Saturday, December 12, 2009

Tort Reform

Michael Getnick, President of the NY State Bar Association, published last weekend, this editorial in the NY Daily News, discussing tort reform.  Having been a personal injury attorney, Getnick predictably opposes tort reform.  I neither oppose nor support tort reform per se, but would like to see it as part of a discussion about health care reform. Which is why I become so frustrated by knee-jerk reactions like Getnick’s, which exudes false exasperation.

Monday, December 7, 2009

Legislative Sneakery: A Brief Review

This article was first published on the Journal of the American Bull Moose, but since they were having a little trouble with some of the hyperlinks, I have reposted in its entirety here.

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

A Call for New Legislative Drafters

The Texas State Legislature desperately needs new legislation drafters, or at least proofreaders and editors. And it needs to stop beating the dead horse of gay marriage. A recent flare up of controversy surrounding the state’s constitutional gay marriage ban suggests that the Legislature may have inadvertently banned all marriage.

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Is Useful Political Discourse Dead in America?

I have a new article in the Journal of the American Bull Moose.  Please check it out, leave comments, etc., over there:

Brief summary:  political debate in America gave way to partisan debate, which gave way to partisan rhetoric, which has now reached its cancerous end-stage, which could be described as opposing obfuscative misinformation campaigns designed for the dual purpose of swelling the ranks of political cults and making money.

Friday, November 13, 2009

Glenn Beck’s Conspiracy-Mongering Destroys Meaningful Debate

Glenn Beck continues to spew specious nonsense in order to suppress reasonable discussion of substantive matters.  Two specific examples to follow.

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Further Replies, Responses, and Comments

Wes Brown, over at the Journal of the American Bull Moose wrote a good reply to my response to his article, which in turn was, one could say, an unintentional response to my first post here.  I responded to him via email, which the editors of JABM included with Wes's article.

The exchange can be found here:

To recap:

  1. I posted an article on this blog, stating a case for President Obama deserving the Nobel Peace Prize.
  2. Wes Brown wrote his own article, on the JABM (unaware of my article, but stating many of the things I was trying to argue against), stating a case for President Obama not deserving the Nobel Prize.
  3. I replied here.
  4. Mr. Brown responded to the arguments in my follow-up post, with a second article on JABM.  JABM included my counterargument, in its posting of Wes's article.  That two-part exchange can be read here.

Friday, October 16, 2009

Peace Prize Follow-Up

Wes Brown, over at the Journal of the American Bull Moose, wrote a good article about why President Obama does not deserve the Peace Prize. (Article found here.)  I stand by the conclusions of my previous post, but wanted to clarify a few things in light of Wes's article, and partially to respond.

Monday, October 12, 2009

President Obama Does, In Fact, Deserve the Nobel Peace Prize

On Friday I was going to write a blog post about President Obama’s Nobel Prize.  In the time since then, I have completely reversed my opinion.  Initially I was surprised and frustrated by the award; despite the fact that I tend to agree with and support Obama,[1] like many others I felt that he had achieved nothing to deserve the Prize, and that the award rendered the Prize less meaningful.  But I have been slowly coming around to the idea that the Prize is sometimes simply awarded for efforts, not concrete achievement.  So I planned to write a Monday post about that.  Sadly for me, others – more articulate others – beat me to the punch.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Judicial Credibility: Caperton v. Massey and Constitutional Recusal Requirements

Earlier this summer, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a modestly groundbreaking ruling on constitutionally required judicial recusal.[1] The case, Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co.,[2]> garnered significant public attention before it ever reached SCOTUS.  In fact, the underlying story proved so dramatic that John Grisham used it for the basis of his most recent novel, The Appeal.[3]  Caperton represents the Court’s first major case regarding disqualification of judges since the 1970s.  The Court, by a 5-4 majority, held that the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment requires a judge to recuse himself to avoid the probability of bias, and that within the framework of judicial election campaign contributions, a multi-factor test may objectively determine such a probability.

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

In Defense of Ted Kennedy

Personally, I am saddened by the death of Senator Kennedy.  I made the mistake of posting something to that effect as my Facebook status this morning.