February 2008 Archives

But does this strike anyone else as odd (emphasis mine)

Jurors considering the fate of a former police officer who murdered his pregnant lover and their unborn child didn't believe he meant to kill the woman in her home.

"Nobody ever felt he went there to kill her. Whatever came about, came about as a result of something that happened when he got there," jury foreman Charles Gillespie said Wednesday.

The jury determined that they would not recommend the death penalty for Bobby Cutts Jr. for the aggravated murder of the unborn female fetus. He also was convicted of the lesser charge of murder for killing Jessie Davis, 26.

It sounds like her life was worth less under the law than that of her fetus! What's that about?

Remember, I warned you not to look.

From page 3 of the March 2008 issue of the National Wildlife Federation's Wild Animal Baby magazine, a publication for very small children.

Um. Yeah.

Today, walking back from lunch:

Michael (guesturing towards a vacant-looking storefront): Hey, did you know that's a pot club over there?
Me: Really?
Two guys loitering nearby: Hey, you want to buy some pot?
Michael (laughing): No thanks.
Me: I feel like that was a real-life Google text ad.
Michael: Totally. An annoying Google text ad.

Composed extemporaneously this a.m.

Hush little baby
don't run away
Mom and dad need
a triple latte

If that triple latte don't work
Mom or dad will turn into a great big jerk...

His senior foreign policy advisor? Samantha Power, author of A Problem From Hell: America in the Age of Genocide.

Everybody else in the universe (or at least the country) has already weighed in about my hometown's latest escapade. You know, the one where the Berkeley City Council decided to give Code Pink's anti-Marine-recruiting-station protest a boost by giving them a free parking space in front and passing a resolution calling the recruiters "unwelcome intruders." So I don't need to jump into the fray and talk about how awful the war is, nor do I really need to point out that if a conservative city somewhere took the same approach towards pro-life demonstrators at an abortion clinic and offered them free parking, nobody here would think that was so cool...

but I couldn't help but flag this quote from Country Joe MacDonald, he of the "Fixing-To-Die Rag."

The issue has very little to do with the Marines and a lot to do with political grandstanding and NIMBYism, McDonald said.

"The council said the Marines can't recruit here, they should recruit somewhere else," he said. "And if there's a problem, we still want you to help us. It's astounding. It allows everyone to make fun of Berkeley again."

He said protesters on both sides are driven by "civilian guilt."

"Most people yell and scream about this issue because they're trying to show how patriotic they are," he said. "At this rate, Berkeley's going to be a damn noisy place."

I downloaded an album called Disco Not Disco from Emusic, which included a track called "Sharevari" or "Shari Vari" (depending on who you ask.) It's a bizarre techno number from Detroit, featuring somebody describing this pimptastic denizen of the club scene in a fake-Italian accent.

I just found a YouTube video of people dancing to it back in 1982. It's quite a sight to see, and I love the old-fashioned sounding TV host introducing the number...

My dad is arguing this case!

hether a $500 million damages award against Genentech Inc. stands will probably come down to whether the California Supreme Court interprets a 32-year-old contract as establishing a fiduciary relationship between the biotech giant and a research center.

That issue was the focus of Tuesday's oral argument in the long-awaited case, as the court's justices attempted to nail down exactly what constitutes a fiduciary relationship in a patent contract. All seven justices -- including 1st District Court of Appeal Justice James Lambden sitting in for recused Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar -- asked tough questions without tipping their hands about who would prevail.

Attorneys for both sides were well-regarded appellate specialists. Jerome Falk Jr., a partner in San Francisco's Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin, represented Genentech, while Peter Davis, counsel in the San Francisco office of Reed Smith, presented arguments for City of Hope National Medical Center.

It was on television too, although viewing the archive requires blasted Windows Media Player...

...that Michael Lerner stop talking or writing for the remainder of the 2008 election cycle.

Because honestly, I don't think this is going to convince anybody of anything. Except that he likes to use big windy words. And that maybe they should vote for one of those other candidates with less flaky-sounded endorsements. Honestly, what was the Chronicle thinking? Did they do it on purpose? Are they seekretly hoping it's Clinton vs. McCain, and thus they got normal-sounding people to write their endorsements?

These are the first two paragraphs of Lerner's piece.

I enthusiastically support Barack Obama, the first serious spiritual progressive candidate for the presidency. Once in office, Obama's discourse of hope, challenging narrow technocratic consciousness, will open the possibility for serious social movements to push him beyond the constraints of Democratic Party spinelessness.

Spiritual progressives want a New Bottom Line so that institutions, social practices, even our own personal behavior is seen as efficient, rational and productive, not only to the extent that they maximize money and power (the Old Bottom Line) but also to the extent that they maximize love and caring for others, kindness and generosity, ethical and ecological sensitivity, and enhance our capacity to respond to others as embodiments of the sacred and to the universe with awe, wonder and radical amazement.

Uh... yeah. Right. Please, somebody... just make it stop.

OK, now that I've looked online, it seems that the Chronicle may have run different opinion pieces in different markets. This is better...

A friend of mine forwarded me an email from her father, a staunch Fox News-consuming Republican of many years standing.

Basically... If we Democrats want the White House back, we'll nominate Obama.

Hi guys and gals.

I don't think that you should vote for Obama just because he supports Israel. I do think, though, that he's quite a remarkable candidate, in many arenas. This includes his ability to inspire not only die hard
Democrats like ourselves, but individuals like my father, who is always arguing politics with his liberal family and his friends. Take a look at the attachment, even if it's just to humor me. My father wrote a
very surprising letter, introducing information which clearly indicates that Obama is far from being anti-Semitic, or anti-Israel.

Sincerely,

Wendy

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Bloom, Elliott"

Subject: Obama is pro Israel

Hi All,
Recently I received email accusing Barack Obama of approving of anti-Semites, and being anti-Israel. I just assumed that this was another Clinton dirty trick and have obtained strong evidence of Obama's pro Israel record, and strong support from the Jewish community from the beginning of his political career. Marsha Alper, who is a volunteer for the Obama Presidential campaign obtained this material for me. I have included a PDF and web references provided by Marsha. This material indicates that it is a foul canard that Obama is not a strong supporter of Israel. He is not an anti-Semite and has been a strong supporter of Israel for many years.

I have voted Republican in all Presidential elections from the time of Jerry Ford. I ask you to join me in support of Barack Obama, the most inspiring, eloquent, and intelligent candidate for President since JFK. I will vote for him because I believe he can bring Americans together to solve the most impossible problems we have faced since world war II. If we take the path of partisanship, divisiveness, and politics as usual, the path of the Clintons, we do so at our peril as a Nation.

Best Regards,
Elliott