Can someone please provide me with a rational explanation of why the possible suicide of a rich black man with whom we were so angry that we ran him out of this town can bring this city to its knees, but the 290 largely poor largely black homicide victims who live right here don't merit anywhere near the same level of intensive, thoughtful discussion?
Thanks. I'd appreciate that very much.
Friday, September 29, 2006
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Legal Ethics
Legal Ethics is the name of one of my textbooks. In it, it discusses Enron, and the law firm of Vinson & Elkins, which was the law firm employed by Enron. Essentially, the book says, "Don't do like they did."
I love that Enron and all its connected players wound up in legal textbooks. One of the strongest things a law professor can say to her students is, "Don't you wind up in the next edition." The students who hear that shudder, thinking what a terrible situation that would be.
The Enron crew has become a societal touchstone for what not to do. Every time I read about them in my book, I am reminded that in this case anyway, the spin didn't spin.
I love that Enron and all its connected players wound up in legal textbooks. One of the strongest things a law professor can say to her students is, "Don't you wind up in the next edition." The students who hear that shudder, thinking what a terrible situation that would be.
The Enron crew has become a societal touchstone for what not to do. Every time I read about them in my book, I am reminded that in this case anyway, the spin didn't spin.
Sunday, September 03, 2006
No joy in Mudville
So, just to be sure we're all on the same page here. Bob Casey is running against Rick Santorum in a very important senatorial race in Pennsylvania. Why is this particular race important? Because Santorum is an outspoken conservative who is quite powerful in the Senate and supports the war in Iraq and if he could be toppled by Democrats, it could significantly limit Republican power.
Both Casey and Santorum are both pro-life and pro-gun which effectively cancels both topics, a big drawback for those who seek to keep them on the table. But Casey has been holding better numbers than Santorum in Pennsylvania, and there is reason to believe that Santorum is a victim of a generalized national voter anguish.
So you'd think Casey would look for as much money as possible to bring Santorum down. Indeed, his site says, "This is going to be the most watched, and arguably most important Senate race in the entire country. Building early support is critical to our success." Critical.
So how come noted columnist Dan Savage can't send him money? Savage, if you don't already read him, is the writer of a weekly sex column. Per Wikipedia, "Savage reacted strongly to United States Senator Rick Santorum's statements about homosexuality in an interview with the Associated Press published April 20, 2003...In the interview, Santorum describes gay sex as part of a class of deviant sexual behavior, including incest, polygamy, and bestiality, which he said threaten society and the family. Furthermore Santorum stated that he believed consenting adults do not have a Constitutional right to privacy with respect to sexual acts."
"Savage was outraged by these statements. At the suggestion of a reader, Savage challenged his audience to come up with a sex-related definition for the word santorum as a satirical form of political protest for the express purpose of "memorializ[ing] the Santorum scandal […] by attaching his name to a sex act..." The winning definition: 'the frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex.'"
With that background, last month, Savage sent $2100 to the Bob Casey campaign. But apparently Bob doesn't need (sorry Dan) faggot money. And if Bob Casey, understanding how important the stakes are, doesn't need faggot money, he must not need my nonfaggot money either. And if Bob Casey had the stones to publish his email anywhere, I'd explain exactly that.
Yet the stakes are in fact really high. So I'm doing what Savage did, giving to Philadelphians Against Santorum, so I'll know I did what I could to send that sick* conservative beast packing.
*yes, sick. It's sick to judge other peoples' lives while bringing your own dead child home to be photographed with your other, live children and call that normal.
Sources:
http://youngphillypolitics.com/node/1284
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5406165
http://www.bobcasey.com/actioncenter/raise/?sc=2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savage_Love
https://secure.actionpotential.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=cms.viewPage&organization_id=39§ion_id=509&page_id=2364
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61804-2005Apr17.html
Both Casey and Santorum are both pro-life and pro-gun which effectively cancels both topics, a big drawback for those who seek to keep them on the table. But Casey has been holding better numbers than Santorum in Pennsylvania, and there is reason to believe that Santorum is a victim of a generalized national voter anguish.
So you'd think Casey would look for as much money as possible to bring Santorum down. Indeed, his site says, "This is going to be the most watched, and arguably most important Senate race in the entire country. Building early support is critical to our success." Critical.
So how come noted columnist Dan Savage can't send him money? Savage, if you don't already read him, is the writer of a weekly sex column. Per Wikipedia, "Savage reacted strongly to United States Senator Rick Santorum's statements about homosexuality in an interview with the Associated Press published April 20, 2003...In the interview, Santorum describes gay sex as part of a class of deviant sexual behavior, including incest, polygamy, and bestiality, which he said threaten society and the family. Furthermore Santorum stated that he believed consenting adults do not have a Constitutional right to privacy with respect to sexual acts."
"Savage was outraged by these statements. At the suggestion of a reader, Savage challenged his audience to come up with a sex-related definition for the word santorum as a satirical form of political protest for the express purpose of "memorializ[ing] the Santorum scandal […] by attaching his name to a sex act..." The winning definition: 'the frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex.'"
With that background, last month, Savage sent $2100 to the Bob Casey campaign. But apparently Bob doesn't need (sorry Dan) faggot money. And if Bob Casey, understanding how important the stakes are, doesn't need faggot money, he must not need my nonfaggot money either. And if Bob Casey had the stones to publish his email anywhere, I'd explain exactly that.
Yet the stakes are in fact really high. So I'm doing what Savage did, giving to Philadelphians Against Santorum, so I'll know I did what I could to send that sick* conservative beast packing.
*yes, sick. It's sick to judge other peoples' lives while bringing your own dead child home to be photographed with your other, live children and call that normal.
Sources:
http://youngphillypolitics.com/node/1284
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5406165
http://www.bobcasey.com/actioncenter/raise/?sc=2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savage_Love
https://secure.actionpotential.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=cms.viewPage&organization_id=39§ion_id=509&page_id=2364
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61804-2005Apr17.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)