first, another teaser from tug of the current — this time,
talk of divorce–
she leaves the map
open on her desk
autumn equinox
walking the loop trail
the other way
birthday morning
he tells me that 53
is a prime number
Pamela Miller Ness tug of the current. Red Moon Anthology of English-Language Haiku 2004
(Red Moon Press, Jim Kacian, ed., 2005)
and, a Ness bonus from The Heron’s Nest:
winter doldrums
up to her elbows
in potting soil
by dagosan:
a dear aunt’s cluttered desk —
checking email
from her guest room
[Feb. 25, 2005]
potluck
My mentioning the FTC’s teaser website yesterday, made me
wonder what has happened to Yusuf Islam, f/k/a Cat Stevens, since he was
removed from an airplane and deported for supposed terrorist connections last
ten days ago, as reported at Mr. Islam’s website:
The UK’s Sunday Times and Sun newspapers have agreed to pay
Yusuf Islam substantial damages in respect of articles published on
17th and 19th October 2004. Both reports falsely alleged that Yusuf
Islam was or had been involved in supporting terrorism and suggested
that, as a result, the US authorities had been right to refuse Mr Islam
entry into the United States in September 2004.
“Six months after the fiasco of my deportation from the USA, my formal requests for
clarification from the authorities there are seemingly being ignored,” he said. (see the
Reuters report, and bbc.’s coverage, both Feb. 15, 2005)
Remember the cute baby’s first word in Meet the Fockers? That’s the one that comes to
mind for the sponsors of a CLE seminar on Capital Trial Advocacy in Hunt County Texas, who
thought they should be able to keep a prosecutor out. Get over yourselves and your “proprietary”
tactics! (law.com article, via LegalReader) And, yes, issue-spotters, money came from the courts
to help pay for the seminar.
Irascibly teasing my e-friends:
clearly going on my “please banish this word” list for the 2005 awards at
results for American Heritage Dictionary tells us that snarky
comes from a Dutch word for snoring. It sure puts me to sleep.
for some very good reasons — two years ago. [825,000 Google results.]
‘Nuff said.
why not? Of course anonymity is frowned upon (not teasing). There was
a big surprise for me today Googling guild mentality“> — 3 of the top four
results refer to ethicalEsq‘s post in Sept. 2003, on lawyer websites and guild
mentality. #1 was an elawyer post on the topic. I found a nice quote from
Milton Friedman on the ABA and AMA in a Mises article:
“The justification offered is always the same: to protect the
consumer. However, the reason is demonstrated by observing
who lobbies at the state legislature for the imposition or
strengthening of licensure. The lobbyists are invariably representatives
of the occupation in question rather than of the customers. True enough,
plumbers presumably know better than anyone else what their customers
need to be protected against. However, it is hard to regard altruistic
concern for their customers as the primary motive behind their determined
efforts to get legal power to decide who may be a plumber.”
Before it slips my mind, I must say that I agree with RiskProf Martin Grace:
Walter Olson has done an admirable job of explaining med-mal insurance research
a finger at the press: “the level of reporting about this particular issue seems
to be at the level of an uninformed undergraduate. . . . Most of the analysis seems
to be a rehash of ATLA or Chamber of Commerce arguments. Why don’t we see
original analysis? ”
Lake Superior State University is on *my* banished list. So there!
Comment by Evan — February 25, 2005 @ 4:29 pm
Lake Superior State University is on *my* banished list. So there!
Comment by Evan — February 25, 2005 @ 4:29 pm
Get over yourselves and your “proprietary”
tactics!
So, when prosecutors (using state tax dollars) host training sessions for prosecutors, defense attorneys should also be admitted?
Comment by Mike — February 25, 2005 @ 6:10 pm
Get over yourselves and your “proprietary”
tactics!
So, when prosecutors (using state tax dollars) host training sessions for prosecutors, defense attorneys should also be admitted?
Comment by Mike — February 25, 2005 @ 6:10 pm
Michael, Why shouldn’t both groups be allowed? How about just one good reason. Would allowing all to attend help or hinder the search for justice?
Gee, maybe we should start separating these two factions during law school. Or, perhaps, kindergarten.
Comment by David Giacalone — February 25, 2005 @ 6:25 pm
Michael, Why shouldn’t both groups be allowed? How about just one good reason. Would allowing all to attend help or hinder the search for justice?
Gee, maybe we should start separating these two factions during law school. Or, perhaps, kindergarten.
Comment by David Giacalone — February 25, 2005 @ 6:25 pm
D., I agree that both should be allowed in each other’s tax-supported courses. I wonder whether the either side would agreee.
Comment by Mike — February 26, 2005 @ 3:49 am
D., I agree that both should be allowed in each other’s tax-supported courses. I wonder whether the either side would agreee.
Comment by Mike — February 26, 2005 @ 3:49 am