Seriously?
What the?
WHAT?
My Con Law professor just explained that the Mann Act is a relic past its prime. I wish.
***
Update:
Now that I have recovered a bit, I can register my disappointment. Other Boalties with whom I have spoken today have given me knowing smile or a wise nod, and said things like: "I'm not overly surprised. You know how it is with men in power."
Well, sure.
But prostitution? From Eliot Spitzer? There are many things about him that I have admired -- particularly his aggression toward white collar crime and Wall Street -- and I think my my admiration is why today's news feels like such a kick in the crotch. I have always kind of hoped to see Spitzer as US AG. Maybe even a Presidential candidate.
Well, forget it now.
No matter where you come down on the right/wrong of Prostitution, or adultery, or even the Mann Act, Spitzer's move is a special knife-wrenching kind of hypocrisy. This is exactly the kind of thing Spitzer is supposed to be against, both professionally and personally. It sounds childish, but the truth is my feelings are hurt.
He has angered a lot of people in the last decade. People hate him. People are gunning for him. And he KNOWS all this. So, what on Earth was he thinking?
In other, much more hopeful news, a quick nod goes to Boaltie David, the latest Boaltie to be interviewed at the Shark, as part of a series of interviews to include both students and faculty.
WHAT?
My Con Law professor just explained that the Mann Act is a relic past its prime. I wish.
***
Update:
Now that I have recovered a bit, I can register my disappointment. Other Boalties with whom I have spoken today have given me knowing smile or a wise nod, and said things like: "I'm not overly surprised. You know how it is with men in power."
Well, sure.
But prostitution? From Eliot Spitzer? There are many things about him that I have admired -- particularly his aggression toward white collar crime and Wall Street -- and I think my my admiration is why today's news feels like such a kick in the crotch. I have always kind of hoped to see Spitzer as US AG. Maybe even a Presidential candidate.
Well, forget it now.
No matter where you come down on the right/wrong of Prostitution, or adultery, or even the Mann Act, Spitzer's move is a special knife-wrenching kind of hypocrisy. This is exactly the kind of thing Spitzer is supposed to be against, both professionally and personally. It sounds childish, but the truth is my feelings are hurt.
He has angered a lot of people in the last decade. People hate him. People are gunning for him. And he KNOWS all this. So, what on Earth was he thinking?
In other, much more hopeful news, a quick nod goes to Boaltie David, the latest Boaltie to be interviewed at the Shark, as part of a series of interviews to include both students and faculty.
Labels: Legal Culture, Rabid Conservatives, Shiny Gold Stars
posted by Patrick Bageant at 12:44 PM
29 Comments:
Is your con law professor a member of the Empeeor's Club? Sounds like it. Maybe he/she is a relic of the past.
Anyway, thanks for the post. Interesting.
The allegation/fact that someone violated the Mann Act does not mean that the Mann Act is not a relic.
The Mann Act may not or may not be a relic, but charging people under it is definitely no longer routine. I think that's what the author was alluding to.
interesting info on faculty hiring town hall at berkeleylaw.blogspot
interesting info on shilling at wegetitalreadythereisanotherblognowattracttrafficwithusefulpostsnotleavingirrelevantanoncomments.blogspot
If I wanted to read a different blog I would already be there, could you please just stop being an annoying twit?
These advertisements make it seem like you can only be the customer of one blog that talks about boalt. The truth is whoever made the other blog is insecure that it will receive traffic unless it resorts to online cold-calling.
McWho, you're assuming that the person shilling for the other blog is the same person who runs it.
This is fun, actually. Let me give it a try.
There's an interesting post about stuff white people like over at http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/.
Which reminds me, if you're going to try to advertise, you could at least learn how to make a hyperlink...
Nothing about mentioning the other blog makes "it seem like you can only be a customer of one blog." Seems like it's actually quite the opposite. I believe that's your OWN insecurity talking.
. . . there was some interesting stuff about Eliot Spitzer over at . . . where this post started.
Hmmm?
Insecurity? I just get annoyed when people solicit in general. There is your link back to the thread topic.
Thanks, 6:13 PM (and 7:44 PM); I'm not the one "shilling" for BLB. In fact, it'd be quite counterproductive to do so, as it looks a tad desperate (no offense 3:35 PM; I appreciate your devotion) and probably just pisses people off.
As I've stated before, if I post here, it will be under my own moniker. But thanks for the false accusations, N&B mods. Real classy.
"learned hand" (?): One N&B moderator's frustration does not an entire N&B Moderator policy make. Thanks for lumping me in with those having a problem with you or your moderators shilling on this blog, or calling me sarcastically "real classy." Hell, even Patrick didn't say anything other than to refocus attention on the post at hand.
After looking back over some of your past postings on your blog, it appears to be a common theme of yours (and your co-moderators) that N&B is some orchestrated news organization that presents a well-tailored common voice and thought.
That couldn't be further from the case. I wouldn't recognize Patrick or Bekki if I saw them in the hallway (let alone actually have their email addresses) and I'm fairly certain they'd say the same about me. Hell, even Armen wouldn't have a clue differentiating me from you in real life.
If you want to post on your own page, and receive traffic by those (who may not be yourself) who shill on the comments of this blog, feel free - more power to you. [Kudos on a good faculty hiring town hall post btw.] I can see the appeal (ego, or whatever). I even thought of doing it myself. But since people come here to get their Boalt-related drama or news, so did I (and you can't debate that to be the case, as all your traffic comes from those who found out about it here).
But are we really going to be seeing your postings for the remainder of however long you still have at Boalt (assuming you're a Boalt student) on our comments sections? I've stayed out of the discussion on the topic, but even I'm tired of it already.
If you think there is a void left in some area of N&B, why don't you just fill it here? But whatever you choose, it's time [for everyone] to leave the snarkyness and discussion about this beat-to-death topic out of the comments of posts that have nothing to do with it. Thanks.
Thanks for the response, TJ. I didn't mean to lump all N&B admins in with those who accused the shillers of being BLB admins.
But I'm a bit confused by your post. Specifically, what do you mean by: But are we really going to be seeing your postings for the remainder of however long you still have at Boalt (assuming you're a Boalt student) on our comments sections?
Are you asking me not to comment on your blog? If so, why?
Also, you state: If you want to post on your own page, and receive traffic by those (who may not be yourself) who shill on the comments of this blog, feel free - more power to you.
You're implying that I somehow have the power to prevent traffic to my blog caused by those who shill for it on your blog.
Last, to respond to the invitation that I join N&B, my response remains the same: there's simply no need. I am dumbfounded as to why you criticize someone for starting a blog of their own. I don't agree with your moderation and censorship policies, and would rather express my ideas in a forum that I feel comfortable doing so in. Furthermore, to my knowledge, N&B has never had an "open invitation" to anyone who wants to join its blog (and I doubt such a policy would have positive results).
buzz buzz. maybe this is like insects. irritating as hell, yes. but ignore them and they'll go away.
back on topic. did anyone else notice NY's Lt Gov (who will take over after E.S. resigns) is legally blind? I think that's pretty neat for NY.
lol @ TJ's call for an end to "snarkyness" in an extremely snarky post.
also, its funny how the mods bash LH and in the same breath ask him why he doesn't come blog on N&B.
Blind, eh. I hear he's going to have one hell of a time accessing the ACME.com website...
I think, as part of our new World Order, the N&B Cult loves when people post here, as long as it is related to discussions here, not ads for another blog.
Hell, comments not related are fine too, I just get annoyed at the constant OH LOOK ANOTHER BERKELEY BLOG crap. The scroll on the right side of the screen indicates that there have always been tons of Boalt blogs---a blog other than N&B is not exactly revolution against "The Man."
lol at 9:58.
and 10:14 . . . so what? It's not like a website is a "place." He can still walk into the store any time he pleases.
;)
One bummer about Spitzer resigning (if/when that happens) is that whoever replaces him is unlikely to fill his big-ass shoes in the anti-establishmentarian-dust-raising area.
And if his successor is legally blind in NY, that's SURE to be true.
I was just out on a little run, having a conversation with myself (at least THAT part of me fits right in here in Berkeley) in which I compared today's news to the Craig scandal, which filled me with absolute glee for days on end, as I have mentioned elsewhere on this blog. The big themes are exactly the same: man builds a political career on a moral foundation, and then sinks his own ship with an ultimate gesture of hypocrisy. Except that Craig's tailspin brought me intense pleasure (I firmly believe he represents everything awful about this country) where Spitzer's tailspin makes me feel personally harmed.
What does that say about ME?
can't we all just get along?
i think it's time to update your berkeley/boalt blogroll. i just clicked through all of them and 1/2 are defunct or haven't been updated in >1 year.
only one that's still being updated seemed remotely related to boalt, and many of the others that are still updated are from boalt alums.
This is very true, 10:44. Mayhaps one of the slightly more tech capable moderators could handle that. We shall convene our Council with great vigor and alacrity.
10:10: Guilty as charged for being snarky in my call for an end to snarkyness (call it a lack of sleep, pent up frustration, or whatever). Hopefully the message was heard anyway. But I'll dispute your comment as to us "bashing LH". I think he's made it openly clear how he feels N&B is lacking in one sense or another. I simply wanted to correct his misapprehensions regarding the administration of N&B, suggest he contribute to fixing it, but asking him to do his part in reducing the clutter amongst our comments sections.
LH: I definitely encourage further comments on N&B - assuming they're related to the post at hand. You're clearly an avid blogger, and I'm sure you have something to contribute.
And thanks for providing further evidence that you seem to have some weird sense of the way things work around here.
Your response: I don't agree with your moderation and censorship policies, and would rather express my ideas in a forum that I feel comfortable doing so in.
What censorship and moderation policies? I think someone's a little paranoid. You don't see anyone deleting all the shilling for your blog - we're asking for it to stop, that's all.
9:58: 100% agree. Back to following that advice, starting now.
perhaps you could tell your fellow moderators at N&B to keep their comments on topic on the BLB blog...
(see MRP comment at 10:29 p.m.)
Personally, I am glad that there is *some* censorship on this blog. I think it keeps it from becoming like autoadmit. Imagine if someone got pissed off at one of his or her classmates one day, and ranted about that person on N&B (I don't think anyone would do it, but it could happen.) Wouldn't you want Armen to be able to delete that comment? That's just an example, and it doesn't look like Armen or anyone else goes through the blog and deletes anything they don't like.
I've tried to stay out of this discussion but 9:27 hits the nail right on the head. I have my name attached to this blog forever. And I'll be damned if I go down in flames like Ciolli (who posted here once...how weird). And I have been tempted to get rid of purely anonymous comments. VERY TEMPTED. I mean the VC is very heavily moderated but the quality of the comments and commenters is still fairly high.
On the other hand, anonymous comments are what make this blog. I know this. You know this. We all know this. Just read the OCIP threads to see true witticism that rises to the surface from the pits of law school hell. So far the balance I've struck seems to work well. If I piss off some loon who thinks anyone who supports the troops is a war monger, so be it. I'll sleep soundly at night with that casualty.
theres a big difference between censoring a post because it "outs" somebody and reveals their personal information and censoring a post because you don't like the sentiment it expresses (i.e. that the pro war nuts are "war mongers")
Hilarious understatement from headline of today's New York Law Journal: Prostitution Report Weakens Spitzer
That's great!
Fox News last night ran something like:
"Spitzer Caught With Hooker"
Post a Comment
<< Home