Lucky Guess and Law School Rankings

Greetings and welcome back to The Un-Zone, the semi-regularly updated site on the Internet devoted to all things related to Un. It's time for yet another update from me this week.

In Land Transactions, I read the two cases he assigned, but failed to read the law journal excerpt that followed the cases. I distinctly remember the professor stating that we would be doing two cases in the textbook the day before. I was probably wrong. As you may guess, based upon that assumption, I didn't read the article. Well, imagine my surprise when he asked me a question about the law journal excerpt in the textbook. Some people in the class might find it hard to believe that I didn't read the article but came out with such a great answer to his questions. Rough approximation of conversation follows...

Professor: "Mr. Un, what is the chain of title theory."
Me: "If you can trace the chain of title back to the beginning, then it's presumed to be good title."
Professor: "That's correct. Now, Cross' article is very hard to understand and students have trouble understanding it. Now Mr. Un, can you give a one or two sentence summary about his article?"
Me: "Um...Cross' article states that the chain of title system is bad."
Professor: "Could you expand on that?"
Me: "A person could have possession of the land and have legal right to it, but lose because they didn't file..."
Professor: "That's exactly right. A brilliant summary of the article." (Goes on about the article.)
John (while professor is talking): "Did you even read that article?"
Me: "Um...no. I just saw the title and just made a common sense guess at the answer."

I couldn't have answered the questions he asked any better, even if I had read the article. I was pretty lucky today. At least I read the cases, which is more preparation that most law school students put into class.


US News and World Report have finally come out with their new rankings for universities and graduate schools. Apparently, the University of Kansas School of Law has risen up from its lowlier position last year of 100. Now it is in a seven way tie for 70th place along with such illustrious schools like the University of Oregon and the University of Denver. I've never heard of the University of Denver before this. At least it's better than last year when we were ranked with even more schools I've never heard of.
I still don't understand how in the world they figure out these rankings every year. The magazine gives their general methodology online on how they figure out this stuff, but I seriously doubt they rank law schools in this manner. In my opinion, I think they use a random number generator and produce lists in this fashion. It's the most viable hypothesis I can come up with.
For instance, two years ago, KU was ranked 63. It then suddenly changed to 100. This year, it's now 70. The administration at the School of Law blamed it on the formula and how it calculated the employment rate. Apparently, this accounted for the dramatic drop in the rankings. If you look at the formula the magazine uses, employment rate accounts for 18 percent of the total score. I seriously doubt that this is a viable reason. A change in that number, when everything else was the same or similar, caused a drop of nearly 40 places? I don't think so. This year, due to an increase in people finding jobs meant a jump of 30 places? I don't think so. That's a bunch of bull.
And now, Harvard University is now number 3, when it had the number one spot last year. What was the reason for that drop of two places? Bar passage rate? Highly unlikely. I seriously doubt any of those reasons caused the drop in the rankings. They only dropped down two places. If it were Kansas, it would be what, twenty? Harvard still has a magical reputation, a high employment rate, and disgustingly high GPAs and LSAT scores. They can afford to lose a little bit, whereas a school that's not Harvard-level loses big time.
My conclusion is that magazine rankings are a bunch of bull and the methods they use to calculate them have the same stench.

That's all for now.

Random Websites

Greetings and welcome back to The Un-Zone, the semi-regularly updated website on the Internet for all things related to Un. It's time for yet another scheduled update, just so things don't get too stale. This update is all about some of the stranger sites I've found on the Internet.

This first is a self-described site devoted to "stuff you'd never need to know but your life would be incomplete without." You get to learn about Aspirin, Q-Tips, a man who made things out of matchsticks, and why being a male honeybee is not a good thing (after you mate with the female, your genetalia explode). Just so you know.

This site is well...strange yet useful, if you ever wonder if that jar of peanut butter is "safe" to consume, despite it sitting in the fridge for several months. I do not vouch for the accuracy of this table, but it might prevent food poisoning of a most painful sort. It's a lot more accurate than the "is it growing fuzz" test that some might use. There's other weird stuff on this site also. Something about Discordianism...

A look at security guidelines from the National Security Agency. Enough said. There's some other interesting stuff on that site also.

Need some information about Urban Legends? Then check this site, which has information about lots of hoaxes and urban legends. Or you could go to Snopes.

That's all for now.

Friday Update

Greetings and welcome back to The Un-Zone, the semi-regularly updated site for all things related to Un. It's time for another update to this site.

March Madness is coming closer to the end. I didn't expect Duke to lose to LSU, but other than for Bradley and George Mason (big surprises) making it as far as they have done, things are going as I thought they would. So I spend a lot of time watching college basketball. When it comes to students attending KU, it's quite common. I still think Connecticut will win, though UCLA is playing very well right now. My Final Four at this moment are Texas, UCLA, UConn and Villanova. I probably will be wrong. Just what I am thinking right now.

The College Board still can't get it done right again. I guess "SAT" stands for Sucking (at) Administrating Tests. Yes, the acronym isn't totally correct, but it will work for now. I guess the high school seniors who took it in October will have to go through the nightmare again. What fun it must be to be an admissions officer at a colege right now...or the company responsible for grading the SATs. How hard is it to grade Scantron tests?

According to the current Bush administration, there is no conclusive evidence that global warming exists. But there is quite a bit of evidence to show that global warming it does exist and humans aren't helping. Like the "magically" disappearing glaciers. Of course, glaciers go through cycles, but this is a little too much. I guess Glacier National Park will have to be renamed one of these days...

The DMV gives you a little booklet that tells the rules of the road. Like what a certain sign means and how to make turns. Apparently, people are so confused when making left turns, the Department of Transportation is considering new guidelines on making this process easier to understand. I'm not sure how it can be made any easier. Let the confusion begin...

Obvious news. Playing your music so loud that other people can hear it is an annoying thing when at work. It's even worse if you sing the song out loud. Other obvious things mentioned in the article:
1. It makes for a bad office environment
2. It might be a safety hazard, especially if one works in a factory with dangerous machinery like forklifts
3. It's distracting to others

Lawyers behaving badly in Australia and here in the United States. One is a plagiarizing magistrate and the other was indicted on charges of bankruptcy fraud, child pornography, and obstruction of justice. . They're not making the legal profession look better...

That's all for now.

It's the Media's Fault

Greetings and welcome back to The Un-Zone, the semi-regularly updated site for all things related to Un. It's now time for an irregularly scheduled Spring Break update.

President George W. Bush now blames the media for the low poll numbers supporting the War in Iraq That Supposedly was a Mission Accomplished but for Some Reason is Still Going On, but Technically Isn't a Military Conflict Despite Soldiers and Civilians Getting Shot At or Blown Up or Etc. Apparently, because the media focuses too much on the violence that is going on over there, and not enough on the progress like schools being rebuilt and other improvements made. Great logic. The media is to blame for the low poll numbers. If it weren't for the pesky media, Iraq would be a much better place and everybody would support me in everything I do. It's obvious liberal bias. What the...?
So, when the media states a fact like 2,318 (at the last count) American soldiers have died and nearly 20,000 were wounded and the government does less for them when they come back home (due to budget cuts), the Pentagon has messed up on giving them armored vehicles and body armor, and the US gets caught torturing (not according to the administration) Iraqis at Abu Graib, it's the media's liberal bias? When a soldier gets injured by a roadside IED, it's the media's fault that gets broadcasted? OK...let's flip coins here.
If the media only reported things like schools were being built and didn't point out US casualties, what would G.W. Bush say? That there is a conservative bias in the media? Um...no. He would praise the media for their even-handedness and their obvious care for reporting the facts (Something G.W's administration can't handle or find like WMDs).
Let's be "fair and even-handed" with sharing the blame (This is meant to be sarcastic.) If it weren't for those pesky terrorists, there would be no IEDs. If it weren't for those Iraqi citizens who just can't dodge bullets and shrapnel and who can't select a place that's safe from car bombs, there would be no civilian casualties. Hey, if it weren't for those US soliders who can't magically detect bombs and who can't deflect flying metal, there would be no military casualties. No casualties, no stories about the quagmire in Iraq that's turning into a civil war between Shiites and Sunnis. There is absolutely no blame to be placed on the Bush administration, as President G.W. Bush, in his own words, does not make mistakes.
The last time I checked, only God is perfect and therefore, does not make mistakes and G.W ain't God. Though he pretends to be in his consistent state of arrogant hubris and vanity that pathetically covers up his ignorance and inability to face the truth, despite it not going the way he wants it to be. Arrogant pride and vanity, aren't qualities in a born-again Christian or a Christian of any sort. Then again, I might be reading the Bible wrongly or I got the incorrect version.
How is the media supposed to sound fair and even-handed? Just fail to mention the pesky little details like US casualties? Ignore the truth? Pretend it didn't happen and cover it up just like Abu Graib (though according to the administration definition, it isn't torture unless the pain level approaches that of organ failure or death. Then again, dead people don't feel anything. If an American suffers the same as those in Abu Graib, it's called torture and barbaric behavior. If it happens to an "enemy combatant," then it's not. How do you explain the difference? Just change the definitions)? I can imagine the news...

"Today in Iraq, a new elementary school was opened in Karbala. Please ignore the following, as it may cause you to think poorly of the administration. In other news, a car bomb killed 33 children who were attending the opening ceremony of that school."

OR

"The new power station in Baghdad is functioning at 100 percent today. The citizens of Baghdad are now able to use the electricity without six-hour blackouts for the first time since
the beginning of the war. If you would like to know more about any US military casualties, the media is unable to broadcast this news as it is undermines the US military policy in Iraq."

It ain't the media that's causing Americans to doubt the Iraq War. It's what the administration is doing that's causing the problems. Even if the media didn't broadcast casualties, people, both US and Iraqi are still dying in Iraq. You can't stop that from happening. Unlike the plastic soldiers that you and Rumsfeld play with (and probably played with to plan this mess), real people die and don't come back to fight again.
That's all for now.

Spring Break Update

Greetings and welcome back to The Un-Zone, the semi-regularly updated site on the Internet devoted to all things related to Un. It's time for an update, as it's been a while since I've posted an entry on this blog.

It's March Madness...and there are quite a few irate KU men's basketball fans. The Jayhawks got knocked out in the first round to Bradley, a team from the Missouri Valley conference. I know the team is young, but come on...first round...again? To a team beginning with a "B" again, I might add. I hope this doesn't become a reoccuring pattern next year. And another thing, the KU band should not play Fall Out Boy's "We're Going Down". I know the song is catchy and all, but they lyrics are describing the basketball team's NCCA tournament: "We're going down, down in an earlier round/Sugar we're going down swinging..." It might become the official Choke Song of KU Men's Basketball. I'm sure that next year, the NCAA selection committee will put KU as a 5 seed playing some team beginning with a B like Belmont or Ball State. The only good thing I can think of (and it is sarcastic, mind you) is that going out in the first round means that it eliminated the chance of losing to Bucknell again (who is still in the tournament). Go figure.

I wrote a question to my Professional Responsibility professor (required for the participation grade). It somehow managed to get turned into the question posted up by my professor as the discussion question on the PR forum. I apologize for submitting this question as it is a real mind-twister. I should have sent in a much easier one, but then again, I have a habit of asking the tough questions...

The weather in Kansas is messed up. It's supposed to snow quite a bit on Monday and Tuesday. Enough for the weather service to issue a Winter Weather advisory. It's officially spring on Monday. Last week it was a freaking microburst and this week it's going to be snow. Two weeks from now, who knows what will pop up next? I'm guessing a momentous deluge of near-Biblical proportions. Either that or a heatwave...

Oh, the ABA will be coming to school. Accreditation check. We'll get accreditation...barring some mishap of immense magnitude. I'll keep the blinds down and neatly dusted, keep the furniture in the same spot, do a litter-watch, and...list goes on. Or I could just show up to class, pay attention, and ask pertinent questions. Not as if that mattered with the ABA Accreditation people...It's common sense, you know.

That's all for now.

Early Publication

I enjoy writing for the Brief-Brief, the student-published newsletter for the University of Kansas School of Law. I've evolved (possible un-evolved/devolved/something like that) from writing humorous articles based upon a theme like Thanksgiving to writing biting and satiric articles that poke fun of the law school and everything that I find annoying or pointless or useless. I'm the guy who writes articles that say what people want to say but won't say out loud. Like the random way tests are graded to what law classes are really like.
As a satirist/humor writer/gadfly, I tell the truth that some people do not want to listen or recognize. In an earlier time, I would have caused trouble and ended up being branded a warlock or a heretic or considered treasonous. I'm the little boy who tells the emperor that he has no clothes and writes about it. As I said, it's pretty fun.
Then again, you know that you've hit an iffy topic. Like writing a satiric article about the ABA accreditation process and the newsletter being published the same week the ABA visits. That's something that you don't want to publish...at least until next month. Well, since I am a gadfly, I've decided to "publish" the article that would have come out in March had the ABA not decided to visit this month on this blog. It will (according to the Brief-Brief editors) come out officially in April. But who can wait that long?

Every seven years, the ABA sends a team to evaluate the law schools for the purpose of accreditation. This is important as without accreditation, a degree from that law school isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. That means all that money you’ve spent ($319.25/$618.80 per credit hour) has been for nothing. Well, at least you got many opportunities to drink beer, so your time at law school wasn’t totally wasted. Unlike you after a TGIT at one of the many fine drinking establishments in Lawrence.
After evaluating the law school, this team talks to administration and sends their findings to the ABA Accreditation Committee. I’ve never seen a report made by them, but I’m sure I could come up with phrases that would be used. Like any document written by former law school graduates, it’s well-written legalese. As a public service, I’m offering this handy translation guide.
Every seven years, the ABA sends a team to evaluate the law schools for the purpose of accreditation. This is important as without accreditation, a degree from that law school isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. That means all that money you’ve spent ($319.25/$618.80 per credit hour) has been for nothing. Well, at least you got many opportunities to drink beer, so your time at law school wasn’t totally wasted. Unlike you after a TGIT at one of the many fine drinking establishments in Lawrence.
After evaluating the law school, this team talks to administration and sends their findings to the ABA Accreditation Committee. I’ve never seen a report made by them, but I’m sure I could come up with phrases that would be used. Like any document written by former law school graduates, it’s well-written legalese. As a public service, I’m offering this handy translation guide.

The Easy Translation Guide

1. “This law school has (adjectives here) facilities.”

Translation: “The law school actually exists and is structurally sound. There is electricity, plumbing, and running water. Lots of books in library. Heating and cooling work…most of the times. Well, it worked while we were here. Actual conditions may vary.”

2. “The atmosphere is conducive for learning.”

Translation #1: “The classrooms have chairs and flat, level surfaces suitable for writing notes or the place a laptop on without fear of it sliding off and breaking into a million little pieces.
Translation #2: “Students have told us that rooms are generally freezing cold or sweltering hot. By some miracle, the rooms are at an acceptable temperature.”
Translation #3: “By learning, we mean playing computer games, surfing the web, and sending Instant Messages.”
Translation #4: “They are actually listening (we think) to the lecture because the wireless network is down.”

3. “Students are well prepared for classes.”

Translation #1: “By well prepared, we mean well prepared for classes in learning how to make fries for McDonalds as this school should lose its accreditation.”
Translation #2: “Very few people were engaged in learning (see “The atmosphere is conducive for learning”, Translation #3). We think the administration and professors told the students to look good. Any time this behavior shows up, it’s a suspicious sign.”
Translation #3: “Students are not hungover from a weekend of drinking.”
Translation #4: “Since you are a low ranked school according to US News and World Reports, we had extremely low expectations of your school. You’ve somehow managed to exceed our expectation. Then again, they weren’t that high to begin with, so don’t pat yourself on the back too much.”

4. “Students actively participate in class.”

Translation #1: “The professor calls on people randomly and asks questions in the traditional Socratic Method.”
Translation #2: “They were awake due to large amounts of caffeine. I can’t manage to stay awake.”
Translation #3: See “The atmosphere is conducive for learning,” Translation #3.
Translation #4: See “Students are well prepared for classes”, Translation #2.

5. “The school provides a wide variety of activities for its students.”

Translation #1: “A student can pad their résumé to look attractive for future employers, assuming future employers hire students from this school and the rankings don’t drop any lower.”
Translation #2: “Attend a club meeting and get free pizza! Free stuff is good.”
Translation #3: “There were numerous flyers posted informing students aboutTGIT at .”
Translation #4: “How in the world do students here learn the law in a proper manner to pass the bar exam?”

6. “This site evaluation team recommends that receives accreditation from the ABA Accreditation Committee.”

Translation: “It’s highly unlikely a school fails to receive accreditation unless they are repeat offenders in being a lousy school. Please resume operation of your lawyer processing plant until we meet again in seven years. Have a nice day.”

I hope the ABA doesn't see this one. That's all for now.

In the News...

Greetings and welcome to The Un-Zone, the site for all things related to Un, or at least stuff that this blogger finds interesting. It's a good day for news.

Badly-written movies or novels have predictable plots. One of the plot devices involves discovering that the main character has an "evil" twin brother who is doing all of the bad acts like robbery or murder. In today's New York Times, the story notes that the ex-aide to President G.W. Bush, Claude A. Allen, has a twin brother. Interestingly enough, this twin brother named Floyd had a history of "running into bad times."
Mr. Allen denies all charges saying it "was a mix-up concerning his credit card." Um...I don't know. You get caught trying to fraudulently return stuff you didn't bought and it's now a mix-up? I guess that when you're around G.W. Bush, Carl Rove, and Dick Cheney, you kind of forget about being the "straight and narrow" guy. Talk about bad influences...

I've been a Sci-Fi fan. I enjoyed the original trilogy of Star Wars. The prequels, however, left something to be desired...like using the Death Star to destroy Skywalker Ranch for ruining the Star Wars series. Jar Jar Binks. Enough said. Now they're going to extend the travesty by making a TV show. I hope they freeze this dud like Solo in carbonite.

It took the death of Milosovich for the UN to realize that war criminals might die and that Khmer Rouge leaders responsible for the death of nearly 1.7 million Cambodians might die also. Twenty eight years after the fact. To quote from the Reuters article:

"We all know that the possible accused all are aging, so we really have to start the process as soon as we can," Michelle Lee, the U.N.'s deputy director of the court administration preparing the trials.
No date has been set for the trials of the surviving leaders of the Khmer Rouge under whose rule an estimated 1.7 million people were killed or died of forced labor, starvation or disease between 1975 and the end of 1978.
But Halen Jarvis, the tribunal's Australian spokeswoman, said at a ceremony for the signing of an agreement on the logistics of the trials that everyone involved wanted them to start soon.
"Not only for the possible accused, but also the victims and Cambodians who are waiting for justice, everybody needs to move forward quickly," Jarvis said.
"And of course this concern is heightened by the death of Slobodan Milosevic over the weekend," she said.

Considering how fast the UN operates, the critics might be right. They people responsible will die free men without ever having to face a judge. Oh, and what about Darfur, Uzbekistan, and many other places? Of course, I don't advocate hasty action, but you've got to think that 28 years is way too long.

With all of the emphasis on the war against terror, the United States government is focusing efforts on keeping America safe. By catching Vietnam War draft dodgers who went to Canada. Isn't that a good way to spend money? Prosecute people who dodged the draft over thirty years ago. I guess the war on terrorism has been won...

On a related note to the war on terrorism, the Moussaoui sentencing trial has been put on hold. Not because the defendant performed one of his outbursts, but because a government lawyer had improperly coached witnesses. Not that the government would purposely violate court order, a restriction commonly used in death penalty sentencing cases.
The government lawyer, Ms. Martin, e-mailed FAA witnesses because the prosecution created "a credibility gap that the defense can drive a truck through." Make sure you that hammer the fact that the carriers could have prevented all short-bladed knives from going through. Assert that the FAA "did not necessarily need to wait until we got all available information, that we acted independently, indeed we thought that we had a statutory mandate" because the defense will try to make the FAA look clueless. Oh yeah, and don't admit that the government knew of Al Qaeda plans to fly planes into buildings, despite evidence to the contrary. Here are some ways to skirt the truth...You mean that I can't do that? Oops. Sorry. My bad. I shouldn't have done that. Besides, we admitted we made a mistake and this is the second time we messed up. No harm, no foul, right? Just let the defense do a tougher cross-examination and everything will be all right...
It's too bad that they four of the seven were going to be used as WITNESSES FOR THE DEFENSE. Even the prosecution's argument is full of holes that a defense lawyer could drive a truck through, to use the government lawyer's words. The government's basic argument is as follows:
"If Mr. Moussaoui would have told us the truth about his involvment in 9/11, we would have done more to protect the airports and this tragedy could have been prevented."
OK. Let's look at the facts. The FBI and CIA were monitoring the hijackers several years before 9/11 ever occured. They had the transcripts in Arabic with the Al Qaeda members talking about this plot. The CIA and FBI just so happened to downsize the number of Arabic linguists and told the ones that remained to slack off, only because the department heads wanted more money. Basically, if the department looked like it was being overworked, the department could justify getting more money later. The entire intelligence community, put simply, messed up.
Even if they did have more latitude in intercepting phone calls, the government didn't have enough translators. If they had more information about the plot, there's a good enough possibility that the government wouldn't have stopped the plot. That's looking at the government's argument at face value. Objectively. Which, I might add, is how the President wants justices to look at the Constitution. Literally. Too many "what if's" infest the chain of logic. Too many "would have" and "could have" in the chain. Using the same chain of logic, if the CIA and FBI would have done better in processing, sharing, and using information about Al Qaeda plots, the government would have focused their priorities better and would have done more to protect the airports and this tragedy could have been prevented. Same conclusion as with Moussaoui, but with the government being involved in the chain. Two differences. The American government wasn't actively a part of Al Qaeda (though we did give money to the mujahadden that became the Taliban) and nobody is going to put government officials on trial for criminal charges...
Not that I'm saying Moussaoui doesn't deserve to go away as a free person. He deserves to go to jail for what he's done. But I am saying when it comes to the government, they're doing a good job at messing up and I wouldn't trust them when it comes to protection. Think about Hurrican Katrina and "we didn't know about the situation and if we did, we would have done better." Or any of the other messes. You can't trust the government when it comes to these things. Their record isn't that great.

That's all for now.

March Madness

Greetings and welcome to The Un-Zone, the site for all things related to Un. It's time for an update to this blog.

The weather in this part of the world has been interesting to say the least. Nothing like seeing a grill roll across a yard, a fence fall down, leaves flying everywhere, and shingles getting ripped off of houses. And all of this at 8:05 AM on a Sunday. Not that I was surprised by this, as I was already awake at 6:00 AM.
One would expect when this sort of weather strikes, the meteorologists would adopt a serious tone while on the air. The meteorologist on KMBC Channel 9 brought a few laughs (from me) and most likely, a few complaints while taking about this weather situation. She was smiling while saying things like "70 miles per hour gusts and large hail." It's kind of like seeing a national news broadcaster laughing while talking about a serious topic like a war going on. Then again, meteorologists tend to overdo things. Ted Textor of KCTV Channel 5 makes a severe thunderstorm sound like the end of the world and Gary Lezac of Channel 41 tends to OVER-EM-PHA-SIZE AND EX-AG-GER-ATE when talking about the weather. When it's the summer, he enjoys using phrases like "It's HOT, HOT, HOT" or "DID IT HIT A HUN-DRED? FIND OUT WHEN I DO THE WEA-THER!" That gets annoying. Real quickly.

Anyways, the Kansas Jayhawks won. They didn't suffer from the traditional problems that they normally do. The ball handling was pretty good, with some miscues. Their 3-point shooting was better than normal(it saved them a few times). The free-throw shooting, which tends to be a problem every year (2003 Championship game for example, 12 out of 30) was much improved this time. The defense was very good, with a few mistakes here and there. Shot selections was good. The team also didn't give up the lead, which happened earlier in the season. I was on of those people who wondered what Coach Bill Self was thinking, but it worked in the end. I did notice some problems, but all-in-all, the Jayhawks did a very good job with a team full of youngsters.
The team will be an X-factor in the Big Dance this year. The seed they got, #4, isn't that bad considering the year they had. If they play well, with all the cylinders going at full steam, they could make it deep into the tournament. Possible Final Four if the chips fall right. If they play poorly and make a bunch of mistakes, which they are prone to do, it could be an early exit. KU has a lot of talent, but sometimes, it shuts off and things go south quickly.

Rock Chalk Jayhawk KU!


Time to go. That's all for now.

Websites

Greetings and welcome back to The Un-Zone, the site for everything related to Un. It's time for an update.

Green Hall can feel like a jungle sometimes, and it's not related to the tactics that students use to get a high GPA. I'm talking about the temperature. Some classrooms during the warm months can feel like a jungle. It gets crazy sometimes. Like it being 85 degrees outside and it being 85 degrees inside. Well, it could be worse. Scientists at Sandia National Laboratories managed to produce gases with a temperature of nearly 3.6 billion degrees. Then again, if you paid this much every year, you would expect the HVAC system to work a little more consistently.

And something a little more creative. Really cool sidewalk art. Though I have to admit that some pictures do not show up sometimes for some reason.

Easter Island, home of the stone heads, might have been settled later than thought. This implies that the settlers messed up the place in a shorter amount of time according to this article. Not that we can learn anything useful from this...

The comic strip Dilbert pokes fun of corporate America and the ubiquitous feature found in nearly every office building, the cubicle. The inventor of the original cubicle, designed something more functional and much better looking than the current design. He now regrets it. You can thank Steelcase, Knoll, and Haworth for turning the cubicle, a smartly designed office space into the edifices they are today.

Wow, as a person living in the state of Kansas, a state that keeps changing its science standard every time there is a State School Board election, South Carolina doesn't bow down to the Intelligent Design or Creationist forces. It kept its science standards (promoting evolution) the same. If only Kansas would learn this lesson.


That's all for now.

ABA Accreditation and Facebook

"And (I always feel like)
(Somebody's watching me)
And I have no privacy
Whooooa-oh-oh
(I always feel like)
(Somebody's watching me)
Tell me, is it just a dream"
-"Somebody's Watching Me", Michael Jackson with Rockwell Gordy

Greetings and welcome back to The Un-Zone, the semi-regularly updated site for all things related to Un. Well, at least stuff that I find particularly interesting when I semi-regularly update this site.

Spring Break is a little more than a week away and everyone at the law school is wanting to get away from the casebooks for one glorious week. I'm sure that a large number of students will be consuming large amounts of alcohol in warm, sunny places like Mexico. Others will be spending their time sitting in front of the television and watching the college basketball spectacle called March Madness. I will try to enjoy Spring Break as much as possible.
After Spring Break, it will be time to return back to the semi-real world, as law school, at some times, seems a little too bizarre to be considered real. It's like a little stain in the space-time fabric that doesn't seem to go away after repeated washings with Chlorox and Tide and OxyClean. It also means that the ABA will be visiting KU Law to evaluate whether or not the school will receive accreditation.
For those who do not know much about law school accreditation, the American Bar Association(ABA) has a website that explains the process. Basically, the ABA sends a site inspection team. This team visits the law school, looks at the facilities, sits in classes, and makes sure that certain ABA standards are met. Just the normal stuff that would be important in having a decent law school. It's a once-every-seven-years thing that the ABA does. It's extremely rare for a law school to lose accreditation, and even then, there is a gradation. One gets put on probation and if enough changes aren't made, then the school loses it.

In order to prepare for the ABA people, the administration and professors have politely asked students to be extra-prepared for classes and to pay attention. This means trying NOT TO DO certain activities. The following is an including, but not limited to "try not to do this while the ABA is here" list:
1. Sending Instant Messages
2. Writing e-mail
3. Playing computer games like Solitaire
4. Surfing online
5. Taking naps or sleeping
It looks bad if students actively engage in such activities and the ABA site committee notices them. It might mean the difference between getting accreditation or not getting accreditation. Even if the school gains accreditation, it looks bad.

I don't take a laptop to law school as I try to limit the number of distracting activities while in class at the law school, so I am not involved in these temptations. Yes, I have found that sometimes, classes can be tedious, but I trudge on and keep focused. I don't think that wireless Internet access should be turned off or limited to certain areas in the law school. Hey, if you want to use the Internet while in class, that's fine with me. It's your life and you paid to come here. If that's how you want to spend your tuition money, that's perfectly cool.
The law school has gotten heat from prospective students who claim that they were turned off from KU Law since they sat in a class and saw that students were online. This activity happens in many other law schools with wireless Internet access. I know some people at other law schools and they send e-mail and surf the web while in class. Even at the prestigous schools like Harvard Law School.

Of course, some students will find it hard to resist the temptation, especially when they're in a lecture that is steaming down the tracks to Boredom Station. They might want to go online and visit Facebook or MySpace or any other amusing site. Which brings me to this Shakespearean parody I wrote for my online novel. It's part of a chapter devoted to the Facebook phenomenom that has taken over colleges. It can be extended to the basic question of whether to go online while the ABA site team is at KU:

To Facebook or not to Facebook, that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in law school to suffer
The drones and prating of terrible lectures,
Or to log on Facebook against a sea of boredom
And by web surfing end them. To nod, to sleep--
No more--and by a sleep to say we end
The headaches and the thousand sleepy yawns
That flesh is heir to. 'Tis a caffinated
Beverage to be drunk. To nod, to sleep;
To sleep, perchance to dream. Ay, there's the rub...

And that's a question that many at KU Law will face. No matter what the students at KU Law do, the ABA site evaluation team is watching.

That's all for now.

Judicial Smackdown

Greetings and welcome back to The Un-Zone, the semi-regularly updated site where the blogger rambles on topics of interest. At least in the mind of the blogger.

In law school, you read a whole bunch of cases in really big casebooks. One could build an effective exercise program by utilizing casebooks. They probably weigh five or ten pounds each so one could get an effective workout. Most of them are pretty dull, except for the ones written by judges who let loose standards of decorum taught in most Lawyering classes. The "fair and objective" standard of writing that tries to avoid sounding too confrontational or overbearing. This is an area that I tend to have problems with, as I tend to stray towards the "objectionable" side of legal writing. I always want to insert in snide comments. Which makes my only outlet the Brief-Brief at this moment. Or this blog.

I recently stumbled onto some cases that read like Simon Cowell of American Idol fame wrote them. One justice in particular, Judge Samuel Kent of the US District Court writes some real zingers. For instance, in Labor Force, Inc. v. Jacintoport Corp., 144 F. Supp. 2d 740 (D. Tex. 2001), he writes:

"A]ny person with even a correspondence-course level understanding of federal practice and procedure would recognize that Defendant's Motion is patently insipid, ludicrous and utterly unequivocally without any merit whatsoever. Worse, it is just plain blatantly wrong in light of the unambiguous language of a decades old federal statute and veritable mountains of case law
addressing venue propriety."

His opinion in Bradshaw v. Unity Marine, Corp., 147 F. Supp. 2d 668 (D. Tex. 2001) is loaded with scathing quotes that make both lawyers look like total fools:

"Both attorneys have obviously entered into a secret pact--complete with hats, handshakes, and cryptic words--to draft their pleadings entirely in crayon on the back sides of gray-stained paper place mats, in the hope that the Court would be so charmed by their child-like efforts that their utter dearth of legal authorities in their briefings would go unnoticed. Whatever actually occurred, the Court is now faced with the daunting task of deciphering their submissions. With Big Chief tablet readied, thick black pencil in hand, and a devil-may-care laugh in the face of death, life on the razor's edge sense of exhilaration, the court begins."

Here is his view of the Defendant's Motion:

"Defendant begins the descent into Alice's Wonderland by submitting a Motion that relies upon only one legal authority…. Defendant, however, does not cite to Erie, but to a mere successor case, and further fails to even begin to analyze why the Court should approach the shores of Erie…. A more bumbling approach is difficult to conceive--but wait folks, There's more!"

He lambasts the Plaintiff's counsel with equal vigor. Apparently, the counsel did a lousy job of doing proper legal research:

"Naturally, Plaintiff also neglects to provide any analysis whatsoever of why his claim versus Defendant Phillips is a maritime action. Instead, Plaintiff 'cites' to a single case from the Fourth Circuit. Plaintiff's citation, however, points to a nonexistent Volume '1886' of the Federal Reporter
Third Edition and neglects to provide a pinpoint citation for what, after being located, turned out to be a forty-page decision…. The court cannot even begin to comprehend why this case was selected for reference. It is almost as if Plaintiff's counsel chose this opinion by throwing long range darts at the Federal Reporter (remarkably enough hitting a nonexistent volume!)."

"…[T]he Court commends Plaintiff for his vastly improved choice of crayon--Brick Red is much easier on the eye than Goldenrod, and stands out much better amidst the mustard splotches about Plaintiff's briefing. But at the end of the day, even if you put a calico dress on it and call if Florence, a pig is still a pig."

His footnotes are even better:

"n3 Take heed and be suitably awed, oh boys and girls--the Court was able to state the issue and its resolution in one paragraph…despite dozens of pages of gibberish from the parties to the contrary!"
"n4 In either case, the Court cautions Plaintiff's counsel not to run with a sharpened writing utensil
in hand--he could put his eye out."

Pure genius. Or this paragraph from US v. Martin, just decided by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals which looks questionably on government lawyers. There is no cite available at this moment:

"In fact, at oral argument counsel for the United States was asked if he could explain to the Court what types of offenses or common planning the government would concede to be related for the purposes of sentencing. Counsel had no idea. Instead, counsel spoke of such sophisticated planning that it believes is required under our case law that, in my opinion, only two types of criminals would be able to benefit from it: (1) perhaps a white collar criminal who keeps detailed records of the entire plan or (2) the James Bond movie villain, who prior to carrying out some grand scheme of world domination/annihilation, feels compelled to explain to anyone who will listen and in great detail (with intermittent villainous guffaws), each of the steps necessary to achieve his plan."

But snide remarks are not limited to the opinion. Footnotes, as seen above, can be a goldmine, especially when they quote movies. This lovely opinion from the US Bankruptcy Court has a footnote quoting from the classic Adam Sandler film, Billy Madison. What will they think of next?

That's all for now.

Words

"The most important things are the hardest to say, because words diminish them"
-Stephen King

Greetings and welcome to The Un-Zone, the official website on the Internet for all things related to Un. Accept no other imitations. Today's update is another one of those philosophical posts that will ramble to some conclusion. Please let me indulge in this hard-to-break habit.

I don't express myself very well when it comes to speaking. The gift of gab, as some might call it, is just that--a gift. Some practice--OK, quite a lot of practice--is required, but natural talent is needed. I could become a silver-tongued orator...if I practiced speaking for a million years and even then, I probably would feel like I needed more. Supposedly, according to Irish lore, a person who kisses the Blarney Stone will get this gift of being a natural speaker. I'm of the opinion that I could engage in tonsil hockey with the Blarney Stone and not get anywhere. It won't help.
I probably, wait, I know I lack confidence with my abilities, but I can't help it. I guess I am one of those people I self-describe as "cynical realists." There is a literary style called "magical realism" where people accept magical events happening in everyday life without a bat of the eyebrow. I accept life knowing that the cynical view of life--the road that leads to the world of half-empty--most likely will occur because someone else drank from the cup before I did and the situation won't change any time soon. It's a bad philosophy of life, but someone has to follow it. Let's just say I ain't a person who sees the world with pink-colored lenses.
However, I do consider my writing skills to be much better. The Lawyering professor I had might disagree with my personal assessment, but I don't consider their opinion to be of much significance. In the real world, lawyers do not write in the style they teach. Which defeats the purpose of the class. I digress. For some reason, when I write, my hand (or hands) operate at the same speed as my mind. When I talk, things fall apart. My mind works faster than my mouth which results in me ending up with an awkward pause, trying to get back on track. Either that or I speak before I've given serious thought about it, which happened a lot when I was younger and still happens now (less frequently). You know, the "Did I just say that and oh God, I did and now I look like a wacko and I hope you all forgot what I said" moments where everyone looks strange at you. It happens as I get so caught up in a moment that I have to say what I feel like. My comments tend to be sharp and they tend to irk/annoy/hurt people's feelings/verbally give a smackdown to other people. It can be entertaining, though I try to keep the more vindictive/wacky comments to myself. On a sidenote, I think it might be a good career move if I ended up being a TV judge in the vein of Judge Judy.
Some find this concept weird. I'm known to be a quiet person, but most people only remember the times when I go off and lauch several zingers. Like at the Women in Law Pub Night when I did impressions and pulled out a couple (quite a few) decidedly un-PC jokes in a deadpan. Or when I went off the wall in Constitutional Law and derided the Bush administration on their definitions of "justification" and "torture." Blunt sarcasm is a good thing, but it has limits.

When it comes to expressing how I feel, that's a different story. I have problems with that. With the tendencies I have to say mean things (which tend to be the truth most of the times, though I say stuff out of anger and frustration) or amazingly dumb things, I clam up a lot. Which prevents a lot of problems, but sooner or later, I just let loose and put simply, the proverbial "all hell breaks loose." I've done a good job and things haven't gotten out of hand...yet.
It can be a bad thing...this tendency to clam up. Which doesn't work too well when you like someone of the opposite sex and you don't have the guts to walk up to them and say it. When I do have the guts to say it (much, much later), they're gone or they've found someone who could actually say it/show it. Which might explain a whole lot. When that happens, there goes another wasted opportunity. And I move on to another and another. You just can't walk up to a person in a relationship and say, "Hey, I liked you and I didn't have the nerve to tell you, but now I do. You going to TGIT tonight?" and expect nothing to happen or for things to stay the same. At least it doesn't work in the movies or in books and in real life. So I guess that the operating principle of "better unsaid than said" works in these situations, but I might be working under a faulty assumption. Can't change what's happened. And no, I'm not going to name any names and make a bigger fool of myself...as if that's possible. Oh well.

I've already written too much. That's all for now.

The Un-Zone Weekend Edition: Oscars 2006

Greetings and welcome again to The Un-Zone, the site for all things related to Un on the Internet. Visiting this site on a regular basis has been unscientifically proven to provide a sufficient dose of Un to last until your next fix. Plus it's safe for work and school, unlike some other sites you might be visiting.

The Oscars are tomorrow. It should be like all the other Oscar ceremonies. There will be many long, boring acceptance speeches that thank everyone, including the hairdresser, the makeup people, the lighting people, the caterers, etc. despite the 45 second policy they try to enforce. There will be Joan Rivers, a monument to what can go wrong with too much plastic surgery talking about fashion. Does anyone see something wrong with that? I mean, it's sort of like Fred Phelps giving a talk on tolerance with respect to homosexuals or a Hamas member talking about coexisting with Israel. She's not the first person I think of when talking about fashion or beauty.
Even with Mr. Stewart of The Daily News, I seriously doubt the ceremony will be entertaining or for that matter, worth watching. You know there will be multiple jokes about Brokeback Mountain and gay cowboys. You can't milk any more jokes out of that topic. Someone will make a speech critical of George W. Bush and his policies in Iraq. I'm thinking if George Clooney wins, he'll make one. At least one person will cry while making their speech. An old Hollywood veteran will get a lifetime achievement award.
It will be the traditional Hollywood gives themselves a pat on the back show. Utterly worthless and devoid of any real significance, but millions of Americans will watch it. Actors who get paid millions of dollars playing a teacher will get paid. The real teacher on the other hand, will get paid significantly less and will not get a second of attention. Nor will they get a $30,000 gift basket. As if the actors needed any more stuff than they already have. The morning "news" will devote ten or fifteen minutes to what people wore and who won, treating it like it's a major event worthy of coverage while serious news gets put off on the wayside. You know that they would rather do this mindless "news event" than serious reporting like what's happening in Iraq or Washington DC. It's a lot easier to report and you still get paid several million dollars a year to report it. Which proves that the news is not about news stories of actual value, but topics that get the most viewers. This leads to the general ignorance of the American public at large. Not that it really matters.
Hell, the President of the United States does not watch the news and look where it got him. People watching CBS knew more about the situation in New Orleans than he did. Things look good in Iraq and Afghanistan. Michael Brown of FEMA is doing a heck of a job. I honestly didn't know about the port deal until now. We're doing everything to support our troops, but I didn't know about the body armor problems until now. Everything in his world is going perfectly fine, despite evidence to the contrary. Ignorant of nearly everything, but absolutely sure on everything. Not that it matters. Then again, it's not like the average American knows what is going on in the world. More Americans probably know which celebrity is supposedly dating Nicole Kidman than what is happening in their own city. No wonder why people voted for him. As the pundits say, you always vote for the person who you can relate with. You've got to share something in common with them. Ignorance and simple-mindedness are things people can relate with.
Of course, the Oscars and other awards show that pander to the average American, appeal to the average American because they require little thought to digest. What's so hard about looking at "celebrities" in dresses and suits? Then again, one can also factor in the mindless and idiotic American obsession with "celebrities." Apparently, these shows are appealing because they allow people to escape their world and for a few hours, pretend to live the life of a movie star. Which, in my opinion, if it hasn't become obvious by now, is mindless, idiotic, and stupid. For a more detailed post on this topic, read this post that I wrote on this topic.
My predictions for the Oscars are that someone will win and a bunch of other people won't. Millions of Americans will spend time that could have been spent being productive at work blabbing inanely about who wore what. Millions more will be ignorant about world and local events. Don't watch the Oscars but read the newspapers instead. You might learn something of value.

That's all for now.

Comedian

Greetings and welcome to The Un-Zone, the site for all things related to Un. It's also the homepage for the growing number of The Cult of Un members. You all should join as there are no initiation fees or embarassing ceremonies. Plus it's a whole lot cheaper than therapy and without the guilt.
I'm off on one of those philosophical/rambling post-type moods, so you are all warned. This might be a real long one. As if my other posts were short in any fashion. Not that it really matters. I digress.

According to Voltaire, the noted French author of Candide, "God is a comedian who performs to an audience too afraid to laugh." I tend to agree, though my choice of analogy would be different. I think of God as a playwright directing an absurdist-existentialist comedy. We're all audience members and actors wondering why the plot makes no sense and if the instructions we're receiving are real or made up. Every so often, there's a moment of clarity when everything makes sense, but it's quickly consumed by the mass confusion.
I'm not sure where I belong in this crazy comedy called life. Am I one of those bit players who has a few brilliant lines and quickly fades away, or am I a passive audience member or am I a guy with a more important part but doesn't realize it? I can't even tell if this is a moment of confusion or clarity. Then again, this might all be an elaborate practical joke. I expect God to appear, showered in a blazing halo of light. When God finally shows up, God will act like Alan Funt and say "SMILE! YOU'RE ON CANDID CAMERA!" or whatever the equivalent is called in Heaven. Yeah. God would explain that this is all a giant mixup and I was supposed to be a handsome billionaire dating a supermodel. Either that, just like in the Book of Job, this was all a wager he made with Satan and I had proven God to be correct. "Hey, no tough feelings. Because you've done so well, you're getting big rewards."
Even under that situation, I get the feeling that there's something missing, like the even bigger and crueler punchline. You know. Just when I get the feeling that life will be a whole lot better, it gets taken away. "April Fools! Gotcha!" Not that God has that kind of humor, but you've got to wonder.
I've got a good memory and that is an understatement. I also have the particularly bad habit of dwelling on the past and well, it gets to be problematic sometimes. I also tend to be cynical. I also tend to get angry at things that really shouldn't bother me but do. Things also trigger things in my mind and I wander off and the situation gets so bad that I have to post my mental train of thought onto this blog that seemingly, for some reason or another, at the end, makes some sense. Or at least has some kind of underlying theme.
You would think having a good memory is a good thing. it is, but it gets to be a hinderance when you have a habit of being cynical and you dwell a lot and brood alot and you think as much as I do. Especially when you think about how the most unlikely people get together and you're wondering how is it that you're single. Just liek the following from Michael Buble's "Anyone to Love":

Seems like I'm living a lie
So there's a game I just won't learn
And I wonder will I always be alone
I take a sip and wonder
Why I haven't anyone to love

Yeah, I've figured out why. Only because I've thought about it and when I think about things, I'm usually right about such things. I can list them off, but I don't want to bore you, if I haven't already. I have this nagging feeling that even if I changed what I thought was hindering me (and I'm sure of what the problems are), it wouldn't make that much of a difference. Sore of like what Billy Joel sings in "A Minor Variation":

More of the same thing
Don't even hurt it's been part of the pattern
But still in all it's a small consulation
I just define it as a minor variation

Or in "That's How it Goes" sung by Michael Buble (a great crooner in the style of Sinatra):

But I don't know life will get better
I am sure they know,
Sooner or later it shows, I know
That's how it goes

I don't know. I'm just hoping that this path isn't leading me to a giant practical joke. If it is, I'm wondering what the punchline is. Hopefully, the laugh comes like this when I'm looking back at how pitiful things were and how much better they are now as in Buck Owen's "Save The Last Dance For Me":

And don't forget who's takin' you home
And in whose arms you're gonna be
Oh, darlin' save the last dance for me

I think I've done enough for today. That's all for now.

Something on Fred Phelps

Greetings and welcome back to The Un-Zone, another blog taking up a slice of space on the Information Highway. It's time for another update.

I'm amused by what Leonard Pitts, Jr. writes in his syndicated column. His article about FEMA and Michael Brown was funny. His article about his twelve year old son getting involved in an accident was touching. But this article takes the cake. It's all about Fred Phelps, the anti-gay crusader who makes Kansas look like a breeding ground for psychotic ultra-conservative Bible thumping bigots. Not that the State Board of Education has done this unwanted promotion for the state already with its science standards.
Anyways, back to Fred Phelps, the Baptist "pastor" (Calling him a "pastor" or any term of relgious leadership is an insult to religion. I can think of many other terms, but I doubt that they would be printed.) that claims that God invented IEDs to kill soldiers that protect the United States and it's immoral values. If it weren't for soldiers fighting for an "immoral country" in World War II, he most likely would be speaking German, singing Deuchland Uber Alles, and celebrating the anniversary of the Munich Beer Hall Putsch. Though I have to admit, I can imagine Fred Phelps doing a Seig Heil to a picture of Hitler. Nazi Germany did send homosexuals to death camps and I think that Fred Phelps, in his hate-filled little world might advocate such actions if he had a chance. Yeah. I forgot to mention "free speech," a concept that the immoral United States has. It allows Fred Phelps and his "church" (if you take the term very loosely and pervert it to an extreme) to spout off his homophobic vitriol. Yes, there are certain restrictions like time-place-manner, the Brandenburg Rule, and so forth, but I think that the general idea, at this moment, is good enough. If Fred Phelps considers the United States immoral, I wonder when is he finally going to leave the US. I'm thinking that people in Kansas would gladly donate money to send him off to whatever country he thinks is less immoral than the US. I digress.

Anyways, Leonard Pitts wrote this article about what fuels Fred Phelps. His answer: Fred Phelps is gay. Yep, in Mr. Pitts' opinion, The Phelpster has climbed up Brokeback Mountain and rode a few cowboys and got some interior decorating tips. I'm not too sure about the interior decorating tips, as I'm sure Mr. Phelps hasn't gone beyond "Going to Hell Red" and white. If you've ever looked at his signs, they only use those colors. I digress again.
To quote from his article:

Well, I don't think he's as crazy as he seems. Heck, nobody could be. No, he's not disturbed. He's just gay.

Hear me out. How often have we seen public moralists railing against that which they themselves secretly indulge? Think Jimmy Swaggart with his prostitute. Think Dr. Laura's pose in the nude. And for goodness' sake, how many times have we seen homosexuality condemned by those who
turned out to be closeted themselves? There was Pat Robertson biographer-turned-gay-activist Mel White; Spokane Mayor James West, who spent his days opposing gay rights and his nights in gay chat rooms; and Gary Cooper and Michael Bussee, who founded a group that purported to cure people of homosexuality but gave it up when they fell in love with each other.

Not that it would make any difference in the behavior of Fred Phelps. He still will continue to be an ardent homophobic nutjob who protests at funerals until the day he dies and meets his maker, whoever that happens to be. In all likelyhood, I'm thinking it is Satan. You can't explain anyone who hates anybody that much by saying "God created them." The Bible does say "Let us create man in our image." This gives credence to the "God works in mysterious ways." I'd hate to think that.
Thinking of Fred Phelps as the Spawn of Satan seems more satisfying. He's the wolf in sheep's clothing, but is doing a bad job at it. A person who can be filled with that much hate has to be devil-spawn. It might explain why he can spout off such hateful rhetoric. He twists the Bible to suit his own purposes and sadly enough, people believe him. It's quite common.
Shakespeare once said in The Merchant of Venice, Act I, Scene 3:

The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
An evil soul, producing holy witness,
Is like a villain with a smiling cheek,
A goodly apple rotten at the heart.
O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!

Most Christians denounce Fred Phelps' teaching as unorthodox and inappropriate. Even the Southern Baptists, one of the more conservative Christian sects consider his teachings as hateful and incorrect. The following is from "ondem Sin - and sinner" by Robert Stacy McCain:

“The slogans that Fred Phelps and his group are promoting are unscriptural and very inappropriate,” says Dwayne Hastings, director of communications for the Southern Baptist Convention’s ethics and religious-liberty commission. “Southern Baptists stand on the word of God in believing that homosexuality is wrong and that, as the Bible says, it’s an abomination to God. But God does not hate the homosexual…. To those who are unaware of the orthodox Christian view of homosexuality, Fred Phelps presents a distorted and, in fact, perverted view of God’s word in his message of hate.”

Finally, to quote from Reverend Dr. Byron E. Shafer's sermon delivered on February 29, 2004 at Rutgers Presbyterian Church:

Certainly, the most dangerous of all the temptations that confront us are those buttressed by the devil’s ability to cite scripture in ways that cloak the falseness of evil and injustice in a goodly
appearance.
This Lent, as we are called upon to face down temptation, I pray that we may succeed in fulfilling an admonition given to us by the apostle Paul (I Cor. 16:13), one of those admonitions from scripture that Satan has never cited and will never cite. For it starts like this: “Keep alert, stand firm in your faith, be courageous, be strong.” And then it concludes with these memorable words: “Let all that you do be done in love.”
So this Lent—and indeed throughout your whole life—whenever you find yourself confused or tempted by Satan, I pray that it will be some words suggested by the Bible that come to your lips: “Let all that I do be done in love.”

I think I smell some fire and brimstone coming from Westboro Baptist Church, whose website address reflects the Fred Phelps message. Ah, it must be a Gateway to Hell, just like the old Stull Church and Cemetery. Though the demons that lived inside were imaginary, but the ones over at Westboro Baptist are real.
Fred Phelps, if he stumbles upon this, or Mr. Pitts' article, will probably hate this. It's his right. Just like his right to spout off hate-speech. Just like my right to write this. We won't see things exactly the same way, but that's the great thing about America. Trying to get away with this stuff in China is a whole lot harder.

That's all for now.

An Olympic Update

Greetings and welcome back to The Un-Zone, the site for all things related to Un. It's time for a semi-regular weekend update to this blog. It's all about the Olympics, or the Visa and Chevrolet Primetime Promotion Sports Unspectacular.

There's nothing like the Olympics. Or so it used to be before it became an over-hyped, over-commercialized, overly-dull not-so-much-of-a-sports event. There's something heartwarming about watching Nike commercials involving a drunken, underachieving, fake-philosopher skier; Chevrolet commercials that whore the Olympic march; and inane commentary that detracts from the sports. In total, the Olympics aren't a showcase of elite athletics, but stupid STFU commercials and stupid STFU commentary with some sports thrown in as an afterthought.
To bring people up to date on the Olympics, an event that less people are watching. NBC wonders why. I guess the amazingly annoying commentary, the frequent ads, and the tape-delay are not to blame for the lack of success according to NBC. It's the lack of "good angles" they can repeatedly talk about over and over again until you want to shoot the TV. Think Tonya/Nancy or maybe the Salt Lake scandal. Yeah. Earth to NBC...your broadcasts suck. Plain and simple.
A recent USA Today article failed to mention any of these more-obvious problems. They had 10 "solutions" to make the Olympics more interesting, and none of the obvious problems were solved. Their solutions were "let's put in experts who know the snowboarding lingo and have them blab inanely about the performances" and other dumb ideas. What ever happened to STFU for more than two seconds and let the viewers see the action? You can stick in your comments and dumb graphics after the performance. Or before the many and frequent commercial breaks, thanks to NBC, which stand for Nothing But Commercials/Crap when the Winter and Summer Olympics roll around every two years.

Sasha Cohen pulled a Cohen and fell not once, but twice, during the long program. It seems like she always falls during the long program. I guess she did what the experts predicted, but much earlier than usual. I really hate the new scoring system, as a person who fell and in general, did miserably, can get a medal if they stick in enough jumps to make up for their flubs. At least in the old system, people who fell, in general, didn't get a medal. Not even a bronze. Unless everyone else sucked and fell also. Thankfully, the gold medal winner from Japan stayed on her feet. If she fell, it would have been choosing from the better of three flawed performances. Either that, or some unknown dark horse would have won.
Bode "I did well subjectively which counts" Miller bombed on the slopes and did not medal. Zero medals in five events. His last name and his proclivities towards drinking booze is so apt. It brings new meaning to the phrase "Miller Time" when he skis and drinks. Or when he drinks before he skis. Though I'm pretty sure he wouldn't drink Miller as he does Nike commercials. Maybe a nice European import. He can be a brilliant skier, but his Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance schtick is pretty annoying and quite possibly, the most false thing a person can say. "It doesn't matter if I don't get a medal. I give it my all when I go out and ski. I'm an individual and it doesn't matter what others say about me or my performance." Yeah right. STFU. I don't believe that patent BS and nobody else should either.
The last time I checked, athletes didn't go out to the Olympics to watch the scenery. They go out there to do their best, represent their country, and hopefully, win a medal. Bode Miller had done very well in world competitions (assuming he stayed on his skis and actually completed a race) and for him to say "it doesn't matter if I win" is crap. Even the people who don't medal go out there to win. Even those who don't have a prayer and end up last do their best to win.
Yes, everyone does their best and gives it "their all." Bode Miller would never give less than a hundred percent effort when he skis. Everyone might be able to give 80% effort and win a medal, even gold. OK...that's nice...and your point? If not practicing at all, partying all night, getting drunk, and hitting the bars is his idea of "giving it all," then his "100%" ain't worth jack squat. If spouting philosophical bullshit and drinking beer were an actual Olympic event, then he'd easily win the goal. Anyone else who tried the "I gave it my all" and did half of what he did (the boozing), they would get fired immediately and searching for a new job. He's done a lot more practice in drinking than in skiing. Resume your drinking Bode; it's the only thing you're good at. Hope that the DUI slalom is an event in Vancouver.
The USA Ski Team touted themselves as the "Best in the World" with Bode as the one to watch. I guess the Austrians and everyone else showed Team USA who was the real number one. Yes, Team USA was number one, but not in skiing. More like number one in over-hyped.

The closing ceremonies are on Sunday night. Bode Miller might show up...if he isn't hungover from a night of drinking. Bode, now that you've shown your amazing talents in skiing, you can resume drinking with skiing on the side. Unlike in the slalom, it's OK to go through the gate leading to the stadium. Next stop on the Olympic Train is Beijing, China, where I hear the USA basketball team might actually show up, make baskets, and play defense unlike in 2004.

That's all for now.

Research on Dancing

Greetings and welcome to The Un-Zone, the only site on the Internet devoted to all things related to Un.

It's amazing what great discoveries researchers at universities make. Researchers up at Rutgers have completed a remarkable study. After much time doing computer-generated graphics, video-analysis, and much time, they have come up with a result that will change the world. Their amazing conclusion: men who can dance well generally have a better chance at attracting females. Not only do they attract more females, but the more desirable ones (i.e better looking ones). Yes...that's the result of their research.
Wow...that's an amazing conclusion. There's got to be a Nobel Prize for this seminal and life-altering research. Most likely, an IgNobel Prize.
Given this conclusion, one can assume that a male can hypothetically, look like they fought ugly for fifteen rounds and won, but, with the right dance moves, get an attractive female to go out with him. Um...highly unlikely. Oh, I forgot one thing. Body symmetry. The more symmetrical your body is--your left side being a mirror image of your right--the more likely you will be a good dancer. If you look at research, people find body symmetry, especially in the facial region, to be attractive in mates. So yeah, the corollary is relatively true also. Ugly person equals ugly dancing.
However, this does not mean that if you look like Tom Cruise or for that matter, a Victoria's Secret model, you will be blessed with Fred Astaire dancing abilities. Dancing like you're suffering from an epileptic fit (complete with spastic arm and leg movements) may not attract members of the opposite sex, unless they stragely find the behavior ironically sexy.
Then again, it might depend on what kind of dancing you do, especially if you are a male. Imagine, I don't know, the latest so-called Hollywood Hunk in a flamboyant costume doing the salsa with reckless abandon. Something from The Birdcage. Not so good...right?

A wit once said that dancing is the vertical representation of a horizontal action. Another person once said how you put out on the dance floor is analagous to well...you get the point. I'm not so sure about that. Then again, I don't dance in public since I know I'm lousy at dancing. I'm not going to embarass myself.

As Genesis once sang:
Oh and checking everything is in place
You never know who’s looking on
A perfect body with a perfect face - uh-huh.
No, I can’t dance, I can’t talk.
The only thing about me is the way I walk.
No, I can’t dance, I can’t sing
I’m just standing here selling everything.


That's all for now.

Fear and Love

Greetings and welcome back to The Un-Zone, the site for all things related to Un. It's time for another not-so-regularly scheduled update after a period of illness. I'm feeling much better, though I'm not fully 100%.
During my sickness, I've had some time on my hands. I was surfing the web and I stumbled onto a blog. The post asked a question that many people have asked (in many forms): "When do you resign yourself to being single?" That is, when do the risks of falling in love (the heartache, the rejection, the pain, etc) outweigh the benefits? How many times do you crash and burn before you put away the wings?
So, thanks to that question and a lot of time on my hands, I have decided to make a stab at an answer. I have no qualifications as an expert on this topic, which makes me perfect. God forbid if someone takes this post seriously. My regular readers, or even those who stumbled onto this blog by some unforseen circumstance or by mistake, please excuse me for this Dr. Phil meets Bartlett's Book of Quotations post.

Those of you who have been in multiple bad relationships, you probably have the "I hate love" mentality. It's best expressed by the following quote by Neil Gaiman, author of The Sandman and Anasazi Boys:

Have you ever been in love? Horrible isn’t it? It makes you so vulnerable. It opens your chest and it opens up your heart and it means that someone can get inside you and mess you up. You build up all these defenses, you build up a whole suit of armor, so that nothing can hurt you, then one stupid person, no different from any other stupid person, wanders into your stupid life… You give them a piece of you. They didn’t ask for it. They did something dumb one day, like kiss you or smile at you, and then your life isn’t your own anymore. Love takes hostages. It gets inside you. It eats you out and leaves you crying in the darkness, so simple a phrase like ‘maybe we should be just friends’ turns into a glass splinter working its way into your heart. It hurts. Not just in the imagination. Not just in the mind. It’s a soul-hurt, a real gets-inside-you-and-rips-you-apart pain. I hate love.

Of course, after such an experience, one probably doesn't want to go though those crappy emotions again. It's quite understandable. Wouldn't it be nice if all relationships were guaranteed to be perfect? That everything about it would be just the way we wanted it? No risk of broken hearts. No risk of being hurt. Sorry to tell you this, but it's just not possible. Inherent in all relationships, especially those involving love, means taking those risks:

Love anything and your heart will be wrung and possibly broken. If you want to make sure of keeping it intact you must give it to no one, not even an animal. Wrap it carefully round with hobbies and little luxuries; avoid all entanglements. Lock it up safe in the casket or coffin of your selfishness. But in that casket--safe, dark, motionless, airless--it will change. It will not be broken; it will become unbreakable, impenetrable, irredeemable. To love is to be vulnerable
-C.S. Lewis

If you don't become vulnerable and accept the risk, your heart will never be broken by another person, but you destroy it yourself. It leads to a kind of apathy to relate to other people. One will lose the capacity to risk one's self in the hope of achieving any kind of meaningful relationship with another person. Risk is unescapable. If one person changes, the other person will change. How much is not known, but the other person will change.
It's so easy to say "I love you," but so hard to show it. People can buy flowers and dinners, but in other ways, it's nearly impossible to do.
Anything that can be seen as exposing the inner self--the hopes, the dreams, the more personal details--are seen as a sign of weakness that can be used. This stems from two types of fear that the psychoanalyst Otto Rank termed "life fear" and "death fear." The first is a fear of being an individual, the fear of being abandoned. A person with the fear throws themself so much into the relationshp, trying so hard to please the other person by being a reflection of the other person, that they lose a sense of they they really are. The second fear is the fear of losing one's independence, the complete opposite of the first. People with this fear have secret back doors installed in their relationship so they can run away if things become too serious.
Love requires courage. Courage requires being fully committed, but being all too aware that things might be possibly wrong. We might be wrong in pursuing this. This doubt is healthy. Being absolutely convinced is dangerous and unhealthy. It requires quieting the doubts of others and personal, unconscious doubts as well. That is real courage. To pursue something in spite of doubt.

When do the risks outweigh taking risks? Never. Not being capable of love is abnormal. To purposely hide yourself from love for fear of being hurt is abnormal. With love, you have to take the risks that come along with it. You have to risk being vulnerable. As Jalal ad-Din Rumi said, "Your task is not to seek for love, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it."


Well, that was a little too...well...philosophical. More regular posts will come later. That's all for now.