Thursday, April 9, 2009

Open Thread

Just not up for it today... sad, I know.

Wednesday, April 8, 2009

"Grounded in Law, not Politics"

-----
Claims Eric Holder in defense of his opinion find the D.C. Voting Rights bill Constitutional.

The proponent's argument appears to be a "history provides a gloss" argument:
"Supporters note that courts have often treated the District as if it were a state, addressing, for example, questions of whether D.C. residents are subject to laws governing federal taxation, interstate commerce and the right to a jury trial." -Washington Post

I find this argument extremely weak. This is an argument that admits that this bill is unconstitutional, but because the District has been treated like a State in these circumstances, it is a State and the bill can not be found unconstitutional. Past treatment of the District as a State is not a strong argument, because it does not erase the fact that the district is a federal territory. Treating it as a State does not make it a State. This seems pretty clear cut.

If they do hold that the District is equal to a State in this arena, will the NRA be able to use Heller as holding applicable to States? That may be the only good that would come of it.

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Open Thread

Work is keeping me busy, no time to post today.

Monday, April 6, 2009

Disgrace

-----
As a future lawyer, it is disheartening to see how the profession has become a mockery. Here and here are some recent examples from Wall Street Journal's Law Blog.

Did these attorney's start law school with the thought that could easily swindle new clients? Did these attorney's begin their law school education with great morals and ethics, only to worn down by the cynicism of law professors and older, more experienced attorneys? Is it the education, or the practice of this profession that corrupts so many? Or are the corrupt simply drawn to the money and power that can come with being an attorney?

Am I simply bringing disgrace to my name by adopting this profession as my own?

I am only one man, but I certainly hope and pray that I will be provided the opportunity and the God-given strength to bring to this profession the honor and respect it deserves.

Friday, April 3, 2009

To Bow, or Not To Bow

-----
That is the question of the morning.

The attacks on Barak Obama's bow to the King of Saudi Arabia appears to be quite out of proportion. When I first heard the story, and before I saw the video, I was thinking he bent a knee - Now that would be a sign of submission.

I do agree that Barak Obama's bow was inappropriate as a slight bow of the head is enough to show respect, but I'm not going to say that Obama was plainly out of place to bow in greeting. It is not simply a sign of submission. In many cultures it is also a sign of respect. Whether or not President Obama should be showing such deferential respect to the King of Saudi Arabia is a completely separate issue.

As for those distinguishing this bow from his greeting of the Queen of England: The Queen of England is a symbolic monarch with little to no power in the game of politics, whereas the King of Saudi Arabia has real political power and is an equal to the President's international stature.

Plus, can you even imagine any American bowing to a monarch of England?

Thursday, April 2, 2009

A Broken Campaign Promise

-----
that the blind masses might notice?

Obama's failure to bring change we can believe in is only quite apparent to those who refused to drink the Obamaid. Is there some hope that the masses of blind followers will begin to wake up, now that Obama has directly affected their daily lives in a way that is financially harmful?

"I can make a firm pledge," [Obama] said in Dover, N.H., on Sept. 12. "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes." -AP (emphasis added)

"No one making less than $250,000 under Barack Obama's plan will see one single penny of their tax raised," Joe Biden said, "whether it's their capital gains tax, their income tax, investment tax, any tax." -AP (emphasis added)

Unfortunately for President Obama, a tax on cigarettes will disproportionately affect the "poor"; you know, the ones making less than $250,000.

"A Gallup survey of 75,000 people last year fleshed out that conclusion. It found that 34 percent of respondents earning $6,000 to $12,000 were smokers, and the smoking rate consistently declined among people of higher income. Only 13 percent of people earning $90,000 or more were smokers." -AP

However, the Obamaid is powerful stuff. It may take several more attacks before the masses wake up from their drunken stupor.

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Negotiations

-----
The most important aspect of negotiations is the balance of rights and power. For example, if one party has all of the legal rights to enforce their claim and they have all the money, the other party will find it in their best interest to settle the during negotiations.

"In the case of Chrysler, Obama said the company must have a partner to stay in business. He gave Chrysler 30 days to reach a merger agreement with Fiat, which has agreed to build fuel-efficient cars in the United States and repay U.S. taxpayers for new investments made before Fiat assumes majority ownership, he said." -npr

This shotgun merger is not helping Chrysler is any way. Fiat now has every reason to hold out for exactly what they want. President Obama has handed the Italian company all the power they need to eliminate any legal rights Chrysler may have had. Yay globalization!

My recommendation: Chrysler management needs to suck it up and make the hard decision is file a chapter 11 bankruptcy. It is understandable that they fear for their jobs, but if they have any sense of loyalty to the company itself, they should buck up and make the hard decisions.

I can only imagine how satisfied Ford must be with themselves for turning down the TARP money. It may have been the best decision they ever made.