As I was sitting on the beach this afternoon, it suddenly occurred to me that Aardvark Video--a video store from my childhood that went out of business about 15 years ago, and which I haven't thought about since--probably chose that name so that it would appear first in the Yellow Pages.
God, I'm useless.
Now begins my week-long unemployment, which I am kicking off with a night-long bender. As Duff says, "Binge Responsibly."
Remember how I said last week that production values are
sorely lacking in today's YouTube ninja videos? Well, I will
admit, sometimes bad videos really are funny. Take for example
today's Ninja Wednesday clip: At first, I thought it was some
kid's 8th grade homeroom project, but it appears to be an
actual local tv commercial for home sales. The fact that they
are using a ninja to sell homes is totally sweet.
I saw the Simpsons Movie this weekend, and it was awesome. Could have used more Apu. But still, the Itchy & Scratchy cartoon at the beginning was truly genius, as was the Bart skateboarding scene. If you haven't seen it yet, I highly recommend you go immediately, before everyone else has and all of a sudden you find yourself that loser who hasn't seen it and you have to suffer a constant barrage of "Yooou haven't seeeen it yet?" Then you'll find yourself watching it all alone at the dollar theater 6 months from now, wondering why you don't have any friends. The answer is because you're a loser, and people want to be friends with winners.
However, is it just me, or did anyone else find the previews before the movie seemed, well, aimed at a much younger audience? The Simpsons isn't exactly kid fare; this is a movie that features a full-frontal Bart. I'd think I'm pretty typical of the Simpson's audience (male, late 20s), and yet they are showing me previews for the Rock's newest family-themed travesty. And then there was "Daddy Camp," the sequel to Daddy Day Care, only apparently they couldn't convince Eddie Murphy to break-away from his busy Norbit-filming schedule, so they replaced him with the now homeless Cuba Gooding, Jr. I say homeless because that is the only possible explanation for Cuba Gooding, Jr. appearing in this film. (This movie is so bad that they couldn't even convince the fat guy from Curb Your Enthusiasm to return.) The Fred Claus trailer tries to hard to make it look like it is a cross between Elf and Bad Santa. I guarantee it won't be as good as either.
Perhaps the worst, though, was the trailer for Alvin and the Chipmunks, featuring Alvin literally putting Theodore's shit in his mouth. What. The. Hell.
The point is, when you have to tell someone who doesn't watch the Simpsons that it is really an adult cartoon in order to convince them to see it, it doesn't help your case when these are the previews. For the first 15 minutes I had to endure several "I told you so" stares. Thankfully the movie itself redeemed me:
[After Bart skates by naked.] Ralph: I like men now!
Yesterday, Slate had an
article entitled "The
state of the ninja." The article is trying to be funny,
and it sort of is, but not really. It did provide a link to
this totally awesome trailer for American
Ninja however:
My favorite quote relates to the article's claim that Israel,
where two directors who produced several modern ninja movies
were from, is responsible for the modern-day ninja craze:
The Israeli affinity for ninjas makes sense when you consider that ninjas are basically supercool Jews. Both practice esoteric traditions that must be kept pure or they'll lose their power, both wear black outfits, and both can destroy much larger and more numerous opponents. The main difference is that while observant Jews spend a lot of time praying, observant ninjas spend a lot of time hiding and killing people.
[Presently, t]he ninja seems to have fallen into the clutches of the shallow and callow, fit only to be an object of mockery for sad men-children.
Until someone gets off their ass and starts making some good Ninja-related material, we all suffer.
Speaking of the Transformers movie . . .
By the way, a little word of advice to the menfolk out there:
DO NOT let your wife, girlfriend, or any other woman you hope
respects you to find out just how much you know about Transformers.
The minute you start talking about Megatron, or how Bumble
Bee used to be a total wuss, they are going to look at you
like some sort of freak/nerd combination of loserishness.
This has happened to me on several occasions. So men, save
the Soundwave conversations for your buddies.
But ladies, let me give you some advice as well: If your man doesn't know ANYTHING about Transformers, that means something's wrong with him, not the other way around. See, as a boy growing up in the 80s, it was basically impossible to not absorb a significant amount of Transformers-related information. That shit be everywhere: on TV, in the store, at school. An 8-year-old boy in the 80s simply could not escape. Thus, ladies, if your man hasn't picked up on at least the basics of Transformer lore, the real question you've got to ask yourself is: "How sheltered was he by his momma that he never interacted with other normal boys?" Yeah, that's right, he has mother issues. Good luck with that. So maybe next time your boyfriend says something like "Megatron is the leader of the Decepticons," you'll give him a hug and thank him for being normal, instead of rolling your eyes and mumbling "nerd."
Hola, amigos. What's up? I know it's been a long time since I rapped at ya, but things have been crazy around here lately. I admit it: I've been extremely lazy. It is kind of inexcusable because SJ should be the kind of place where bar studiers can come and procrastinate. But I dropped the ball. Let's hope all you taking the bar are a little more on your game than I've been.
So, not long after my last post, I took a trip to New York City to hang with some law school and college friends. As usual, it was awesome. However, I had forgotten how dirty and smelly New York is in the summertime. I mean I knew that it wouldn't be pleasant, but I'd forgotten that exact smell that hits you walking down Amsterdam at 2 AM at night, when all the restaurants and bars have put their trash out on the street. Plus, as incubators of stank, subway stations are generally unbearable.
But still, it was awesome, mainly due to the real live Kwik-E-Mart. It was about all I could hope for, given it was really just a 7-11. I got a pink frosted donut with sprinkles and a squishee. I passed on the $6 box of Krusty-O's , although it was still tempting. What was really sweet was the place was full of tourists and everyone was helping everyone else take pictures. No doubt, the Kwik-E-Mart was almost worth the price of the plane ticket just by itself.
(By the way, the next day we saw a preview for the Simpson's movie before Transformers, and I've got to say, we were on the floor laughing. Given the last 5-7 seasons, I didn't have high hopes for the movie, but having seen "Spiderpig," I can safely say it will at least have a couple of chuckles.)
We also went on a mini-courthouse tour, which is something only law nerds---correction, "law clerk nerds"---would be interested in. Really, the tour only featured us walking into the lobby of the new EDNY, and a motioning toward the general direction of SDNY. Good stuff anyway; EDNY's new courthouse is pretty impressive. Looks sort of what I imagine courthouses in Minority Report look like.
On a related note, my old job is winding down and I'm starting to look forward to my new job. When my friends visit me in August, I've promised to continue the courthouse tour, only this time we'll hopefully make it beyond the lobby area. We may even hold a mock trial, which I only want to do because I want to play with that thing that makes the static noise in the jury box. If only we had one of those at my fraternity house.
Finally, to all the bar takers: You're freaking out now. That's understandable. Just remember that in general, you've only got to beat 25% of the field. And most of you have probably never been in the bottom 25% of anything. Plus, remember that unlike almost everything else you've ever done, there is no reward for having the best bar score (well, I think Arkansas has an award for "best essays" but that's kind of ridiculous). No one is going to be impressed if you have the highest score in the state; they're just going to think you studied too much. So relax, take comfort in your preparation, and have a few shots of Jack to dull the pain.
To those who were in the bottom 25% of law school, uh, good luck?
Happy July 4th everybody! Unless, of course you are taking the bar exam this summer, in which case today is the generally accepted start of crunch time. Up until now, you've probably been taking it fairly easy, going to Bar Bri, maybe playing some golf, whatever. Don't worry, I was the same way.
Anyway, over at Clearly Erroneous, Just another law clerk has posted 5 "tips" to prepare for the bar. Long-time readers of SJ may remember that I, too, have given five valuable tips for bar preparation. Comparing the two, mine offers much more practical advice, whereas JALC's will only help you "pass," for whatever that's worth.
Right, but seriously, that CE list be crazy:
1. Pack now? Look, the bar exam is only two days long (three if you're in a shitty state or taking two different bars). Just wear the same clothes everyday. It will demonstrate how focused you are and totally psych out your fellow bar takers (let's not forget this is a competition), who will say things like, "Holy shit, that kid is so dedicated to passing he doesn't even have time to change clothes," and "I threw up a little in my mouth when I sat down and smelled the guy next to me, who clearly hasn't changed his clothes from yesterday." Of course, you'll overhear that comment and think to yourself, "Yeah you smelled me, that's the smell of victory!" Only it won't be, it really will be B.O.
Ok, it is late around here so I don't want to get into too much detail about this right now. In fact, I'm sort of thinking of writing a short article (like, newspaper/magazine article, not law review article) about this because it is kind of funny, but kind of sad, at the same time.
Anyway, as you've probably heard, President Bush commuted Lewis "Scooter" Libby's 30-month prison term. This means the conviction still stands. However, as the president explained in his statement, "I respect the jury’s verdict . . . But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive.”
So, the president, in exercising his constitutional discretion, reduced Libby's sentence. If you'll remember, the reason Libby got 30-months to begin with is because that was the low end of the advisory sentencing guidelines range. Thus, the president essentially downward departed in reaching Libby's sentence. In fact, this represents a 100% departure. If the president were a district court, almost any circuit court would reverse his decision to depart so significantly.
In fact, Bush commuting Libby's sentence brings up an interesting question: Does this case prove that there are situations where a prison sentence within the advisory guidelines range is unreasonable? Clearly the president here thought so. But what about the Supreme Court's take.
Just two weeks ago, the Supreme Court in Rita
v. United States held that circuit courts could presume
sentences within the advisory guidelines range are reasonable.
The majority opinion explains:
[T]he presumption reflects the fact that, by the time an appeals court is considering a within-Guidelines sentence on review, both the sentencing judge and the Sentencing Commission will have reached the same conclusion as to the proper sentence in the particular case. That double determination significantly increases the likelihood that the sentence is a reasonable one.
In Libby's case, the sentencing judge and the Sentencing Commission clearly reached the same conclusion as to the proper sentence. Thus, under the Supreme Court's interpretation, the D.C. Circuit would be allowed to find that that sentence is presumptively reasonable. (I'm not sure if the D.C. Circuit has adopted such a standard, but my guess is that if it hasn't, it soon will given Rita.) Does this mean that the president's decision to commute, which represents a 100% departure from the advisory guidelines sentence, is presumptively unreasonable? The technical answer is no, because that's not what the Supreme Court said; just because the guidelines are presumptively reasonable does not necessarily mean that nonguidelines sentences are presumptively unreasonable. In reality, however, I would argue that the presumptively unreasonable standard is closer to the truth. Circuit courts demand district courts thoroughly justify departures based on 3553(a) factors to an extent not required of guidelines range sentences. Moreover, you would be hard pressed to find any circuit court that would agree reducing a 2 and 1/2 year sentence to 0 months is "reasonable," no matter the 3553(a) justifications. (I would say a circuit court has never done this, but there might have been some early post-Booker cases that did this, and I have no desire to research this right now. However, I think now, almost 3 years after Booker no circuit court would do that.)
So who is right? Does this case prove that there are situations where the guidelines are not reasonable (and thus illustrating that the "presumptively reasonable" standard is flawed by giving too much deference to the guidelines in practice)? If not, has the president proven that his decision is unreasonable under the law, but that he is going to ignore the law to help a brother out? I dunno, I'm too tired to think about it right now.
Right, so the point is I think it is kind of funny that President Bush's commuting of Libby's sentence could be considered unreasonable under Supreme Court precedent. (Although obviously the president's power to commute is not subject to judicial review.) I also wonder if the president would have agreed with a district court that had similarly reduced a sentence from 30 to 0 months based on 3553(a) factors, or whether he would have used it as yet another example of liberal, activist judges.
Recent Comments