Tuesday, February 28, 2006



Do We Want Mexifornia?
Victor Davis Hanson

Thousands arrive illegally from Mexico into California each year—and the state is now home to fully 40 percent of America’s immigrants, legal and illegal. They come in such numbers because a tacit alliance of Right and Left has created an open-borders policy, aimed at keeping wage labor cheap and social problems ever fresh, so that the ministrations of Chicano studies professors, La Raza activists, and all the other self-appointed defenders of group causes will never be unneeded. The tragedy is that though illegal aliens come here hoping to succeed, most get no preparation for California’s competitive culture. Instead, their activist shepherds herd them into ethnic enclaves, where inexorably they congeal into an underclass. The concept of multiculturalism is the force-multiplier that produces this result: it transforms a stubborn problem of assimilation into a social calamity.


To read more see the link...

Rewriting history

Inspiration is hard to come by...especially in Law school...The whole process itself isn't necessarily designed to deaden you, but it nonetheless does that. When you do things that are boring, you become boring. There isn't any way to make most law school classes exciting unless you really care about what is happening. Most of the people who are excited aren't excited about the subject, they are excited about FIGHTING about the subject. They simply want someone to argue with, beat up, browbeat, put down, humiliate, and in general serve to prop up their flaggin ego. They are rewriting history.

Rewriting history is a subject I came across while reading a website by a guy named Animal MacYoung. He wrote a book called something like "cheap shots.. and other dirty tricks". A self-proclaimed self-defense expert, his aspect of self-defense comes from the street. He is, for lack of a better, word, a thug. Nonetheless he is an intelligent thug, one who is worth listening to, as he offers sage advice on self-defense from an important perspective.

IN any case, one of the traps people fall into when studying the martial arts, and in other fields, is rewriting history. They are making up for things that happened in the past that they were hurt by. It rang true for me. All that time I spent in the dojo, honing punches and kicks and various chokeholds and joint locks were an attempt to rewrite history, in a very real way.

Except that I never really cared enough to put myself in a position to have to use it. I always saw self-defense as just that; keeping yourself safe. Thus I mastered conflict avoidance. If someone was driving like an asshole, I usually took a different route. If someone was getting loud and aggressive, I go somewhere else. Whether it was because I was afraid or just trying to avoid stress, I don't care to explore. It doesn't really matter.

It's a funny thing to realize that after ten years of throwing punches, you begin to realize, as my friend once said, how much ten years of learning to communicate may have helped you out.

Now what exactly does this have to do with law school?

Law school is a fight. Court battles are fights. IN fact, the word "trial" originally meant armed combat between two parties in order to solve a dispute. You can see this in the adversarial process of the law. There is a winner and a loser quite often. There is a judge and a jury. There is your hired gun, the attorney, and the opposing black knight, the other counsel.

And of course there are different personalities that come into the fray. Some people are simply too gentle to be attorneys. Others are so harsh and angry that they may be effective, but end up hated. Others cruise along with a zenlike ease, taking nothing personally and doing what they need to do to survive. That is the path I would take.

Friday, February 24, 2006

Wall Street

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

No protest over mosque bombing

To show how complete outrageous the behavior of the muslims protesting the mohammed cartoons are, one need look no further than the latest bombing of one of the holiest shrines in Shi'a islam in Iraq.

Watch what will happen.

The answer?


NO crowds, no threats, no meetings, no fatwas issued, no demands for justice. Nothing. Nada, zilch, zero.

Now that the cowards across the world have bent over backward trying to assuage the barbarians frothing at the mouth over the existence of free speech in non-muslim nations, we have this to demonstrate exactly how putrid, hypocritical and anti-civilization these thugs have been and are.

Saturday, February 04, 2006


Kowtowing to threats, or disrespect?

Here's a piece from the Times which is, I think, a little soft on the muslim, as is usual for mainstream sources. What this is really about is allowing members of a certain religion to threaten us into submission. This is really about liberal society, and an attack upon it. It is about free speech. To allow a segment of the world's population to burn embassies, threaten Danes with extermination against the backdrop of silence from a US President who ostensibily went into Iraq to fight such forces, is the most disgusting thing I have seen in a long time. Satire plays a crucial role in our civilization, and we should defend it to the death, because once that goes, then so does everything else.

Friday, February 03, 2006

Reprinting the cartoons

Muslim fanatics read this

The same Arabs that continually print the most racist cartoons in the world are no going crazy in the streets and threatening death to the Danes...and what is the reaction of the US? To sell out the Danes in the most cowardly way imaginable. Here is a chance to stand with pluralism and free speech; here is a chance to stand for liberal society. Here is where the line is drawn, and our leadership doesn't get it. Even Bill Clinton doesn't get it.