Orin Kerr, who should have his own blog, points us to these t-shirts for law students. Orrin says his favorite shirt is this one. I suppose I liked this one. I'll bet, though, they sell a lot of these.
Overall, though, I think I'll stick with thinkgeek and DespairWear™. But this was the best.
Seriously now. What relevance does the attitude of uber-partisans Dick and Lynn Cheney about Kerry's debate mention of their adult daughter have?
Can't she speak for herself? After all, she's working on her father's campaign. Or is the GOP ban on Mary Cheney camera-presence still in effect?
Today's Fablog essay transcribes Giblets's rant against Cheap And Tawdry Political Tricks, to wit John Kerry's blasphemous mention of Dick Cheney's daughter's sexual preference.
Ms. Cheney is, among other things, the former gay and lesbian corporate relations manager for Coors Beer and member of the Republican Unity Coalition, a 'a homosexual activist Republican group' according to the CWA — not exactly a closeted role in life.
I can reveal, however, I have proof that Giblets is not the author of most of this essay. Indeed, other than the penultimate paragraph, the satirical part, this “Giblets” essay is materially similar to a rant I heard someone named Mickey Kaus give on NPR this morning.
Unless “Mickey Kaus” is a pseduonym for Giblets we can only conclude that Giblets listens to NPR! While adding a paragraph or two to the end of this rant transforms the meaning — from something offensive and smarmy based on innuendo and the idea that there's something wrong with being gay into a much funnier, indeed subversive, essay — one has to ask whether this sort of substantially derivative work with just a bit tacked on can be defended as parody.
My brother's column today gets into the Bush bulge watch thing:
Salon is featuring a photo today that would appear to show Vanessa Kerry staring at Bush's bulge last night.
The bulge in question is what — again — looks like a rectangular object on Bush's back, under his suit. Here's the original photo.
Mike Allen wrote in The Washington Post last weekend that Bush's aides have “tried to laugh off the controversy.”
Dave Lindorff wrote in Salon yesterday that “speculation continues to run wild” about the bulge, and that the White House's half-hearted explanations don't seem to wash.
A new poll from the Economist finds that of those who had seen a picture of the bulge, 49 percent said they think it's caused by “a radio receiver so that his team could communicate with him during the debate;” 18 percent think it's a fold in the suit; 13 percent something else; 20 percent don't know.
Tim Grieve writes in Salon that Bush campaign manager Ken Mehlman was repeatedly asked about the bulge yesterday, and finally said: “The president is an alien. You heard it here first. The president is an alien. That's your quote of the day. He has been getting information from Mars. The shock of the debate will be the president's alien past will be exposed, which is why that box is there.”
The problem with this story, as preposterous as it may sound to some, is that it risks perpetuating an image of Bush as a puppet. I think a lot of us are waiting for a definitive answer.
Someone should really ask Vernon Jordan who suggested the prohibition on photographing candidates from behind during the pre-debate negotiations and what reason if any was given. Because it's that condition, said to have been demanded by the Bush negotiators, that gives this story what legs it has. That and the consistent strangenss of the shape of the bulge. Oh yes, and the absence of a physical this year.
So, the three main things are the attempt to stop the photos, the consistent strangeness of the shape and Bush's decision to forgoe a physical before the election. Oh yes, and Bush's odd behavior during the debates.
So, the four main things that give this story its legs are the attempt to stop the photos, the consistent strangeness of the shape, the lack of a physical this Oh yes, and Bush's odd behavior during the debates. Oh yes, and also the fact that tin foil can be fun.
But no one expected the aliens to admit complicity in rigging the election for their puppet until the planet was almost unsuitable for human life due to global warming—which, combined with increased carbon dioxide and radioactivity will make it a perfect breeding grounds for
Ack. help. im beighalew2332o5 2432`72 fcds
Slashdot reports:
“Tit for Tat, the reigning champion of the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma Competition, has been defeated by a group of cooperating programs from the University of Southampton. The Prisoner's Dilemma is a game with two players and two possible moves: cooperate or defect. If the two players cooperate, they both have small wins. If one player cooperates and the other defects, the cooperator has a big loss and the defector has a big win. If both players defect, they both have small losses. Tit for Tat cooperates in the first round and imitates its opponent's previous move for the rest of the game. Tit for Tat is similar to the Mutual Assured Destruction strategy used by the two nuclear superpowers during the Cold War. Southampton's programs executed a known series of 5 to 10 moves which allowed them to recognize each other. After recognition, the two Southampton programs became 'master and slave': one program would keep defecting and the other would keep cooperating. If a Southampton program determined that another program was non-Southampton, it would defect.”
Haven't read the paper yet, but this sounds like a significant result, as the empircal superiority of 'tit for tat' is received wisdom in most accounts of applied game theory I've ever read. 'Ascription is an Anathema to any Enthusiasm' calls it delightful and suggests that,
This is the classic model of all game theory! And even in this tiny little dishpan model collaborative groups form and once they form they out compete the players that fail to collaborate. As Dave Weinberger once pointed out, we are a species that will form communities even if it means tapping out the alphabet on the wall of our cell.
I wonder if real-life applications may be limited by the difficulty of the earlier game to determine who gets which role…
U.S. Stymies Detainee Access Despite Ruling, Lawyers Say (washingtonpost.com)
More than three months after the Supreme Court declared that hundreds of detainees at the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have the right to challenge their imprisonment in U.S. courts, none has appeared in a courtroom.
Of the 68 alleged al Qaeda and Taliban fighters who have so far petitioned for access to federal court in Washington, only a handful have even spoken to their lawyers. With some held for nearly three years on the U.S. Navy base, the detainees remain largely precluded from receiving legal help because of protracted negotiations with the Justice Department over lawyers' security clearances, the government's insistence on monitoring attorney-client conversations and the number of visits lawyers will be allowed, defense attorneys told a U.S. District Court judge yesterday.
Losing in the Supreme Court has produced….no change at all.
Recent Bluessky Posts
Jotwell Blenderlaw