have the patience to allow two young adults to stay at home while they attempt to make a life for themselves.

I'm thankful for the ability to air my thoughts via this blog. Only three people really know what I feel and what I'm doing at any given time, other then that I have no external venting system. This blog helps to keep me sane.

I'm thankful for politics. If the fight to gain power was interesting, then the fight to keep power will be the focus of our federal three ring circus. In the first ring is the legislative branch, with Tom DeLay as the ringmaster. The second ring being the judicial branch, with the Chief Justice still being treated for cancer. And the third ring is the Executive Branch, with a President that is consolidating power faster then Nixon. It has been said that "absolute power corrupts absolutely," eventually the public will realize the hypocrisy of the Republican party, it's only a matter of time.

Happy Thanksgiving to All----WDR

2004-11-23T14:19:00.000-08:00

Irony to Nth Degree!

It says handle with care, but it is supposed to stop a bullet. The irony is just so strange I had to post this. WDR

2004-11-20T01:54:00.000-08:00

When Will They Work For Us All?

I wrote this to my representative to oppose H.Res 853. While Congress is attempting to praise the Boy Scouts, they fail to make any mention of their discriminatory practices.

Dear Representative,

I am writing this letter to request that you vote against H.Res. 853, praising the Boy Scouts of America. While the Boy Scouts of America was a fine organization that instills values in young men and young adults through its explorer program, the organization has shifted away from its core values to become a discriminatory organization today.

When I was seven, I joined Tiger Cubs, the first program for boys while in elementary school. I wanted to go camping, hang out with friends, and help others in my community. From there I progressed into Cub Scouts earning the Wolf rank while I lived in Culver City. In 1992, my family moved to Orange County, California where I joined the local Cub Scout Pack in order to continue to make friends, and go camping. While I was discussing the requirements for the Bear rank with my Den mother a question arose for which a person at my young age, nine at the time, would have a difficult time answering. The requirement was for the scout to discuss how the scout and the scout's family practiced their religion in their daily lives. I was raised in a very open-minded household and my parents allowed my brother and me to study and learn about different religions on our own. I even attended a Christian pre-school. When I explained to my Den mother that my family did not attend a church or practice a specific religious belief, she seemed aghast by the statement. She then immediately placed a call to the Scoutmaster, unsure of how to handle the situation.

The day after the meeting my father received a phone call from the Scoutmaster and a scout executive from the local scout council stating that if my brother and I were to remain in scouting we would have to profess a belief in god. They stated that we were in violation of the Scouts "declaration of religious principles." I could have walked away from scouting at that moment but we decided to persevere. We would take the issue to court in order to ensure that my brother and I could continue in scouting. From 1992 to 1998, I was involved in Randall, et al. v. Boy Scouts of America, Orange County Council Inc. (17 Cal. 4th 736) I was fortunate to remain in scouting throughout the case continuing through Cub Scouting and attaining the Webelos and the Arrow of Light, the highest rank in Cub Scouts. I joined a local Boy Scout troop soon thereafter.

A scout is told to uphold the Scout Law. A scout is Trustworthy, Loyal, Friendly, Helpful, Courteous, Thrifty, Brave, Clean, Cheerful, Obedient, Kind and Reverent. Under reverence, a scout is to practice their religion as they have been taught and to respect the beliefs of others. As a scout who does not profess a belief in god, I would be violating the scout law if I said god in the scout oath. Many of my fellow scouts wondered what all the fuss was about, telling me that I should just mouth the word. I believed that by just mouthing the words, I would violate the Scout Law. Despite unkind remarks from some scouts, I continued to thrive in Boy Scouting. My fellow scouts voted me into the Order of the Arrow, the Boy Scout Honor Society. I went on numerous camping trips, I traversed the trails of the Philmont Scout Ranch in Northern New Mexico, and I was awarded the Eagle Scout rank by my troop.

I understand that this letter may reach you with very little notice, as I was made aware of the resolution this evening. I ask you to vote in opposition of H.Res. 853. Many young men who share similar beliefs have been denied the ability to participate in the Boy Scouts of America. No other youth organization in America today has the same devotion to community service and it is a shame that young men are being denied this opportunity. I personally hold the Boy Scouts in high regard and I would vote for House Resolution 853 myself if the circumstances were different. However, the organization has not shown the ability to respect the beliefs of others including non-theists and even the Unitarians. Representative Issa is incorrect by assuming this is true.

Please oppose House Resolution 853.

Sincerely,

William D. Randall
Eagle Scout

2004-11-18T21:24:00.000-08:00

Those Who Ignore History Are Bound to Repeat It

The current situation in Iraq has caused me to consider the last 250 years of modern history. While most are concerned about were to buy a new Mustang or party on a Saturday night, I have been concerned about how modern day events are mirroring events that occurred during the creation of the United States. From a band of lowly insurgents fighting a foreign occupying force to ensure their freedom, the insurgents in Faloujah mirror the tactics employed by the Minutemen during the Revolutionary War. During the Revolutionary War, colonial minutemen utilized new tactics to defeat a far superior force. Surprise attacks, and the break from standard military tactics allowed a weaker force to have a jump on the strongest army in the world at the time. Today in Iraq, Muslim fundamentalists are using surprise attacks, improvised explosive devices, and a superior knowledge of their local surroundings to put American forces into a weaker position. While the military forces in Iraq are supposed to represent a coalition of the willing, roughly 90% of the costs and casualties have been borne by the US, demonstrating the inability of a stronger, larger force to adapt to the terrain.

Recently, I was pointed to the United States Army Counter Insurgency Manual, available through the Federation of American Scientists. In the introduction, the manual points out how the military has focused on using conventional warfare, where "shock and awe" has become the operating mantra of the modern military. Secretary Rumsfield has proposed that the military shift to a faster, lighter and more responsive force, unfortunately this transition is occurring in the midst of a war. Stryker vehicles have been developed and deployed, but the boots on the ground are consigned to using Humvees with the floorboards covered with sandbags. In this case, the U.S. has to adapt to the tactics of the insurgents, in an almost Darwinian game of "only the strongest surviving." Marine units in Falujah have had to level entire buildings, only leading to a further increase of war costs.

The current election also shares a similarity to the debate over slavery. Northern abolitionist states had to make concessions with their southern neighbors to ensure the ratification of the Constitution. As the nation expanded westward, other concessions were made, such as the Missouri Compromise. The South refused to grant more concessions and nation was plunged into war. Today the "red states," who continue to receive more from the Federal Government then what they put in, have decided to succeed politically from the Union. While the Northern and Western "blue states" continue to excel academically and economically, the "red states" refuse to make compromises to an ever-changing society. The "blue states" are the mature grown ups in the front seat of the global community car, realizing that cooperation equals survival, while the "red states," are the rowdy teenagers in the backseat constantly grabbing for the steering wheel. European unification created a stronger, more agile, economic force with the ability to counter the U.S. in every category. Those in America who are able to adapt to changing global circumstances, by realizing that not everybody speaks the same language, practices the same religion, or even cares what America thinks, will benefit by learning more about the world they live in. This, in turn, will help America navigate the 21st century and break the cycle of history we are in.

Just a thought, or two, or three, or four, ........WDR

2004-11-05T00:36:00.000-08:00

Saw this on the Daily Show, ROTFL!. Even the British are making fun of King George!

2004-11-03T19:27:00.000-08:00

When do we get to tug on the Rope?

After watching the returns, crunching the numbers, reading the post-mortems on Kos and TalkLeft, I have realized that the Democrats may have more to work with despite the negative returns. We as a party have started a period of introspection that is needed to take back the House in 2006. I have worked a lot on this campaign, and I do have to commend the GOP on their election strategy. Morality is possibly the weakest aspect of the Democratic party, and when the election boiled down to "Gay, Guns and god," we were at a sizable disadvantage.

Other issues in this campaign have also angered me. The first issue has to be the ability of the campaigns to stay on message. Watching the Kerry campaign from the primaries through yesterday, they always looked like a campaign that was unsure of what to say. The GOP was able to capitalize on this and paint the "flip-flop" label on him. Unfortunately the American people have little knowledge of history and they forget that the "Flip-flop" label is the oldest trick in the political book, along with "don't change horses in midstride". The second issue is the choice of a senator to run for the presidency. Senators have lengthy voting records which shed light on their personal positions. I personally support Kerry for being a liberal senator, Bush however went to the extremes and painted him as being the "most liberal." The National Journal, in their congressional vote rankings reserved this title for Senator Kennedy after looking at their entire career voting records. Governors are better suited to run for the presidency as they can make a lot of promises and they are not held to a voting record. Governors can set policy and legislative priorities, but the votes are made in the state legislatures where the members are not as well known. Howard Dean was the only governor to run for the presidency in this cycle and his rapid move to the front was based in part on the health care policies he was able to advocate for the small state of Vermont.

The third issue I have about the Kerry campaign is how the liberal candidate ran an old fashion "conservative" campaign. Many aspects of this pertain to the marketing of the candidate. Standard rectangle bumperstickers versus the stylish W. Ovals. One Kerry supporter in Phoenix was able to "hack" the sticker and make a Kerry "K" sticker, but the Kerry campaign never bother to go toe to toe. At the local level, requests for signs at our county office fell on deaf ears until the state party and our Orange County Victory Fund raised money to print our own OC for KE signs. Bumper stickers and signs did not come in from the state party until a week and half before the election. Large BC signs went up around OC while all we could do at our HQ was sigh. I hated having to tell volunteers that we were "out of this" or "out of that". On the visual front, the New York Times ran an interesting editorial pertaining to the designs of the campaign signs. Bush's bold and forceful font versus Kerry's somewhat prim and proper font conveyed a subliminal message to voters about who could fight the "war on terror." Other candidates in Orange County ran on the presidents coattails for reelection by copying the BC design for their signs.

Issue number four pertains to the lack of a coordinated heirachy among the 527's. I applaud MoveOn and ACT for their extensive GOTV efforts. But the BC campaign kept all of their GOTV efforts under their campaign. Allowing the 527's to freelance represented a serious tactical error on behalf of the KE campaign. With multiple groups on the ground in Ohio, the likelihood of alienating Kerry voters is possible with multiple untrained and unprofessional volunteers knocking on the doors. Now this is not to knock those who worked for ACT, but a Nightline special on GOTV was extremely interesting. Precinct walkers for BC never said "are you going to vote for George Bush," Instead they said "Are you standing with your President?" What is a person going to say when the question is phrased like that. If you say no, your loyalty instantly comes into question. If you were a Kerry supporter you would get lamblasted with BC phone calls and flyers. If you said "yes" just to appease them, then you would be lying and would be placed into a moral conundrum. The BC people also co-opted the flag. WTF!! It's our flag too dammit. We should have them at every event, in the crowd, behind the candidate. In the end the Democrats need to start looking more like the Republicans but talking like Democrats.

Karl Rove's church outreach program, the GOP 72-hour initiative, along with placing initives banning gay marriage in eleven states was crucial in winning votes from conservative christians. Rove stated how he never needed the Democratic vote to win reelection, well he was right. Questioning god is equated as not being faithful, and no conservative christain voter wants to be painted as a being faithless. It is the ultimate peer pressure and when decisions about who and what to vote for are being made from the pulpit, the separation of church and state is further weakened.

About leadership at the campaign level, Bob Shrum should never be hired by a presidential candidate ever again, Give Trippi an advisory role the man had an idea and he was able to manage the rapidly growing Dean Campaign. By the time former Clinton officials came on board, we were trying to change engines in the middle of the racetrack while being lapped by the Presidential Limo.

And as for leadership at the Party level It's time for Terry to go. While Marc Raicoit was able to run a nondescript spin room in Boston until the cover was blown, Terry never quite got the concept in New York. He has failed to unify the many different factions within the party, and as Kos mentioned, he has overseen the worst electoral season for the Democrats since Clinton was elected. The former chairman, Joe Andrew was able to unite the party. During his reign Unions, environmentalists, and other groups realized winning was everything and they put aside their differences to get Clinton elected. The Democrats need a party chairman that is similar to the GOP chairman. Young, charismatic, and has the ability to keep the party on message. I would recommend the CEO of the DNC in Boston, Rod O'Connor. He was able to pull the convention off without a hitch despite a prolonged police strike.

Now we have a situation where the Republicans control the House, Senate and the Presidency. The voters have spoken and have given the GOP the run of the town in D.C. O.K. fine, the GOP now has enough rope, they are saddled with the responsibility of reducing the National Debt, finding and killing OBL, and continuing to resolve the Iraq quagmire without institution the Draft. Failure in any one of these three areas will allow the Democrats to tug on the rope and pull the GOP out of power by Midterms in 2006.

One last thought pertains to voter turnout. About 120 million voters voted in this election, each candidate received a record number of votes, and the final tally was roughly 51%-49%. James Carville stated that the candidate who is dependent on voter turnout is the first loser. Kerry depended on GOTV way too much, the next phase however must be building up grassroots voter support, not just telling the voter to vote for the candidate but by giving them a compelling reason to vote for the candidate that infuses a passion among the electorate on a personal and charismatic level. Clinton was able to do this and until we have a candidate that can solve this problem (Obama?), Democrats will have difficulty in the south where the changing number of electoral votes make the south extremely important. And how in the heck can we lose Florida! Democrats outnumber Republicans but we lost the state. Until we can lock in Florida, it will be difficult to win the presidency again.

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
"We shall not fail or falter; we shall not weaken or tire...Give us the tools and we will finish the job."
- Winston Churchill

2004-11-02T00:00:00.000-08:00

WHAT ARE YOU DOING READING THIS BLOG!!!!

VOTE

VOTE

VOTE

and if I haven't said it enough

VOTE!!!!

If you need any guidance in how to vote, please feel free to refer to my selections below and adjust accordingly.

I'll post as events warrant....WDR

2004-10-29T12:45:00.000-07:00

Now I know how the campaign saves money, they have no need to print loyality oaths! (photo copyright Kerry Campaign)

2004-10-27T23:47:00.000-07:00

"The One Finger Victory Salute"

Family values my ass! This link makes my skin crawl.

2004-10-26T21:44:00.000-07:00

Another Cameo Appearance by ME!!

I just finished watching Alexandra Pelosi's "Diary of a Political Tourist" on HBO. It is another great behind the scenes look of the presidential election cycle before the rest of the country decides to pay attention. I really liked the dueling cameras part where John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi interviewed each other on the campaign plane. But that was not the best part of the show.

The best part of the show comes at the credits, where I appear not once, not twice, but three times. I thought my vantage point on the seventh floor on the Fleet Center sucked (it did), but showing up in a Pelosi special is awesome, and I have to thank my Tivo for being able to catch it. I'm the guy with the rolled up beige shirt and the "when will it end" look on my face. Cool cool cool.

Just bragging.....WDR

2004-10-21T22:35:00.000-07:00

The Will Randall Voters Guide

After researching the many different issues on the California ballot, the following are my choices.

President and Vice President of the United States:
- John Kerry and John Edwards

   This is a no brainer, considering how our current President is lacking a brain of his own. Kerry's answer in the second debate really sealed my vote; "But I can't take what is an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn't share that article of faith, whether they be agnostic, atheist, Jew, Protestant, whatever. I can't do that." (Commission on Presidential Debates)
I place a high value on the separation of church and state, and John Kerry values this too. Of course, this is not the only reason why I am voting for John Kerry. The war in Iraq, the failure of the current administration to capture OBL, the decline of the economy, and the future of the Supreme Court are all reasons for me selecting John Kerry.

US Senate
-Barbara Boxer

   Another easy selection. Bill Jones is in this race only because the Republican party cannot take the chance of selecting a more moderate candidate in the vein of Arnold, and risk rebukes from the far ~~reich~~ right. Plus his lack of ability to fund his own race, makes this race a joke.

US Congress
-Lewis Myers (only until I can fund my own candidacy)

   I subscribe to the ABM philosophy, Anybody But Miller. The only problem is that the GOP has faced only token opposition from the Democrats. Our current congressman won his seat in a special election (horrendously low turnouts) after the previous congressman, Jay Kim, was convicted of fraud. Miller is also sponsored by the National Homebuilders Association, since he was also a former contractor himself, in many ways it is like the fox guarding the henhouse. I remember the day when the hills of Yorba Linda were covered with green grass, now they are covered with homes and no trees to hide them.

CA State Assembly, 60th District
-Patrick John Martinez

   This is a straight partisan vote. I don't know a whole lot about this guy.

CA State Senate, 33rd District
-Randall Daugherty

   Randall is really a nice guy. I have worked with him at the OC Democratic Party and he has a vision for the County and the State that encompasses everybody. Unfortunately the ability to win a race depends on money and Randall was short on donations from the start. I really want to see Ackerman out of office, since he refused to met with me and the CSUF delegation when we visited the State Capital over Higher Education funding.

Rancho Santiago Community College District, Trustee Area 1
-Again another party line vote. The OCDP is sponsoring Alfredo Amezcua and Brian Conley.

Orange Unified School District
-I'm up in the air on this one.

Anaheim City Council
-Lori Galloway
   Galloway gets my vote because of leadership with the Eli Home. The home is a refuge to battered women and unfortunately is receiving a lot of a grief from a selfish neighbor who is only concerned with his property values. I'm not sure on the second candidate yet.

Now for the propositions
1A- Yes
59-Yes
60-Yes
60A- Yes
61- Yes
62- No
   I really don't like the idea of having a R v. R race in O.C.
63-Yes
64-No
   "Frivolous Lawsuits" sounds like a band name rather then a real issue. This is just another way of businesses ignoring their societal responsibilities.
65-Yes
66-Yes
   Three Strikes has done more harm then good in CA. The prison population has skyrocketed and many provisions of the Three Strikes law smack of due process violations.
67-No
   Good intentions, but bad way of going about it. Find another way to fund emergency services.
68-No
   I'm not wild about the expansion of casinos in CA. If I want to gamble, I'll go to Vegas.
69-No
   The use of a DNA database to keep track of those who are suspected of committing a felony smacks of a Due Process violation. No one should be a suspect after they have been wrongfully arrested.
70-No
   70 would grant indian casinos exclusive 99 year contracts to be the only casinos in the state. No one really knows what the states fiscal condition is going to be like in 100 years, and the exclusivity deal is practically a "Golden Handcuff."
71-Yes
   Probably one of the few things the Governor and I agree on. The use of stem cells is needed to cure many of the genetic diseases that exsist ranging from Alzhimer's to Parkinson's. Stem cell research gives hope to those who have none.
72-Yes
   I call this the "Put up or Pay up" initiative. This bill would prevent employers from pulling out the health care rug from their employees, and would require companies such as Wal-Mart to "put up" private health insurance or pay for the services that the state would have to provide to those lacking coverage. It would stop the constant buck passing that Wal-Mart, Safeway, and McDonald's are engaging in to lower costs in order to increase profits.

Measure A- Yes
-My high school needed temporary classrooms, and the school was only 25 years old. A new High School is desperately needed for an area that is going to experience record growth.

2004-10-12T21:29:00.000-07:00

The Big Debate Rally in Tempe!

2004-10-12T21:27:00.000-07:00

Media Update or How I Got My Ugly Mug on T.V. (Again)

If anybody was watching Hardball on MSNBC today, My brother and I were working the "pit" dueling it out with the "W"imps! Mike was carrying a large sign, and I played the role of "blocker" attempting to block the BC signs. On a personal note, I really would like to thank the BC campaign for the wonderful foot mat their signs make. It was the best $200 million ever spent. It was fun and one bystander compared it to a sporting event. Yea, we can all agree to disagree, but at the end of the taping we all shook hands and went to our corners.

I debated briefly with a women who looked like she stepped right out of a Gap catalog. She asked me how I could support a candidate who supported murder. Right off the bat I realized she was talking about abortion. She could not talk about the loss of jobs in America to outsourcing, she could not talk about an effective strategy to ensure stability in the Middle East and bring our allies back to the table, she could only talk about what I consider a religious issue. Another bystander asked her if she would allow abortions in the cases of rape. Her unequivocal "no" scared the hell out of me. The issue then shifted to stem cell research, she still equated embryonic stem cell research as murder. I argued that the many cannot dictate the lifesaving options of the few, and the lack of treatment options led to the death of Christopher Reeve and leaves many talented people in society suffering.

She shook her head after I told her that religion has no place in government. If she only knew who I was.....?

2004-10-12T14:55:00.000-07:00

Blogging from the Road - Tempe, AZ

As part of my effort to understand the confusing and complex process that is the Presidential elections, I am in Tempe, AZ to partake in the insanity surrounding the Presidential debates. In the five minutes I have been in town, I noticed the signs denoting "Road Closure Due to Presidential Debate" signs on the streets surrounding my hotel. Various unions have also checked in, ranging from the IAFF, the SEIU, and the Teamsters, in order to show their support for the KE Ticket.

Later this afternoon I plan on taking a tour of the campus to determine the status of the media setup on the campus, and I'll try to watch a taping of Hardball on the ASU campus,

From the KE Victory Fundraiser in L.A., to the Democratic National Convention in Boston, this is the most access I have had to any presidential campaign.

Tomorrow is the big debate watch party and rally with the Foo Fighters here in Tempe. I received my tickets from johnkerry.com and I'll definitely post pictures from the event.

Go Kerry!.....WDR