|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jens 'n' Frens
Idle thoughts of a relatively libertarian Republican in Cambridge, MA, and whomever he invites. Mostly political.
"A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures."
-- Daniel Webster
|
|
|
|
|
|
Saturday, June 28, 2003 :::
The Marlins were gutted and cleaned last night by the Red Sox, and someone thinks it's unsportsmanlike.And Marlins manager Jack McKeon accused the Red Sox of running up the score in one of their greatest offensive performances ever. "I didn't realize your pitching was that bad over here at Boston that you would try to add on a 16-run lead in the seventh inning," he said. Indeed, Boston pitching perhaps isn't bad enough to give up, say, 14 runs in one inning, but such a feat hadn't been unheard of, even before last night. Perhaps it would be considered unfair to the fans, but it might be appropriate to allow (if it's not allowed already) a team to concede early. At any point before that concession, though, there's a game on, and I have trouble with the idea that a team should quit playing. If such concessions did take place once in a while, this would be even less arguable in my mind; if the game is so over that your opponent shouldn't be playing any more, why are you still playing?On the college level, at the level of coach, it makes sense to me that a football coach will put in his second string at some point, but on the level of player, I can't ask the second-stringers not to run all over the opponent, either. This, more than anything, is about giving the second string on the better team and the first string on the weaker one a chance to get some play in against opponents of a similar strength, under the willful delusion that this is an amateur sport being played as much as anything for the fun of it. In major league baseball, just play the game.
::: posted by dWj at 5:24 PM
(0) comments
Friday, June 27, 2003 :::
I got a chance to check out Scalia's dissent in Lawrence, and it's another entry in his "delenda est Casey" strain of jurisprudence.To tell the truth, it does not surprise me, and should surprise no one, that the Court has chosen today to revise the standards of stare decisis set forth in Casey. It has thereby exposed Casey's extraordinary deference to precedent for the result-oriented expedient that it is. I may remember incorrectly, but it seems to me that the Dickerson case a couple years ago was at least as frightening in its elevation of stare decisis above law, if perhaps less explicitly.Texas Penal Code Ann. ยง21.06(a) (2003) undoubtedly imposes constraints on liberty. So do laws prohibiting prostitution, recreational use of heroin, and, for that matter, working more than 60 hours per week in a bakery. And the minimum wage.Constitutional entitlements do not spring into existence because some States choose to lessen or eliminate criminal sanctions on certain behavior. Rights that the democratic process recognizes do not need Constitutional protection. Rights that rely for their existence on their recognition by the democratic process have no protection. A "living" bill of rights is dead.
::: posted by dWj at 5:31 PM
(0) comments
Also dead is Denis Thatcher, the first man to be the spouse of a British Prime Minister.Thatcher was rarely unpleasant to individuals, though an exception was made for Sir Edward Heath. What finer thing could be said of a man?
::: posted by dWj at 4:26 PM
(0) comments
In December (during the Lott flap) I refered to Thurmond as "going to be dead in three months", which was apparently off a factor of two. That's pretty good compared to the rest of my prediction record, though.
::: posted by dWj at 10:10 AM
(0) comments
When he was a racist, he was a Democrat.
Former South Carolina Senator Strom Thurmond, the nation's longest-serving senator and former "Dixiecrat" candidate for the presidency, died Thursday in Edgefield, S.C. He was 100.
Thanks to Dean for pointing this out.
::: posted by Steven at 2:01 AM
(0) comments
Thursday, June 26, 2003 :::
I've read elsewhere that O'Connor was in both majorities, as she was in both affirmative action cases on Monday. Maybe she's just moody.While I haven't read the Lawrence write-up either, I glean the impression that it has a "generally-accepted standards" thing going on, much like the opinion that found that the execution of the mentally retarded had become unconstitutional over the past several years. Which would probably make Scalia's dissent fun to read, though I haven't done that yet, either.
::: posted by dWj at 12:57 PM
(0) comments
In case you hadn't heard, Lawrence v. Texas was decided for Lawrence, 6-3 (O'Connor concurring, the three conservatives dissenting, with an opinion written by Scalia). Here's the PDF version of the majority opinion written by Kennedy (link from Volokh).
UPDATE: Rush Limbaugh says O'Connor was in the majority (more or less) both here and in Bowers v. Hardwick, which it at least seems to overturn (I haven't read any of the opinions, and I'm not sure whether there's a subtle difference between the two cases which could make the difference).
::: posted by Steven at 11:54 AM
(0) comments
If you're looking to hire a good lawyer, James Lileks has some good news for you.
::: posted by Steven at 1:54 AM
(0) comments
Michael Kinsley on the Michigan rulings (from the Corner):
The court's message to universities and other selective, government-financed institutions is: We have fudged this dangerous issue. You should do the same.
::: posted by Steven at 1:53 AM
(0) comments
Wednesday, June 25, 2003 :::
It's been hot and humid here the past couple days, or at least hot; I've slept downstairs the past two nights rather than ask the A/C to fight the temperature gradient to the bedroom. (Attempts to mitigate it with fans seem less effective than one might hope.)
::: posted by dWj at 5:48 PM
(0) comments
"Iraqi scientist turns over centrifuge, needed to develop nuclear bomb, that had been hidden in Baghdad. Details soon," promises CNN. More circumstantial evidence, at least, of weapons programs.
::: posted by dWj at 5:46 PM
(0) comments
They just said on the radio that Krispy Kreme's store in Medford opened yesterday.
::: posted by Steven at 5:37 PM
(0) comments
It's hot and humid. We don't have air conditioning at home. I miss cold and rainy, especially as the landlord starts going around without a shirt when the weather gets like this.
Speaking of weird and disturbing, something's going on with Lileks. He's not telling us much, but it doesn't sound good.
::: posted by Steven at 5:36 PM
(0) comments
Connections in the news: Enron has been forbidden to trade energy contracts; I was recently wondering whether they were still around. I was wondering whether they needed a press spokesman when I heard that there are rumours we have the former Iraqi Information Minister.
::: posted by dWj at 4:41 PM
(0) comments
Anyone interested knows by now that the Fed cut the funds target 25bp.
::: posted by dWj at 4:14 PM
(0) comments
I have to admit that part of me wants to tell Turkey that if we can't use their territory we'll just attack from Kurdistan instead, but Turkey has been a good enough ally for long enough in an area where a couple real allies would be useful that we should probably just say, "okay, you forgo the billions of dollars; we look forward to working with you in the future". Turkey, remember, was one of the first countries in September of 2001 to say, "we don't need to see evidence of the provenance of the terrorist attacks; if it's good enough for the United States, it's good enough for us." This wins them some points in my book.
::: posted by dWj at 3:31 PM
(0) comments
The Drudge Report has an update on Michael Jackson
Orth, wife of NBC's Washington Bureau Chief Tim Russert, is set to unleash on NBC's TODAY SHOW Tuesday morning.
She will claim -- in a report which streets March 12 -- that Michael Jackson paid $150,000 to an African voodoo chief who promised him that David Geffen and Steven Spielberg and the 23 other people on Jackson's enemies list, some of whom had worked with him for years, would soon die.
The voodoo man, who had 42 cows ritually sacrificed for the ceremony, later assured one close observer of the scene that Geffen, who headed the list, would die within the week.
Link from Dave Barry.
::: posted by Steven at 3:31 PM
(0) comments
The Kitchen Cabinet's Lily takes on the discussion of taboo subjects, and predictably gets it right. (The Cabinet is the source of much of our traffic, so I have to suck up.)
The rudeness isn't in the desire to talk about politics, or even (usually) in the substance of the remarks; it's in the narrow-minded assumption that if someone's at the same dinner party as you, they share your politics.
Sometimes people are deliberately inflammatory (I have a specific example in mind), but most trouble of this sort is caused by presumption rather than intent.
I spent Thanksgiving on Cape Cod with the family of a friend. At one point, I ended up discussing Cardinal Law with a half-dozen Catholics (I'm not Catholic). There's no reason it can't be done civilly, as long as it's done respectfully.
Elsewhere at the Cabinet, Kate brings up space tourism, which will probably require a reduction in costs to be viable, and Lily finds a British survey on bad American teeth that doesn't seem to mention David Letterman.
::: posted by Steven at 3:31 PM
(0) comments
They might quote the AIMR standard because it exists. American securities law, to my understanding, doesn't even define insider trading. (European securities law, to my understanding, doesn't even try to prohibit it.) What it is she has to be convicted of (liable for?), that is an interesting question. (It wouldn't be conviction in a civil case, would it?)
::: posted by dWj at 10:10 AM
(0) comments
Yesterday, on NRO, there was this column about Martha Stewart and insider trading.
Insider trading is a murky affair (and the insider-trading charge against Stewart is civil, not criminal). The private Association for Investment Management and Research (AIMR), which administers the rigorous Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) exam, suggests that investment professionals who receive material non-public information "shall not trade or cause others to trade in that security if such trading would breach a duty or if the information was misappropriated or relates to a tender offer."
I'm a CFA candidate (which is what caught enough of my attention to comment on this article), but I don't believe Martha Stewart is, and I'm a bit puzzled to see AIMR's standard quoted. Wouldn't it make more sense to quote, I don't know, American securities law?
Stewart wasn't privy to any material non-public information on ImClone when she sold her stake, save for the obvious negative clue that the CEO was selling his.
"Mrs. Lincoln quite enjoyed the Ford's Theatre production of Our American Cousin, save for the obvious negative..."
That column is just weird.
::: posted by Steven at 12:51 AM
(0) comments
I got mail today from Jim and Cecelia Rappaport. Jim ran for Lt. Governor last fall, and I hoped the mailing would be political in nature, but it's about an other passion of theirs -- cancer (which they're against). Their son Joshua had leukemia as a toddler, and since then, they've been involved in this thing called the Pan-Massachusetts Challenge. You can get more information at their web site, and you can also pledge money there. If you want to sponsor Rappaport, his "eGift ID" is JR0063.
::: posted by Steven at 12:30 AM
(0) comments
Tuesday, June 24, 2003 :::
If you're looking to hire a good writer -- or if you're looking for a funny, informative, and well-written blog to subsidize -- Colby Cosh has some good news for you.
::: posted by Steven at 3:49 PM
(0) comments
So as far as I can tell, racial discrimination is legal, even if you admit to it and everyone knows you're doing it, but only if you retain plausible deniability. Is that right?It seems to me there was a case a year or two ago over a law passed by a city referendum; someone was seeking to overturn it on the grounds that the voters voted for it for racist reasons. Does anyone know what I'm talking about? What came of that, and how does it bear on this? Update: Opinion Journal puts this slightly differently: "A cynic might conclude that yesterday's decisions mean universities can still racially discriminate, as long as they're not too obvious about it." I bet you didn't know that I was a cynic.
::: posted by dWj at 11:10 AM
(0) comments
Monday, June 23, 2003 :::
Actually, before I make myself useful, a couple things about the new Harry Potter book. They aren't specific, but they might spoil a little. I made the following comments to a friend of mine on Saturday:
As a -- let's be charitable -- skeptic of the educational establishment, you're going to love the new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher.
The book also continues and expands on GoF's ["GoF" is "Goblet of Fire", the previous book in the series] press-skepticism theme.
Instapundit points to this review which goes a little deeper (though Reynolds doesn't consider it spoiler material, I do) in discussing libertarian themes of the book.
For the record, I'm about half-way through. I'll probably read a little more today, but most of my reading will be school-related.
::: posted by Steven at 12:55 PM
(0) comments
Yes, they split the baby down the middle. Based on the summaries I've heard, it sounds like they've decided that racial discrimination by state institutions is okay, as long as it's subtle.
As Orin Kerr points out at Volokh, O'Connor's (majority) opinion in the law school case is here in PDF form.
I'd be reading and commenting more, but I have a bunch of things to do, and have a bad cold. So I'm going to spend the day reading non-blog-related things, writing non-blog-related things, and sleeping.
::: posted by Steven at 12:48 PM
(0) comments
SCOTUS has released decisions on the affirmative action case; it should show up here in due course, and enlightened commentary here. CNN reportsThe high court upheld the university's use of race in law school admissions, but said the use of a point system which considers race in undergraduate admissions was unconstitutional.
::: posted by dWj at 10:50 AM
(0) comments
Sunday, June 22, 2003 :::
Instapundit suggests that good sense may be breaking out in France. I'm withholding judgment for now -- I tend to think of France as being more like this.
::: posted by Steven at 8:43 PM
(0) comments
Mark Steyn needs to learn to finish reading one book before he starts the next:
According to the prepublicity, the latest book - Living History: the Bulk Order of the Phoenix - would see Hillary rise from the ashes yet again, step out of Billy's shadow and prepare to take Housewhites back from the evil usurper Lord W Bush (as fans know, the W stands for Woldemort, but by tradition the name is never said). But instead it's mostly hundreds of pages about who Hillary sat by at the many school dinners she's attended, with a brief passage about when Billy told her about Moaning Monica. According to the book, after spending the summer golfing with Uncle Vernon Jordan, he admits to Hillary that, although he did play quidditch, he never put his bludger in the golden snitch. Hillary thinks this is a lot of hufflepuff and, although he doesn't die, Billy finds himself under an impediment curse which means that for the rest of the book he hardly gets to take his wand out at all and Uncle Vernon starts calling him Nearly Headless Bill.
::: posted by Steven at 7:57 PM
(0) comments
|
|
|
|
