kazaa and Judge Moore

Gotta love the piece, today, from Marci Hamilton in FindLaw comparing Judge Moore, music downloaders, and the Catholic Church. How? The shared sense of entitlement.
I'll leave the article for you to read (quickly, she argues that downloaders, the Catholic Church, and Moore feel a sense of entitlement in their activity that lifts them above clear legal restrictions)- but here's the postscript, wherein she asserts that, maybe, the age of entitlement may be ending:

Fortunately, the Entitlement Era may be coming to a close. With more and more institutions inclined to call lawbreaking just what it is - from the RIAA's willingness to call stealing stealing, to the Boston Globe's willingness to call abuse abuse - entitlement is under siege. Lawbreaking is lawbreaking no matter who the perpetrator is - whether a church, or a state Supreme Court justice, or a college student - and increasingly, some have come to insist on that very truth.

But is that really true? Kind of absolutist- which may be right. I think she's right to say lawbreaking is lawbreaking- but should that lawbreaking carry the same meaning for each instance? Going 5 over on the interstate is lawbreaking and murdering a stranger is lawbreaking; but, these two instances of lawbreaking mean very different things- both in consequence and (as importantly) in their social acceptance/disgust.
It seems entitlement might also be another word for the way we feel when driving 5 over- and if we were punished "too severely," we would feel entitled to social sympathy. But I digress. Read the article.

I've noticed there are two kinds of people in this world-
1) those that, when on the phone, prefer to retreat to a private/quiet area in order to carry on the conversation (for two reasons- privacy and consideration of others in the vacinity not on the phone);
and 2) those that walk over to where others are sitting (on the computer, or, perhaps, reading) and carry out the conversation as if, for some reason, the third non-phone-party wished to hear the person's end of the conversation.

Just an observation.

Sebok on Moore

FindLaw commentary writer, Anthony Sebok, wrote an interesting piece on the controversy created by Judge Moore's refusal to remove the Ten Commandments statue; to wit, the question of whether the judge's disobedience can rightly be compared (as the judge has so compared) to Dr. M.L. King's civil disobedience.

In interviews, Moore has argued that he is doing no less than what Dr. Martin Luther King did when he disobeyed police and ended up in jail in Birmingham in 1963. He has also remarked, "I believe you should obey higher courts except when that higher court is not going by the law."

If we take Justice Moore at his word that this principle - rather than, say, political advancement - is his reason for refusing to move the statue, then is he correct to make a parallel between himself and Dr. King? And if not, why not?

In this column, I will argue, however, that there is a big difference between Dr. Martin Luther King's saying that he thought that the segregationist laws of Alabama were "wrong," and the Chief Justice of Alabama's saying that the federal court's interpretation of the U.S. Constitution was wrong - for three main reasons.

Those reasons are 1) The Order does not single out a minority for burdens; 2) Judge Moore is in a position ofpPower, not vulnerability; and 3) (and I think most importantly) Judge Moore is a judge, not a private citizen--as such, he has a particular obligation to abide by the rule of law.
Of interest, is Sebok's discussionof judges' reactions to the Fugitive Slave Act. Go give a read.

Warren Zevon

Just watched the VH-1 special on Zevon. The show uses the recording session for "The Wind" (see below) as a background narrative- but does well to highlight Zevon's career and his influence amongst other musicians (who appear en mass to say goodbye via collaborations on the album).
I saw Zevon once, here in Chapel Hill at the Cat's Cradle. It was during his solo tour- so he played the big hits fromsundry albums. I remember, after his last encore, he reached out to those of us that had squeezed into the front row, and shook our hands. I was probably 15 or 16 at the time, and after shaking those sweaty guitar string smelling hands, every one of his songs I heard on albums sounded different. More alive, I guess.
I wish I could give him the life that's in his music...it's sad to say goodbye to Warren Zevon. But, I look forward to hearing his rendition of Knocking on Heaven's Door in this latest release. It's out Tuesday.

In the middle of the desert...


so Vegas was truly the great plastic city it was billed to be- with a plastic antarctic to boot. These cute fellas were a few feet away from the swimming "complex" and to their opposite were several flamingos, a compulsory zoological addition given the casino's name.
My brothers and myself managed not to lose any life savings- indeed, little brother Adam won a few rounds in Blackjack; making him the designated buyer of cheap drinks for the remainder of our first evening in town. We stayed at the old chestnut, the Flamingo, for two nights- and were lucky enough to have a window looking out over the Bellagio fountains, very gorgeous. The pool was all I hoped for...a wonderland of watery fun...and was densely populated for people watching between pages of my book.
While walking along the strip is plenty fun, we made the getting of free/cheap drinks sort-of a mission. Namely, giving the appearance of heavy gambling while peeking around for a cocktail waitress is a bit of an art. One doesn't want to lose five dollars in quarters lest the acquired drink might actually be at cost. Ahh, but when they come (or when you stumble into an all drinks for a dollar bar), the life of poor grad students like me and the fellow travelors is a blessed one.

Religion and Constitution

hopefully it won't be an empty promise when i say that i'll be coming back to this Alabama Chief Justice Roy S. Moore's 10 Commandments stone several times in the coming weeks. of further hope, we can stir up some discussion and counter-rhetoric directed to my arguments.
First, a bit from the Times:

They came streaming in from all directions, wearing their crosses and Confederate T-shirts, carrying dog-eared bibles and bottles of water and enough Power Bars to outlast a siege.

One man even walked from Texas, 20 miles a day, in a frock.

Their mission: to protect the rock, Roy's rock.

Their morale: high and rising.

Today is the deadline for Chief Justice Roy S. Moore of Alabama to remove the 5,280-pound monument of the Ten Commandments he installed in the lobby of the state supreme court.

But the rock ain't moving.

Despite threats of having his state fined $5,000 a day and being held in contempt of court, Justice Moore vowed to disobey a federal court order that begins at midnight.

This afternoon, the United States Supreme Court refused to block the removal of the Ten Commandments monument.

"If they want to get the Commandments," Justice Moore said in a statement today, "they're going to have to get me first."

I listened to the Judge's first press conference a few days ago on CNN- noting his utter lack of a legal defense. Rather, it was an attack on the federal judge that ordered the statue removed. I am sure Moore has offered a legal defense in his brief--I'll try to find that before addressing the issue head on. For now, just wanted to get the ball rolling.
I welcome comments on readers' initial positions on this.
Apart from legal considerations- here's a question: Is it right (in whatever sense you want to take that term) for the Judge to treat the issue as he is? Perhaps further, how is the Judge treating this issue? Because he has refused the court order to remove the statue, I regard his defiant position as stepping away from the legal world and into a contentious political/sociological relm. What do you think?

gun law

Check out Professor Sebok's argument on why U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein's recent ruling in NAACP v. Acusport, Inc. et al., while dismissing the case for lack of standing, may have created a "raodmap" for future suits against the gun industry.

The NAACP may have lost this battle, with the dismissal of its suit, but it nevertheless made significant progress in the war to make gun manufacturers liable for gun violence. This progress is largely due to Judge Weinstein's decision to allow the case to go forward to the discovery stage.

In discovery, never-before-gathered, and never-before-analyzed data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and the defendant industries was obtained. Judge Weinstein's opinion both discusses, and - in a 13-page appendix - collects that data.

The data is damning, for three reasons. First, it shows that there are a handful of retailers who are "bad apples" in that they are supplying a disproportionate share of the guns used in crimes. Second, it shows that the industry could have done something about these dealers. But, in fact, the industry has, in fact, done virtually nothing on this score- and certainly had not implemented any of the common sense solutions the complaint in the suit outlines.

much more in the essay...

listening pleasures

Go to Susie Ibarra's website and download the "Galak" mp3- it's the Susie Ibarra Quartet, with (much admired by me) saxist Greg Tardy. While listening, surf around her site; truly a strong force in music right now. I remember seeing this group in NY and being blown away. Lets hope the quartet puts out a recording someday. Of course, Ms. Ibarra has plenty material out to hold us over..

Reading

Matthew Miller on Arnold..
Interesting pro-Arnold reading from a left perspective.

The real key - unknowable at this writing - is Arnold's view of George W. Bush and his domestic priorities. Bush's "compassionate" persona is appealing. But you have to follow policy relatively closely - or at least listen to advisers or to a wife who does - to understand that Bush's "compassion" is a marketing hoax, belied entirely by his budget priorities.

The key to Arnold's ability to transform the GOP and the national debate would be for Arnold to repudiate Bush's tax cuts as senselessly favoring people like himself when the resources should be used for more pressing national needs.

Arnold would have unique standing to say, "You know, my campaign is about California, but I've saved $X million already from the Bush tax cuts, and there's nothing wrong with asking someone like me to have paid the few percent more I paid at the end of Clinton administration - especially when it helps keep the budget in balance and funds programs for poor children."

Importantly, this view is entirely consistent with a call to scrap crazy regulations that hurt California's business climate.

This one move, because of the earthquake and discussion it would generate, would at a stroke reclaim the center of political debate from the rightward lurch that GOP zealotry and Democratic timidity have created. It could alter the dynamics of the presidential race in 2004, and policy outcomes for years afterward.

Of course, I'm hoping Davis blocks the recall wth a landslide- you'd even think it possible if the audience for Bill Mahr (Davis was on the other night) had anything to do with it.

Just back from a red eye, LA to Chapel Hill. Will have pictures and fun stories to insure material breaking off from the same ole' Owens Rhetoric politics gripes. Stay tuned...

israel blog

sadly, my last shabbos in Israel has come to an end. it was magnificent. I will
be returning to America on wednesday afternoon. I really don't want to though.
I love it here. this is the only place for Jewish people. You cat really feel
like you're in exile until you are about to return. i have experienced so much
personal growth here. I could actually feel my soul growing by the minute. i am
a different person now. but hopefully still pretty much the same. i will fill
you in when i get back. i hope you are having fun out west. if you ever wonder
what Jerusalem is like all you have to do is imagine las Vegas if everything
were exactly 100% opposite. see ya later

micah p cooper

alright...the trip blog as promised.
we are in vegas right now. no blogging till now for lack of a computer. But happily, the flamingo, las vegas, has a nifty computer feature in the hotel TV. $9 a day for internet isn't so bad, is it?
So, so far, what've we done? (i'll fill in stories later.
Spent night one in Arkansas. no stories there. night two was amarillo (where we saw Smithson's ramp), night three in roswell, NM. We didn't get abducted- but not for lack of trying.
Now we're in Vegas. I'm hungry for a steak and lobster buffet.

Alright, we leave for a cross country drive tomorrow morning. Again, I plan to blogg on the trip...but if you find this site vacant for a spell, you know the cause. Major highlights to come will be earth art in Amarillo, Roswell New Mexico, Vegas, and a personal look at the mayhem in California. Stay tuned.