Ernesto and Irv

Still teaching, but not quite as sleep-deficient.


Ernesto Lecuona (1895 - 1963) was, by most estimations, Cuba's greatest musician ever. He was a composer, pianist, band leader, and a founder of the Havana Symphony Orchestra. Finding the Castro regime in Cuba intolerable, Lecuona moved to Tampa in 1960. If you have not been informed about Ernesto Lecuona, you can bring yourself up to speed here, here and here.

Lecuona's untimely death on 29 November 1963 did not receive the attention it merited because the news media of the world was still working on the grist from the death just a week earlier of another significant figure in Cuba's history -- President John F. Kennedy.


History repeats itself! My friends in Philadelphia have informed me that noted radio personality Irv Homer passed away on 26 June 2009. I had a number of occasions to listen to Irv's show, and I held him in high regard for his sincerity, and his willingness to call things as he saw them, come what may. Irv Homer was able to see the broader issues of things.

Irv Homer was a staunch proponent of the First Amendment and the Second Amendment, and was openly critical of the intrusive excesses of government, whether the FCC or the IRS.

And, having lost a young child of his own to disease, Irv Homer was an active and avid supporter of the Sunshine Foundation, a charity that grants wishes to very sick children. [Parenthetic note: The Sunshine Foundation's sponsorship of gatherings of children afflicted with progeria, a rare disease that manifests itself as rapid aging, enabled the efficient and reliable collection of blood samples which greatly advanced the medical research towards treatment and cure.].

Hopefully, Irv Homer will eventually be recognized as the broadcast industry's moral compass he was. But, like Ernesto Lecuona before him, Irv Homer must, in death, take second-line billing the media's other anointed idols of lesser worth than himself -- In Irv's case, he is a few pages after Michael Jackson and Farah Fawcett.

Rest in Peace, Irv Homer (and also Ernesto Lecuona)!

Frustrated Professor

I have been quite sleep-deficient of late. I'm out the door at 5:30 AM to teach my morning class, and then I have an evening class that ends about 9 PM. Fortunately, none of the people with whom I share an office are teaching during this summer session, so I am usually able to take a little nap during the early afternoon.

Some of my students are really on the ball, but today, two of them rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe the sleep deficiency is catching up with me and making me edgy.

The first one asked if she could just turn in the written case briefing (this is an undergraduate Law course) without having to give an oral presentation, because she is uncomfortable giving an oral presentation to the class. Note that (A) students may give the oral presentations from their seats (almost all do) instead of standing up before the class; and (B) another student in the class, who has a speech impediment, has been quite avid in delivering her oral presentations. I didn't want to get into a pissing contest over it, so I told her it would be okay. Believe me, even if I were to give her a 100% on the assignment based upon the written submission alone (rather unlikely), she is in no danger of becoming class valedictorian.

The other one (who is usually quite attentive and studious) misunderstood an assignment. The assignment entailed finding official documents issued by a particular governmental office. The specification for the documents was that they be no more than 6 months old. The four documents this student presented were between 6 and 18 months old. After I returned the assignment -- she got gigged for the older-than-specified documents -- she came to me and told me that she misunderstood because of the language barrier (English is not her native language). I told her that my own grandparents, whose formal educations did not surpass the equivalent of the sixth grade, also had a language barrier, but that they overcame it. Fortunately, I suppressed the urge to tell her "Welcome to America -- Now Go Learn English!!!" She's essentially a very personable woman, but this time she really got on my nerves. Probably the lack of sleep is getting to me.

Don't get me wrong -- I enjoy teaching the courses I do. But summer session courses are very draining for student and professor alike.
I dread tomorrow. I fear that tonight will be one of little or no sleep. And because we are rapidly approaching the end of the first summer session, the students are very, very likely to have 11th hour questions for me. I hope that they do not interrupt my nap tomorrow afternoon.

Color Us Angry

During the past few weeks, various incidents of local, national and/or international proportions have implicated the topic of Black-Jewish relationships. I do not now purport to try to solve the strained relations between the two communities, and indeed, the observations set forth in this post will (at least in the short run) likely cause some degree of discomfort on either or both sides. Just for the record, however, let my disapproval of certain straight-up racist comments that have emanated from certain quarters be noted.

And now, to stir up the hornet's nets, I will suggest that within the Jewish community there is a significant amount of anger towards the Black community. It is an anger which neither side is comfortable acknowledging; indeed, many if not most in the Jewish community are oblivious to their own anger in this regard. Consider the following:

A. Jews stood with the Blacks in the Civil Rights Marches of the 1950's and 1960's. Some even gave their lives in the fight against racial segregation in America. The incident near Philadelphia, Mississippi on 21 June 1964 is a case in point. Three civil rights workers disappeared, and their bodies were later recovered from an earthen dam. The three were James Chaney (Black), Michael Schwerner (Jewish) and Andrew Goodman (Jewish). The incident cost the Jewish community more -- both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of its membership -- than the Black community. After we did so much to end the legalized discrimination against the Blacks, they have turned upon us and support our enemies.


B. In the 1950's and 1960's, Israel sent its best and brightest to aid the developing African nations, and took the best and brightest of these developing African nations in to its colleges and universities for training. Every one of these African nations sided with the Arabs to vote against Israel!

C. We see and hear Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and all of these others spouting off their anti-Jewish garbage. Which wouldn't be so bad, except that thousands of Blacks fawn over these bigots, day and night, savoring and cheering their every word.

D. We are subjected to Black speakers who deliver venomous anti-Jewish speeches on the various college campuses, and whose speaking engagements are planned, organized and sponsored by the various Black student organizations on campus.

E. And, of course, there are the bad experiences in locales such as East New York, Mattapan, Parkside, Lawndale, Dexter-Linwood, Mt. Airy, Forest Park and other once-vibrant Jewish neighborhoods where the Blacks moved in, displaced the Jews, and made life dangerous for those Jews who remained.


In short, the Black community has too often showed gross ingratitude towards the Jewish community.


So if some Jewish youth, with the assistance of a few beers, spout off some racist anti-Black comments, then by all means condemn those racist comments (just as the anti-Jewish comments by Blacks, intoxicated or otherwise, ought be roundly condemned). But understand that the Jewish community has some real and valid gripes against the Black community in America and elsewhere, on account of the ingratitude we have been receiving.


Postscript: Some white supremacist nutjob killed Stephen T. Johns, an African-American security guard at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Officer Johns was, by all accounts, a very worthy man. The American Jewish Committee has set up a fund to help Johns's family.

There is no denying the nagging notion of the possibility that Johns's son might one day follow Black community precedent and turn against the Jewish people. But if I don't do at least something for Officer Johns's young son, then I will be no better than the Blacks who have ungratefully turned against the Jews.

And so, notwithstanding my reservations over the whole thing (including reservations about the American Jewish Committee itself), I have joined what surely will be many in the Jewish community, and have cut a check to the AJC to be used to help Officer Johns's family.

Making Simplification More Complex

I really shouldn't be posting now, because I have lots and lots of work to be completed in less than 24 hours. Most (but not all) of it is related to the courses I now am teaching. This is the Summer Session, which squeezes what normally be about 4 or 5 months of classes into a period of less than 4 weeks. So now, I am grading the assignments that were submitted last week (and I also need to get working on the Midterm Exams so that they can go to the copy shop and get back in time to be administered next week).

Summer Session, then, is intense and stressful for the students. And for the Instructor (that's me!), the intense stress is multiplied by the number of students enrolled.

I need to take a break from it all, so I'll do this posting.

The assignments I am now grading are topic selections for the Term Paper -- a "pre-Term Paper" if you will -- that run about 2 or 3 pages. One of the students has submitted a "pre-Term Paper" which concludes with the following paragraph:


"The proposed Term Paper would address a call for action, so that new administrative agencies can be appropriated to the right health care programs. These health care programs would require more administrative agencies to help acquire the flow of rules and regulations that will ensure no illegal activities will take place. More so, the need of administrative agencies is there to provide a fundamental way for everyone to get the care they need in a capitalistic society."


Okay, I do not deny that am highly opinionated, nor am I reticent to express my unpopular opinions to my classes. But I do take pains to not impose my personal opinions upon my students.

How, then, can I grade this assignment without injecting my personal and political views? The problem with health care in America is that it is so complex, and that any health care provider must interact with not only the insurance companies, but with many governmental agencies. This complexity cannot help but add to the price of health care.

I'm not so sure I understand how the creation of new governmental agencies will simplify health care, let alone reduce its cost.

So what should I write as my critique to this student's assignment?

'Tis a puzzlement!

I think I shall stop here, go to bed, and after I wake up in the morning, take another look at this student's submission.

Good night!

Spy v. Spy?

Our Shavuot holiday was inspiring but largely uneventful. Having experienced many nights of less than optimal sleep over the past two months, the sleep achieved during the holiday, though hardly the best I have ever known, was quite welcome. With my schedule for the coming month, there is little reason to expect a significant number of really good sleep nights for that period.

The news story that inspired this posting is the sentencing of admitted spy Ben-Ami Kadish, who was fined but avoided jail time. Judge Pauley wonders, as do I, why it took Uncle Sam 23 years to bring charges. Assistant U.S. Attorney Iris Lan would have Judge Pauley believe that it took the FBI that long "to put all the pieces together." But His Honor didn't buy it, and neither do I.

The case is notable mostly because the Israeli information handler dealt with by Kadish was the same one who handled Jonathan Pollard.


My comments, in no particular order:

A. Yes, Israel does spy on the United States. And the United States similarly spies on Israel.

B. Knowing what I know about military procedures relating to classified information, and about human nature in general, there is only a small, limited set of circumstances under which one might conceivably be involved in espionage on a one- or two-shot basis. Because once you begin, your handler and/or some party associated with your handler thereafter owns you, and you must keep on playing the game. I don't like having to answer to anyone, so I have always taken pains to stay far from anything resembling espionage.



C. One of the conditions of that aforementioned small, limited set of circumstances is that the temporary spy must accept no money or other commodities of value for his or her services. Quite curiously, the "facts" as agreed to by Kadish and the U.S. Attorney specifically provide that Kadish neither requested nor received anything of value for his services.

D. Yet, according to the criminal Complaint, Kadish remained in telephone and e-mail contact with his handler up until the FBI began questioning Kadish in 2008.

E. Jonathan Pollard, beyond all doubt, was provided with cash and other goods and perquisites for his efforts. It certainly was far, far more than his out-of-pocket cab fare, telephone calls and photocopy expenses.

F. More to the point, there were, and are, persistent rumors that Pollard had customers other than Israel. If this is true, then it would go very far towards explaining why the U.S. government dealt with Pollard in a manner as harsh as it did, and why Israel has been less than enthusiastic about pressuring the United States for Pollard's release.


G. When Kadish began providing documents in 1979 or before, there still was this entity known as the Soviet Union. At the time, the conflict between Israel and the Arabs was a proxy war between the USA and the Soviet Union, during which Israel used American weaponry against the Soviet weaponry used by the Arab states. More importantly, Israel, on its own and in conjunction with the United States Department of Defense, made modifications and improvements to the American weapons, to the benefit of both Israel and the United States.

H. As Judge Pauley surely suspects, there is much, much more to the Kadish story than the government is disclosing. And the obvious use of the bringing of charges in 2008, after 23 years, as a lever to pressure Israel, does not account for the whole story. I, for one, do not have sufficient information to do anything more than engage in speculative guessing as to what these other factors might be.

I. Judge Pauley inquired of Kadish's attorney as to Kadish's source of livelihood. The only answer given was that Kadish had some investments. Might there be a tax angle to this all? As a tax attorney, I can think of all sorts of taxation issues.

Inspiration or Plagiarism?

Because the courses I teach are designated as "Writing-Intensive," the Term Paper requirement is unavoidable, for both student and professor.

So, having assigned the Term Papers, I now have about a week remaining to grade them before the grade submissions deadline arrives. [Actually, it is less than a week because our great holiday of Shavuot, commemorating our receipt of G-d's Torah at Mount Sinai, will soon be upon us.]. This, therefore, will be my project for today and tomorrow (and possibly Wednesday).

The premise of Western Civilization is that we are part of a great continuum, whereby all we have is derived from those who preceded us, and, likewise, what we do will be the basis of those who will follow us. For this reason, proper scholarship dictates that the intellectual ideas and precedents we apply be acknowledged and cited. Indeed, the law review article of mine that was published a few weeks ago cites sources going back to King Hammurabi.

It is a bit of a stretch to expect law review level scholarship from undergraduate level students. Nevertheless, I do require my students to give proper citation in their Term Papers, and citational errors are viewed with greater concern than some misapplications of the spelling and grammar conventions which greatly alarmed the battleaxes who were my junior and senior high school English teachers.

Of course, I take a very strident attitude to the outright plagiarism involved in purchased term papers. These are the ones where a sentence placed in the Google search engine hits some verbatim documents. I had graded all of four Term Papers and found yet another Internet term paper vendor (whose name will not be noted in this posting, lest the site be given free advertising).

Sometimes you just know when a Term Paper is not kosher. A few years ago, I read a sentence which used the word "bulwark." The word did not strike me as one typical of the vocabulary of today's undergraduate students in America, so I googled just a 4-word fragment from the sentence and immediately found verbatim term papers on 3 different Internet sites.

Approximately one-third of my students do not speak English as their first language. It has come to the point where spelling and grammatical errors are encouraging signs because such butchering of the English language indicates that the work is the students' own. A perfectly-written Term Paper by one who was not drilled with the English spelling and grammar in the manner typical for my Baby Boomer generation in America is a waving red flag.

And, of course, I spot-check the actual citations. Some of them are ill-written, but at least I can find them. Some of the citations cite secondary and tertiary sources when they should be citing primary sources (e.g., the cited article from the New York Times discusses IRS Notice 2008-83, when the student should go to the IRS website and access Notice 2008-83 directly).

Some of the students just string together direct quotations from their sources. I can't gig them for plagiarism because they cite the sources from which the quotes were derived. It isn't very creative writing, but at least it is honest writing.


Query: Just where is that fuzzy demarcation of where inspiration ends and plagiarism begins? Does stringing together a bunch of quotes constitute a creative inspiration? Does changing a few words here and there in the quotation constitute a new work?

Along such lines, listen to the popular Neapolitan song "O Sole Mio" and compare it with Elvis Presley's "It's Now or Never."

Was "O Sole Mio" inspiration for Elvis, or did Elvis plagiarize the melody?

Orts & Ephemeris

Lots of things are going on now, so I am not postured to do any deep intellectual blogging -- at least for the next 24 hours. The following items and events have occurred, are occurring or are slated to occur:


A. A new law review article of mine has been published. Another article in a different law review is in its final editing stage and is slated for publication shortly. And a third article, not nearly as research-heavy as the two just mentioned, has been accepted for publication in a legal periodical, and is slated to appear within the next 2 months.


B. I have a court date tomorrow, and need to prep for that.


C. I have just completed administering my Final Exams. Well, almost. A greater than usual number of students didn't show up for the exams. Most of them contacted me in advance with their situations, and for these I have made or will make accommodation. Those who did not contact me in advance (and indeed, have yet to contact me) will receive a big, fat "zero" for their final exam grade. And they will go to the Department Chair and whine. But my Department Chair has almost always backed me up on this type of thing, and I would expect him to do likewise. After all, the syllabus handouts, distributed to everyone on the first day of class, explicitly lay down the rules about the need to contact the professor in advance if any accommodations are to be made for missed exams.

[This is a cultural value I picked up from my days with the Internal Revenue Service. Untimely tax returns are penalized, and extensions (at least the first one) are granted for the asking if requested before the due date. A similar world order is imposed upon my students.].

I think that the flu epidemic is playing at least some sort of role behind the higher numbers of absentees. But the rules are uneffected: Apprise the professor in advance that you are missing the exam, and reasonable accommodation can usually be made. Don't come to me after the next semester begins, as a few have been known to do, and for the first time tell me how sick you were! How long do you think you would last if you pulled that shtick with your gainful employment?

In any event, I am now grading the exams. I am going blazooey, so posting this is my much-needed break.


D. Speaking of Final Exams, our son has completed his, and is now moving his chattel goods from the dorms and back home. There goes the privacy my wife and I had enjoyed. Awshucks!!


E. Notwithstanding item D above, our son will be away with friends this coming Shabbat. Not to feel lonely, though. We have four houseguests slated to come over and visit, including our fatso friend, referred to as "He" in prior postings (here and here and here and here). As for the dining dynamic described more fully here, we will sort of be evenly matched: 3 fatsos and 3 non-fatsos (though the excessive adipose tissue on one of the guests counted in the "fatso" column has only been acquired relatively recently). We're looking forward to it.

Benedict's Travels & Travails

As Pope Benedict XVI's visit to Israel was approaching, I became attuned to some of the controversies that came up within the Jewish community. For various reasons, I decided at the time to sit this one out. But this evening I found myself participating in a very charged conversation with several acquaintances, and realized that the whole matter has been obsessing me, whether I admitted it or not. I need to vent!

And so, I will, of sorts, weigh in with this posting. There is no expectation that this posting will win or lose me any friends or enemies, nor change anyone's viewpoints, nor resolve any of the controversies. And I make no pretensions whatsoever of being neutral or objective. What I do purport to do is to identify some of the complicating issues that serve to make the controversies complex if not intractable.

First and foremost, the Pope's constituency is not the Jewish people. The Pope's constituency is the Catholic Church and its adherents (and the Catholic Church is in no way a monolith). It is unrealistic to expect the Pope to be a champion of the Jewish agenda (if such indeed is susceptible to definition).

The very establishment of the State of Israel had theological repercussions within the Catholic Church. A people whom the Church had always viewed as accursed Untermenschen had achieved statehood. It was -- and still is -- theologically simpler for the Church if the Jewish people would simply be eliminated. But there was a practical side, because the Church's holy sites in the Holy Land stood a better chance under a regime of the Jews than under a regime of the Muslim Arabs.

There is no denying that Jewish people have long suffered at the hands of the Catholic Church. We are not just talking the Crusades and the Inquisition, but it goes all the way down to the personal in the present day. Specifically, many if not most Jewish people in America have had negative childhood experiences of one kind or another involving kids from Catholic schools. From my conversations with many, many other Jewish people, I have concluded that I lucked out in this regard, for while my own negative experiences with the Catholic school kids were not particularly remarkable (and in fact I had many positive childhood experiences with Catholic schoolboys), many other Jewish kids of my generation were not so fortunate.

[Disclosure: My higher education includes a degree from an institution run by an order of the Catholic Church. Never for even a fleeting moment did I ever regret the decision to attend that fine school.]

And just as the Catholic Church has its history with the Jewish people, it has caused no less offense towards the Muslims.

And, in addition to the Jews and the Muslims, there are significant elements of the Eastern Church who are present in the area, who also have historical gripes with the Catholic Church (and with one another).

Any visit to the region by any pope, therefore, inherently presses against lots of sore spots. Accordingly, the Pope has had to tread very carefully during his visit. And there were bound to be instances when whatever he would or would not say would be offensive to either Jews or Muslims (or, perhaps, both). He was damned if he did, and damned if he didn't.

Take, for example, the Pope's visit to the Kotel (Western Wall) in the Holy City of Jerusalem: For various political and practical reasons, the Kotel is, administratively and legally speaking, a synagogue. Benedict's visit to the Western Wall had been scheduled for Lag B'Omer, a day of significance on the Jewish calendar. The security people in the Israeli government, who, for the most part, do not place a high priority upon religious observance, had made a decision to exclude the public from the Kotel during Benedict's visit. This, of course, was like stirring up a hornet's nest (and, for the record, I firmly believe that Jewish people should never be precluded from praying at the Kotel -- We've been kept away from there for too, too long).

Okay, so they modified the plans in a manner to provide for the Pope's security without making the Wall judenrein. But then the Rabbi of the Kotel declared that Benedict shouldn't have his crucifix exposed when he visited the Kotel.

In a perfect world, I would agree with the Rabbi. But this is not a perfect world, and the last time I was in Israel, on one of the occasions I visited the Kotel I saw some Filipino Catholic priests whose crucifixes were visible. Nobody seemed to be upset (they were, after all, Catholic priests). But then, again, the paparazzi weren't there at the time to record anyone making a big affair of it.

And, speaking of removing religious symbols, the Vatican had requested that Jewish symbols be removed from the ambulance that would be part of the Pope's entourage.

It is clear, then, that there was no way of avoiding controversy when the Pope visited the Holy Land.

Another factor that is playing into the mix: Benedict XVI, before he became Benedict XVI, was Joseph Alois Ratzinger. He is the first German pope in nearly half a millenium. And Israel's relationship with Germany is a very complex and paradoxical one. While there remains, since the founding of the State of Israel, an expressed revulsion to Germany and all things German, the fact is that Israel is a country created in the image of Germany. German architecture (Bauhaus and post-Bauhaus), German engineered infrastructure, and, before the Japanese and Korean automobiles came, the cars, trucks and busses were German.

Much is being made over the fact that Joseph Alois Ratzinger served in the Hitlerjugend and the Wehrmacht. My take on it: Just as Israel has compulsory military service (with some exceptions for religious individuals, but that's a whole other can of worms), so, too, did Nazi Germany. The young Ratzinger actually deserted the Wehrmacht, the German army. This shows that he either (A) was a coward; or (B) had principles. I never met the man, but nobody, not even his detractors, characterize him as a coward.

In any event, the fact that he is German is a further complication to the controversies. It is quite possible (read "highly probable") that a double standard is being applied to Benedict XVI because of his German background.

And so, whatever your take may be on the controversies anent to Benedict's visit to the Holy Land, understand that controversy was unavoidable.

The Wal-Mart Bargain

The 20 November 2008 Wal-Mart stampede in Valley Stream, New York has, of course, kept the legal profession quite occupied. Nassau County DA Kathleen Rice has reached a settlement agreement with Wal-Mart.

Thus far, I give Ms. Rice high marks on the deal. The public is getting much more from Wal-mart than would be possible under a successful criminal prosecution. Wal-Mart is increasing its safety policies and procedures, thereby raising the bar for all such retailers. Victims of the stampede can, if they so choose, be compensated without resorting to the courts.

It's a good deal, BUT …

The program is only as good as its gatekeepers. Specifically, Ms. Rice's office has placed ads such as the one in the 9 May 2009 Newsday (page A 38), addressing "Anyone Present at the Valley Stream Wal-Mart Store on November 29, 2008, between 2:30 - 6:00 A.M."

Query: How many of those who will respond to the advertisement were, in fact, actually at Wal-Mart at the time? And how many of those who were will exaggerate their losses?

Observation: To get a claimant's affidavit, DA's website provides that one can "Download PDF English" or "Descarga PDF Español."

Query: How many of those who will be claimants, bona fide and otherwise, should not have been in America in the first place, let alone at the Wal-Mart?

The New York Bailout Rules

New York, notorious as one of the most overbloated and wasteful bureaucracies, has been getting things right of late.

Firstly, we had that "photo-op flight" of Air Force One over the Statue of Liberty, which threw a significant percentage of the people in Lower Manhattan into panic, and caused the financial markets to take a little plunge. The White House looks like a smacked toochas with Louis Caldera proffering an official tail-between-the-legs apology, and our senior Senator, Chuck Schumer, vehemently and appropriately denounced the lamebrained secrecy tactics of the White House Military Office. This time, it wasn't Schumer who was the putzhead!


And then, there is Walter E. Carver. Mr. Carver's financial misfortunes drove him to seek public assistance, which he received for approximately two and one-half years, from September 1997 to March 2000. The terms of his public assistance required him to w-o-r-k at subsidized employment. After receiving the bailout from the New York taxpayers (myself among them), Mr. Carver got back onto his feet, and his financial luck markedly improved.

In fact, he hit a $10,000 prize in the New York Lottery.

And so, pursuant to New York's Social Services Law § 131-R, the State of New York claimed one-half of that $10,000 lottery prize as reimbursement for the public assistance provided to Mr. Carver.

Walter E. Carver brought a lawsuit against New York, claiming that the reimbursement requirement effectively brought his pay, for the w-o-r-k he did, below the minimum wage. Judge Schneier, of the Kings County Supreme Court, banged his gavel on his bench, and sent Carver right out of the courthouse. Three weeks earlier and three blocks away, Judge Sifton, of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, did similar with Carver in his Federal Class Action suite on the same issues. That case is reported at 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27496. Thus far, Carver is a double loser (as is his attorney, Richard D. Lamborn, Esq.).

Carver's legal misadventures might not be complete. The wages he received, and the entire $10,000 lottery prize, are considered income for Federal and New York State taxation purposes. Wouldn't surprise me one bit if Carver gets Lamborn to tilt at the IRS windmill as well.

Meanwhile, New York would do well to (A) better enforce its policy of reclaiming lottery winnings from public assistance bailout recipients; (B) publicize the fact that such is done, so as to take much of the glamour attraction from that welfare magnet that is New York City; and (C) legislate similar statutes to facilitate the reclamation of lottery winnings from current and former prison inmates.

A Time to Sleep, a Time to be Alert

Michelle Malkin and Amanda Terkel, who, to say the least, do not view the world from the same perspective, are among the many who have been making a big deal about Barack Hussein Obama's economic advisor, Larry Summers, falling asleep at a meeting with the credit card executives.

Quite frankly, I have no real problem with it. My biases are colored by the fact that I am afflicted with a sleep disorder, which acts up from time to time (and I am now amidst one of those periods where sleep tends to be evasive).

While insomnia and dyssomnia are certainly problems, the greater problem is the public's attitude towards people who suffer from such afflictions. It is, as far as I am concerned, nothing less than discrimination based upon a physical condition.

As a solo practitioner, I am fortunate to be able to, when necessary, take a nap during the day, in my office, without jeopardizing my livelihood. Likewise, if it doesn't interfere with my class schedule, I can sleep in my office at the University (and indeed, a little 25-minute nap makes me eager and raring and ready to go in front of the classroom).

But things weren't always that way. In a former position with Uncle Sam, I had this one supervisor who made a big deal of my dozing off. At the time the IRS picked me up, I had already consulted an attorney and was gearing up to file a discrimination complaint with the EEOC. My transfer to the IRS made life much simpler for me, my supervisor, my supervisor's supervisor (without whose harassment, my own supervisor might have been mostly off my case), and the U.S. Government in general. [N.B. Aside from that one issue, I did get along quite well with my supervisor, and do speak well of her -- which made me very reluctant to take the step of initiating a complaint. But, as mentioned, the IRS mooted the issue by hiring me away from the government agency where I worked.].

A psychiatrist with whom I am casually acquainted socially believes that a disproportionate number of job failures, marriage failures, and juvenile delinquency have inadequate sleep in their etiology. Looking back on some of my prior relationships, I must agree with him.

The insomnia suffered by Charles Dickens has left its mark in many of his works. The "fat and red-faced boy in a state of somnolency" from The Pickwick Papers, and Sydney Carton's line "It is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known" from Tale of Two Cities -- only someone tormented with insomnia could have written these lines.

As for Larry Summers: (A) He is probably much more dangerous if he makes his decisions while sleep deficient; and (B) as long as he is sleeping, he cannot implement his economic policies -- policies which I generally oppose.

So get off from Larry Summers's case, and let him sleep!

There are, of course, certain positions where one needs to remain awake. For example, security forces on ships sailing off the African coast, who protect the ships from pirates. In this incident with the MSC Melody , the security forces on the Italian cruise liner were certainly awake and alert.

What is interesting is that (A) the cruise company had hired Israeli security personel; (B) who wielded and used firearms. Ths MSC Melody then was bound for the Jordanian port of Aqaba, which is directly across the border from the Israeli port of Eilat.

Surely the Jordanian authorities knew, officially or otherwise, of the Israeli presence on the ship that was scheduled to dock in its port. This tells us something about unofficial international cooperation against the terrorists!

Sewer Service

After nearly a week, I now have internet access again. We had technical problems last Monday, and with the last two days of Passover on Wednesday & Thursday, coupled with some big time ineptitude on the part of the Best Buy and its Geek Squad, we were unable to get back up until this afternoon (Sunday). No thanks to the Geek Squad or Best Buy; we called in a local who, after several attempts (and one return of a new router to Staples), did in fact get us up and running. Tomorrow, my wife will cancel the Geek Squad appointment that had been set for this coming Wednesday (more than a week after the first call!), because their services are now unnecessary.

It has been very challenging to exist for a week without internet access (though 3 of those days, the last 2 days of Pesach and Shabbat, would not have been internet access days for us anyway). Almost as challenging as the 6 + days without internet access have been the 8 days of Passover without beer (but we did have an enjoyable holiday, and the Carmel 777 Brandy and Jelinek Slivovitz. sufficed quite well).


The big story now in LawyerLand is that a process serving company, American Legal Process, together with its president, has just been charged with various offenses in connection with falsified evidence of service. If these charges are proven (and there seems to be some rather strong and damning evidence in the AG's pocket to substantiate them), then many people had default judgments taken against them because they were never served with the papers.

This will have to play out in the courts. ALP's attorney, Corey Winograd, is, of course, zealously defending his client and insisting that ALP and its president, William Singler, did nothing wrong. This, of course, is what a defense attorney should be doing.

[Disclosure: A few years back, I had a case with Corey Winograd, and have no reason to impute his client's scumbag attributes to Corey personally.].

This subversion of the judicial system is a very disturbing matter. The process servers who falsify their affidavits and other documentation are no less a threat to American freedom than the terrorists and pirates.

And while I applaud Andy Cuomo, the New York Attorney General, for his proactive interest in the matter, the potential for political payback cannot be ignored.

I note that in Binghamton, some volunteer lawyers have taken on the task of aiding families of the victims of the recent shooting spree there. Reading between the lines, much of their work will effectively be aid to illegal aliens. These illegal alien enablers are being organized by the New York State Bar Association, an organization in which I allowed my membership to lapse quite a few years ago, a decision I do not regret.

My question: Will the NYSBA round up a cadre of volunteer attorneys to help out the real Americans and legally present aliens who were victimized by American Legal Process?

Season of Freedom

Just came off of two days of Passover, followed by my usual Sabbath observance, which equals three days of being incommunicado from the world beyond my own little community. We did have good time, but there were no guests this year for various reasons (which was just as well, because my wife got hit by some virus and was largely out of commission after the first Seder).

My wife's moonbat Cousin Shira, mentioned briefly in last year's post, is in no financial condition to do out-of-town traveling, and so, she wasn't with us this year either. I'm somewhat disappointed. For one thing, I miss the interesting politically-charged conversations we get into. Our son was with us this year, and, having spent the prior year in Israel and witnessed a few incidents firsthand, he has come back with some rather staunch political views regarding what must be done to ensure the security of Jews in the Holy City of Jerusalem. He would have made some interesting addititions to the conversation. Moreover, I would rather that Cousin Shira spend the Seder with us than with the leftward-leaning crowd in her hometown. But I digress.


Much has been written regarding the "Passover Seder" hosted by Barack Hussein Obama, including the disgusting sugary praise from the various ecumaniacs and leftist-leaning self-appointed Jewish spokespeople. My own sentiments of the are largely compatible with those expressed by Debbie Schlussel (though Debbie is a bit too conciliatory for my tastes towards Obama's nominally Jewish sycophants).

One issue not mentioned in Debbie Schlussel's posting (and certainly taboo among the politically correct crowd) is the comparison between the way we the Jewish people deal with our own past enslavement on one hand, and the way the b-l-a-c-k people deal with theirs.

G-d heard our cries, and liberated us from Pharoah's bondage. That meant that we had to take on the responsibilities of a free people. Because so many of us had been conditioned from birth into the slavery mentality, a new generation had to be raised with a mentality of responsibility. And so, we wandered in the desert for 40 years. After those 40 years, we were ready to assume the responsibilities of a free people. We acknowledge our past enslavement and indeed, tell our children about it. We do not whine about how the Egyptians enslaved us, and we do not use it as an excuse for personal or national failure!
In short, we have dealt with our prior condition of servitude, and have gotten ourselves beyond it!

Compare and contrast that with the b-l-a-c-k community in America, who, after more than One Hundred and Forty years, in many cases still whine about enslavement (never mind that some of the slaveholders were also b-l-a-c-k), still cite their previous condition of servitude as an excuse for personal and group underachievement and failure, and still have not taught responsibility to the next generation.

I wish all who would take up the burdens of freedom a Happy Passover (and, to my friends who celebrate Easter, "A te, la Buona Pasqua.").

Portraying the Wrong Picture

The news story now making the rounds (as in here and here and here) is about how certain newspapers in Israel photoshopped the women out of the news photo of the new Israeli Cabinet.

The fact is that in some religious circles, portraying a woman in a photograph is considered immodest. The newspapers at issue here are published by and for such segments of the population, therefore, they do not publish photographs which portray women. In fact, some have been known to insist that all photographs of people, even of males, are prohibited.

This posting shall not now get into the issues of whether pixelating or airbrushing out the women out from the group photo is or is not more journalistically ethical than rearranging the positions of the entire group so as to exclude the women, or whether it would or would not be better to not publish the photo at all.

What this post WILL address is the implication, in news stories such as the one at issue, that those Jewish people who eschew photographs of women are somehow "more religious" than those who do not.

Imprimis, I detest the use of the term "ultraorthodox" to describe any Jewish person. The use of the "U" word serves only to fragment the Jewish people, and to subject those of us who adhere to the Torah commandments to ridicule.

There are many groups of religious Jews who, for many generations, chose to stay isolated to one extent or another from society at large. Even when contact and communication could not be avoided, such groups have retained costume and custom which differs from the general norm. They are, in a word, insular. They have always been around, but in today's world of rapid transportation and communication, these groups now are noticed by more and more people who, even twenty years ago, would have been oblivious to their existence. Many of their practices are based more upon group traditions than upon any mandate from the Torah.

I have no particular quarrel with such groups; indeed, I regularly interact with many to one extent or another. And I read several publications whose intended readership is such groups [N.B. The Israeli "Yated Ne'eman" mentioned in the story officially split from the American publication of the same title a number of years ago; let us say that they now are divorced but they still sleep together.]. Such newspapers -- and their readerships -- have the right to decide which photographs will or will not be published in their pages.

As for my religious observance, I daven (pray) three times each day, keep the Sabbath and the dietary laws, and, in a few days, will observe the Passover. For the record, I personally have no religious issues with photographs of women who are decently clad. And, not that it really, really matters, but I wear a kippah and my wife covers her hair with a wig or a snood. Those who happen to wear the black hats but who are sex offenders, tax cheats, womanizers, or even ordinary murderers may well be more insular than I am, but they are not more religious!

Do not confuse insularity with religiousity!

Earth Hour on My Own Time

It is now Earth Hour 2009, and we have just turned on the lights in our house. Most of the lights in our house HAVE, in fact, been shut off for the past 25 hours on account of our religious Sabbath. No dishwashers have been running, nor the washing machine nor the dryer. But with the conclusion of Shabbat, I recited Havdalah and we are now back to the regular days of the week. I have just turned on several lights in the house, and have switched on my computer, and am now composing this posting.

Understand that I was environmentally concerned long before many of the environitwits who are now pushing Earth Hour. Our family was one of the first to get on with the recycling of paper, glass and metal (and indeed, long before the familiar curbside recycling, my grandfather was a scrap metal dealer, that class of people who were the original metal recyclers).

I was composting the vegetable wastes from my kitchen long before many of the environitwits were even born. Where I live, there is an ordinance that prohibits the storage of waste on one's property. A number of years ago, one of my neighbors, Frau Himmler, reported me for having the compost pile, and I received a citation under that code provision (I don't know what she was complaining about; every year she has her landscapers literally spread bovine feces all over her lawn). I moved the compost pile to another corner of my yard and haven't heard anything further.

And, significantly, our household electricity usage is below the neighborhood average.

But amongst the environitwits who are aboard the Earth Hour bandwagon are some hard core enviroterrorists.

A few queries regarding the EarthHourlings:

* How much energy was expended in publicizing and promoting Earth Hour? How many of them jetted around the nation or the world in the promotional activity?

* How many of them recycle their cans, bottles and papers?

* How many of them require supercool air conditioning in the summer?

* In short, how many of them who are talking the talk are walking the walk?


Yes, we do need to cut down our national energy usage. But having someone who has no idea of my household energy needs dictate to me what I must do with my household energy usage is a far, far scarier notion than dependency on foreign energy resources. Because ours is not a welfare recipient household, the family budget seems to be the best determinant of our energy usage.

An ATM for the ATMs

One principle for which I developed great appreciation when I was with the Internal Revenue Service is the notion that any time money changes hands, information also is transferred. The information might be something as simple as the date and time on the receipt from the cash register, or it could be a whole series of legal documents, or anything in between the two extremes. Without going into the nitty gritty details at this time, suffice it to say that during my stint with the IRS, many a seemingly mundane document or scrap of paper or account entry led me to a past money transfer of more significant proportions. In fact, even after I handed back my badge and went into private practice, those skills I learned from my IRS days served me well, and continue to do so.


Just as information can lead one to money, so, too, can money be part of the trail to information. More to the point, money itself can constitute information, and therefore, evidence. In a city the size of New York, then, it is natural and logical that the police will have frequent occasion to take cash and currency as evidence of a crime. Thus, there are a number of rubberstamps which imprint legends such as "NYPD Evidence" and the like.

As the law enforcement people can surely confirm, police departments and prosecutors take great pains to document the chain of custody for their evidence, and to impose security measures to ensure that the evidence presented at trial is the same, untampered evidence that was found during the investigation. Even the IRS people do likewise; one rule was that we would never remove a staple from a tax return document without documenting when, how and why we did it -- so that there would be no issue over whether the tax return document presented by the IRS as evidence was the same tax return filed by the taxpayer.

So what does the NYPD do with its money evidence when the evidence is no longer needed? It had been exchanging it for regular cash with Chase Bank, with the understanding that Chase would, through the appropriate Federal Reserve channels, have the "NYPD Evidence" cash destroyed, along with other retired currency.

Well, it turns out that within about a month's time, two Chase ATMs, each in a geographically distant (by NYC Metropolitan Area standards) neighborhood, were reported to have dispensed some of that NYPD Evidence cash to ATM customers. The two ATM customers were quite credible: A retired FDNY dispatcher and a retired NYPD cop.

Seems that Chase, in addition to its Federal bailout, has now found another source of funding.

Chase spokespeople say that Chase is investigating. I say that the IRS should also be investigating! Someone ought to be chasing Chase!

Andy Cuomo's Little List

I have never particularly been gung-ho for ex-New York Governor Mario Cuomo, nor for his son, ex-Kennedy in-law and now New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. Having said this, it now must be acknowledged that Andy Cuomo is the public official who, perhaps, is coming through this AIG executive bonus brouhaha looking the best, and on that particular score, he has my full applause and admiration.

His 17 March 2009 letter to Congressman Barney Frank, excepts of which have been quoted in the media, is very telling, and is available at Andy's own official website here.

There is little I can say that has not already been stated by Andy Cuomo. I will observe, however, the following:


A. As this post is being written, Edward Liddy, AIG's Chair & CEO who was installed in his position by the US Government, is now being grilled by the House Financial Services subcommittee.

B. Everyone who is anyone in Washington is now expressing outrage, shock and revulsion at the bonuses. This, of course, is in response to the popular sentiment; many of them were the very ones who set up the current AIG bailout scenario in the first place.

C. Operationally speaking, the simplest resolution to this political problem would be for all of the recipients of the AIG bonus bonanza to simply return their bonuses (or, as a face-saving ploy, be allowed to retain, say, $100,000).

D. Recall that during the recent move to fill Hillary Rodham Clinton's seat in the Senate, Andy Cuomo effectively stepped aside so as to avoid a mudslinging contest with his ex-cousin-by-marriage Caroline Kennedy. There is little doubt that Andy has higher political ambitions, but he wisely recognized that a better opportunity is likely to present itself in the future, and that he can build upon his public good will by kicking butt in his current position as NY AG.


One thing Andy can do in order to motivate the AIG bonus boys to return their remuneration is to announce that he is furnishing the list of them to the Internal Revenue Service and to the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance, for whatever actions the respective taxation authorities deem appropriate.

Unlike Treasury Secretary Tim "Tax Cheat" Geithner, Andrew Cuomo still has the moral authority (or at least the appearance thereof) to play that card.

Don't be Ecstatic!

The posting of 30 April 2008 highlighted the propensity of many residents of the more insular religious Jewish communities to trust those who dress like themselves. This phenomenon is, of course, hardly unique to the religious Jewish community; other close-knit ethnic communities have been stung by swindles by those ostensibly of their own kind.

Such also seems to have been the dynamics of the case involving the three yeshiva boys from Bnei Brak who were arrested when they entered Japan with lots and lots Ecstacy pills in their baggage. They claimed that they didn't know that the antiques they had been asked to deliver were in fact receptacles for the contraband.

I do not know the three young men, and therefore, don't really know how to call that one. It is, however, entirely possible that they were in fact duped by someone whom they blindly trusted. Indeed, recent arrests by the Israeli police of two alleged accomplices tends to corroborate the young mens' story.

Rabbi Menachem Mendel Shafran, who recently testified as a character witness on behalf of the young men, is now appealing for financial aid for their criminal defense. His appeal is being carried out through an organization called American Friends of Kupat Ha'Ir, in insert fliers in various Jewish newspapers. AFKH (and indeed, Kupat Ha'Ir itself in Israel) is in the more insular corner of the religious Jewish community; they do not seem to have an Internet presence, and many of the rabbis behind it have been known to take very insular stances on various issues. I myself am somewhat skeptical of AFKH, but this is a function of my general skepticism towards anything and everything; if truth be told, I do occasionally contribute money to AFKH (and, when in Israel, to KH itself). But I do respect Rabbi Shafran, and give much credence to his report of the situation for the young men in Japan.

When I walked the streets of Bnei Brak, as I have done on more than a few occasions, I was given "that look" because I wear a leather kippah and not the black fedora hat or fur shtreimel which is de rigueur for men of the insular religious Jewish groups. When I walked unaccompanied by my wife's uncle or cousins, who do wear the black fedoras, the suspecting stares were all the more frequent and intense. Many in Bnei Brak do not have computers in their homes (and few have t-e-l-e-v-i-s-i-o-n-s). Having seen Bnei Brak with my own two eyes, I can be persuaded to believe that the young men were in fact clueless and naive enough to trust the guy with the black hat, and thus go on their ill-fated trip to Japan.

[Please do not get me wrong. I have enjoyed my visits to my wife's relatives in Bnei Brak, and did in fact meet a fair number of friendly people on its streets. I fully expect to revisit the city at such time as I return to Israel.].

My analysis of the situation in Japan: On one hand, individual rights do not play the overarching role in Japanese culture as they do in the American legal system. On the other hand, the Japanese are bigger on deterrence than we in America are (and the low crime rate in Japan is one result of this). Even if the young yeshiva men are in fact innocent, the Japanese legal system is more prone to view them as exemplars for a lesson in deterrence than to be in any hurry to set them free. And Japanese prisons are not summer vacation resorts as the prisons of America are.

Accordingly, these young men are likely to be sitting in prison in Japan for a while. Their best hope will include a good dose of quiet diplomacy from Israel. This has a number of complications. For one thing, many (read "all") of the insular Jewish social groups are at odds with the secular aspects of the Israeli government. As an example, my wife's relatives will not refer to the big international airport in Lod as "Ben Gurion Airport" because they do not wish to glorify the late Prime Minister David Ben Gurion, an ardent secularist. So now, the rabbinical leaders are now in a position of having to appeal to the same governmental offices which receive large dollops of opprobrium from the ranks of the rabbis' followers (if not the rabbis themselves on occasion). This means that the three yeshiva boys may be a bargaining chip (though likely a very small one) in the current political negotiations to form a government in Israel.

The troublesome bargaining chips, however, are the aforementioned two older guys who were arrested as suspected accomplices of the three. Jewish law and tradition has some very, very strong taboos about turning in a Jew to the non-Jewish authorities. But many respected rabbis have approved of the punishment by secular authorities of Jews who are in fact guilty of serious crimes, especially where innocent Jews have been their victims. The well respected Rabbi Yaakov Kamenetzky reportedly green-lighted some Jewish U.S. customs agents who asked about the propriety of hunting down a ring of Jewish smugglers, for example.

The prospect of trading three small and possibly innocent fishes for two bigger fishes (Suspect Bentzion Miller does, after all, resemble a whale) might play well to the appropriate crowd in Tokyo. If indeed there is ironclad evidence to link the two to a smuggling ring, then Japan gets to avoid world criticism over the conditions to which it is now subjecting its three current defendants, they get to punish a wrongdoer, and they would still be able to send out a stern cautionary message of deterrence to the world.

The way I'm calling it, the great rabbinical authorities in Israel and elsewhere are now occupied with the pros and cons of whether Bentzion Miller and/or Yisroel Eisenbach ought be traded for the three guys in Japan.

As for me, I have already placed in the envelope a modest remittance to "Kupat Ha'Ir - Pidyon Shevuyim" and addressed it to 4415 14th Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11219.

If these three young men are in fact innocent and were in fact unaware of the nefarious motives their dispatchers, then I wish to see them released soon. And if, in fact, the two others arrested in Israel did send unsuspecting and innocent boys as mules to Japan, then they ought not be walking free.

Odds & Ends:

1. Timoshenko Update: This continuing saga of the killing of NYPD Detective Russel Timoshenko was commented about in Blog postings of 16 November 2008, and two on 15 July 2007 (here and here). Dexter Bostic, the gunman who actually fired the bullets at Timoshenko, was sentenced to life without parole on the murder conviction and some consecutive sentences for the attempted murder and weapons violations. Bostic's accomplice, Robert Ellis, was convicted on the weapons charge, and got the 15 year maximum. Accomplice Lee Woods got a mistrial; his retrial has started.

Bostic is still whining about the injustice of the system. The only thing that is missing is Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton complaining about how the system is biased against b-l-a-c-k people. But I really didn't expect them to show up. After all, the judge who heard the case and imposed the sentence, Hon. Plummer Lott, is also an African-American.


2. Yesterday I went to a Continuing Legal Education seminar, in order to fulfill my CLE requirements for my license to practice law. As with any other CLE course, price and timing were my primary factors in the selection. It could have been any topic, but in this case the topic related to diversity in the workplace. I fully expected all of the usual leftist liberal crap about affirmative action, and I expected a full deck of race cards to be played out.

Surprise! Diversity in the workplace was touted by most of the panelists as being the economically optimal choice (as opposed to the good progressive liberal thing to do). This is the message I have been delivering to my students for many, many years. And one African-American attorney came out point blank and stated that new associates in a law firm will not succeed if they carry around an attitude of entitlement! Much welcome evidence that Fat Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and the rest of them do not necessarily represent the views of the African-American community at large.


3. Speaking of Fat Al, he's now making a big stink about a cartoon that appeared in the New York Post. I personally don't see what is so racist about it. Comparing Barack Hussein Obama to a chimpanzee? Hey, they did it to George W. Bush! I don't have the time or the inclination, but someone ought to go through all of the cartoons that have appeared in the Amsterdam News, the NYC newspaper whose target audience is the b-l-a-c-k community. If the Amsterdam News is held to the same standard to which Sharpton and the NAACP now seek to hold the N.Y. Post, then I would have no objection!

Going Ape over Travis the Chimpanzee

The Travis the Chimpanzee story is making the rounds around the world and on the Internet.

Whether Sandra Herold, the late chimp's owner, will be criminally charged, is a question I will leave to the local Connecticut State Attorney's office to answer. Whether or not Ms. Herold's relationship with her pet ape did or did not get a fair report in the media, and/or whether it included sexual penetration, has yet to be proven one way or the other, and I book no bets either way. There almost certainly will be a lawsuit; where it will settle depends upon diverse factors, including but not limited to the extent of Herold's liability insurance coverage, and her equity in her own home and business.

I leave it to the psychiatrists (or, perhaps, the mechanics) to confirm my suspicions that Herold, and/or the victim, Charla Nash, were working with a few sockets missing from their wrench sets.

While the news media busies itself with such questions, this Blog will pose the following three:


A. Where does the ACLU stand on the apparent disregard of Travis the Chimp's civil rights by the Stamford, Connecticut Police Department?

B. Where does PETA stand on the treatment of Travis the Chimp?

C. Where do the staunch opponents of capital punishment stand on execution of Travis the Chimp?

Religion of Arson

The big wildfires in Australia suggest some factoid dots to connect:

On 7 September 2008, Josh Gordon reported in The Age that "Australia has been singled out as a target for 'forest jihad' by a group of Islamic extremists urging Muslims to deliberately light bushfires as a weapon of terror."

This is nothing new. During the 1980's and 1990's (and even later), the Muslims were setting fires to forests in Israel.

More to the point, the Land of Israel has only been verdant with vegetation when it has been in the hands of Jews. It was a largely wasteland when it was in the hands of Muslims.

And during the height of the Roman Empire, before Muhammad and Islam, North Africa's littoral plain on the Mediterranean Sea produced and exported grain and other agricultural produce to Rome.



Something to think about! Is the so-called "Religion of Peace" really the Religion of Arson? It certainly is not the Religion of Sound Agricultural Practices.

A Gold Star Mother Scorned

Now that Barack Hussein Obama has derailed the trial of the terrorist suspects who bombed the U.S.S. Cole, the mother of one of the victims is having second thoughts about having voted for Obama.

Gold Star Mother Diane McDaniels, whose son, Seaman James Roderick McDaniels, was killed in the bombing, has refused to meet with Barack Hussein, and now regrets voting for him.

My compassions go out for Ms. McDaniels. The derailment of the trial must surely be taking its toll on her and her family. She has already paid a steep price to the terrorists.

I will now post, in writing, that which many have been hinting at, but which is just too politically incorrect to say.

Ms. McDaniels is an African-American (as, of course, was her son).

Might she, perchance, have voted for Barack Hussein Obama on account of his race? Might she have judged him by the color of his skin instead of the content of his character?

I in no way gloat at Ms. McDaniels's predicament. In my younger years, I, too, voted for a candidate because he was a lantsman, overlooking some serious character traits which surfaced to severely disappoint and demoralize me.

I truly empathize with Diane McDaniels. And, no less, I respect her for her willingness to admit a mistake.

May she and her family -- and other proud Americans too -- soon see justice done to the memory of James Roderick McDaniels and the other U.S.S. Cole victims!

Rest in Peace, Rabbi Weinberg

A year and a day ago, this Blog implored all to work and pray for the recovery of Rabbi Noach Weinberg. The Rabbi, as mentioned in that post, is one of my personal heroes.

Today, with sadness and regret, I now report that Rabbi Weinberg passed away this morning in Jerusalem. I was privileged to have met him, and to have spoken with him; he has done many positive things for me and my family, and indeed, for the entire world. Many positive projects and ventures, benefiting Jews and non-Jews alike, have Rabbi Weinberg's latent fingerprints on them.

Over 5 years ago, when I was in Israel for a short stay, serious concerns regarding Rabbi Weinberg's health were being whispered by individuals known by me to be cognizant of the Rabbi's situation. That he survived this long is a testament to the grace of G-d, and to the Rabbi's strength and determination.

Rabbi Weinberg will be sorely missed by those who knew him, but the works and projects he founded will continue to move forward and onward.

Rest in Peace, Rabbi Weinberg! May your memory be for a blessing!

Need Some Sleep

Nothing earth-shattering to blog about.

Most of this past week I have been sleep-deficient, due in no small part to that virus bug I picked up. I believe that I have mostly shaken it, but it seems that my wife is now coming down with something. In any event, I woke up tired at about 10:45 this morning, but was able, for the first time in more than a week, to get in a good workout run.

Yesterday, I did get in a relatively good Shabbat nap. I fell asleep on the couch, and my wife said that I was really, really out of it. Maybe I won't be so sleep-deficient this coming week.

The sleep deficiency and virus wouldn't have been so bad, except that it was the first week of the semester, so I had to go in and teach. Whatever voice I may have brought into the classroom with me was totally shot by the time I got out. Fortunately, my assistant department chair gave me a ride, so I didn't have to drive.

As with any semester, I have already spotted some students who are on the ball, and some students who are totally clueless. So many have no conception of what it means to write a term paper -- those students had better get a clue real quickly or they will take a nosedive in the courses I teach! This is college-level work! In my day, I had a real battleaxe of a junior high school English teacher who taught all of us how to write term papers. Has our elementary and secondary educational system been dumbed down THAT much? [Apparently it has.].

Fortunately, there seem to be students who are well-postured and directed towards success. One of them happens to have an on-campus job as a student assistant in my own department. She approached me as I came in the second day of my classes, so I explained a few things to her. She is a transfer from one of the 2-year community colleges, where the courseload for Business Law is not as intense. She'll have to work hard, but I think that she will give it a go.

I am not a big Stupor Bowl fan. Understand that I have nothing against athletics per se (and in fact pulled a varsity letter while in high school). But the Super Bowl is not about athletic performance; it is about keeping the masses entertained and occupied, and about softening their brains so that they can be controlled by Big Brother! The teams are subsidized with lots of taxpayer money. The best thing that I can do is just not watch it! So I didn't!

The best football game I ever watched was two junior high school squads in an unofficial non-league scrimmage game. Their hearts were really into it, there was no TV audience to please (with the accompanying commercial advertisers), and they all accomplished something. Many of the players from that game have now gone onward to achievement in their respective life fields; they are role models, unlike the vast majority of the big league professional athletes of today. But I digress.

During the Stupor Bowl, I was not sitting in front of the big lobotomy screen. What I did was to begin to get my paperwork in order to do my income tax returns. I am now missing two receipts from charitable donees, so the appropriate reminder faxes and e-mails were sent, and need a few more pieces of documentation. But I knocked off lots of the organizing of papers. I am looking to get my tax returns finished sometime during February or early March.

I hope to get some good quality sleep tonight, because I have some interesting lectures and demonstrations planned for my classes this week.

Missed the Coronation

I was out of town for a few days. I basically had a good and productive time, though not without several hassles and frustrations. There was a rendezvous with some Obamatron relatives of mine who, notwithstanding their status as such, were quite pleasurable company. Above all, I was nowhere near Washington, and therefore avoided all of the hasslements of being in that city for Obama's big coronation event. [And, BTW, the situation could easily have turned disastrous with all of the crowds in the tunnel in Washington.]

One acquaintance of the family, whose husband is connected, went to Washington, cleared the security, and got a good seat at the coronation. Not everyone was so lucky (if getting to watch the coronation festivities can be called luck), and indeed, many Obamaniacs got screwed by the poor planning of the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies. And they all still worship the very urinal where Obama pisses!

The meeting I attended (the primary impetus for the excursion) was quite good as far as such meetings go. A former business partner of mine came down with a very bad cold, so I scrubbed the get-together with him. But I caught what he describes as the same bug anyway, so now I'm trying to shake it before I start teaching in a few days.

I also got together with my brother, visited with some friends, did a little sightseeing and returned home a day earlier than planned.

It is now 2 AM, I am now mostly caught up on my correspondence, and now, after this posting, will try to get some sleep because there are several things on the agenda for later today.

Duck, Duck, Duck, Goose!

Today's news of Flight 1549 is now all over the Internet. The plane lost its engines shortly after take-off from LaGuardia, and landed in the Hudson River. All passengers and crew were rescued, thanks to the flight's accomplished and valiant pilot, and, of course, to the FDNY and the other boats that made the emergency response.

I join all in expressing gratitude for the miraculous rescue.

It seems that the cause of the engine failure was bird ingestion. Specifically, a flock of Branta canadensis, commonly known as Canada Geese, crossed paths with the aircraft.

The Canada Geese are protected birds under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The problem is that most of the Branta canadensis in the New York area are no longer migratory, but have, for many generations, lived all of their lives here.

And, quite frankly, their numbers are too great for the health of the human population. There is, for example, a flock that congregates at the Courthouse of the New York Supreme Court of Nassau County, and they leave lots of their droppings there. And, within the past 10 years, a flock has taken up residence near the local school, pooping all over the soccer field.

I am not a sport hunter, and those who are would know more about this than I, but one needs all kinds of Federal and State licenses and permits to hunt Branta Canadensis.


According to a New York Daily News sidebar article to the Flight 1549 story,

" For years, Port Authority officials have tangled with animal activists about efforts to cut down the number of geese that live on Rikers Island near LaGuardia. Back in 2004, more than 400 geese were killed. By 2006, the number netted and gassed had dropped to 165. Animal activists have fought the effort, urging officials to find non-lethal methods to manage the population."

Rikers Island, for the untraveled and unread, is a land mass in the East River where the City of New York has located its major prison facilities. Amidst the current great budget deficit, why not use the Rikers Island flock of Branta canadensis to feed the inmates? Surely the culinary-minded can come up with some Canada Goose recipes.

Trial By Jury

I was in court today, only this time it was to discharge my jury duty obligation. Since 1996, there have been no automatic exemptions from jury duty, which I think is a good thing. Everyone should be able to serve.

Inconveniences to my law practice and teaching notwithstanding (I don't go back to teaching for another 2 weeks anyway), I considered myself ready, willing and able to serve on a jury panel. I had been given a month's notice, and was able to arrange my law practice schedule accordingly.

This was the third time in my life I reported for jury duty (not counting some of the telephone standby years where I never actually had to show up). The first time, when I was in law school, all cases settled and they sent everyone home early. The second time, I knew one of the attorneys at voir dire, so we exchanged the pleasantries and I was sent back to the Central Jury room, where, about 2 hours later, everyone was sent home.

This time, the telephone message posted Friday evening (a few minutes before Shabbat) told me that a range of juror numbers in which mine fell was to show up today. I planned my schedule accordingly.

They now have an orientation video narrated by Ed Bradley from "60 Minutes," which showed a few clips from the old Perry Mason TV series I enjoyed when I was growing up. Bradley explains that these were overdramatizations of the real thing. But I liked them anyway. Much of the video consisted of various people, obscure and famous, telling us all how great the jury system is (which was the main purpose of this "orientation"). And then, the HDTV monitor in the Central Jury room shifted to the CNN News (the big story today, of course, was Bernie the Goniff Madoff). Interestingly, there were several commercials for law firms. I wonder what the implications of this would be if one of those law firms were actually involved in one of the cases heard by a jury that day.

They finally called us, so a Court Officer escorted us to the courtroom on the 5th floor (I walked the stairs, and beat most of the people taking the elevators). Looking at the judge's calendar outside the courtroom, I realized that this was a criminal case.

One of the jurors was an Assistant DA (who also seemed to know the defense attorney), so she was immediately excused. After some general discussion of the case by the Judge (criminal misdemeanor leaving the scene of an accident case, trial scheduled 2 - 5 PM, estimated trial time 5 days), His Honor asked if anyone would be unable to serve. Several people came forward (child care, self-employed tradesman, etc.), most of whom were excused.

Then the first 15 jurors on the list, myself included, were called up for individual voir dire. His Honor asked the usual questions, such as whether we were able to decide the case objectively; whether, if the evidence were sufficient, we could vote to convict without regard to the sentence to be imposed; whether we were willing to consider all of the evidence; whether we could attach no significance to the fact that the defendant doesn't testify if she so elects; et cetera.

Then came the question of whether we would be able to apply the law as instructed by the judge. So I raised my hand and said, in substance, the following:

"Your Honor, I have been admitted to the bar for more than 20 years. My practice does not entail criminal law, so I don't have too many preconceived notions as to what the law is here. However, Your Honor, in what I believe to be the unlikely event that Your Honor were to give a legal instruction that differed from my understanding of what the law is, then, Your Honor, I would have significant problems with that!"

One of the Court Officers seemed to suppress a grin, while His Honor took a second or two to compose himself. The Judge then asked me (and not without a tinge of anger) "Are you saying that you would not apply the law as I instruct you if you disagree with me?"

"Your Honor," I replied, "I stress that I consider such an eventuality quite unlikely. But if Your Honor's instruction as to the law in New York were, perchance, to differ from my understanding of it, then I at least would want to know the legal authority, and look up the legal citation, for such an instruction. On account of my training and experience."

I could almost detect little wisps of smoke emerging from His Honor's ears. He called the ADA and Defense Counsel to the bench, and, after about 10 seconds, glared at me and said, "You are excused!"

I can empathize with His Honor. He was damned if he did, and damned if he didn't. On one hand, he had asked, nay, put us all under oath, to be honest and candid. I was honest and candid. And judges are not infallible; indeed, on any given business day, a trial judge who misapplied the law is overturned by an appellate tribunal in the State of New York. If he were to chew me out, then none of the other prospective jurors would have been honest and candid.

[Also playing into the equation, I suspect, was the fact that I have been admitted to the bar about 9 years longer than His Honor (and, apparently, longer than either the ADA or the defense attorney). I have had 9 more years than His Honor has had to develop an understanding of the law.]

On the other hand, if he were to excuse me (which he did), then wouldn't such a precedent effectively serve to reinstate the automatic exclusion of attorneys from jury duty (remember, the other attorney in the jury pool had been excused, right before everyone's eyes, just a few minutes earlier)?

Note that if the Judge did not wish to make a wholesale practice of excusing attorneys, I did give His Honor an out. I stated and restated that I considered the odds of a conflict between His Honor's instructions and my understanding of the law to be rather long. His Honor could, with the agreement of counsel, gone ahead with me anyway. And, His Honor could have seated me, and instructed me to pass him a note if my understanding of the law differed from his instructions, so that he could apprise me of the legal authority for his instructions.

And, perhaps, there may have been the fear of a kingpin juror (though my personality is definitely not that of a kingpin juror).

And so, I am not subject to jury summons for another 6 years.

While it's good to get my schedule back, I'm a little bit disappointed. A major part of me does want the experience of serving on a jury panel.

We'll see what happens when I get called up the next time.


Ironic Postscript: En route back home from the courthouse, I stopped at a nursing rehab facility to visit a member of our congregation who incurred a nasty foot fracture. Other than his depressed mood, he's doing fine medically. And he is a retired physician (with a daughter who has been admitted to the bar a few years longer than I have been). It kind of made his day that there he was, doctor in the patient's bed, was being visited by a lawyer who sat in the jury box.

Susan Atkins (Part 2)

The 13 June 2008 posting on this Blog was about Susan Atkins, one of Charlie Manson's girls, and California's most senior woman inmate. You will recall that Ms. Atkins sought compassionate release because she had been diagnosed with terminal illness (and that previous March had, according to the medical pundits, three months remaining). The folks on the California Parole Board, in their wisdom, denied the compassionate release for the brutal mutilatrix-murderess.

Well, it is already more than a week into 2009, and Susie Q still hasn't clocked out.

My compliments and plaudits to the able medical staff at the Central California Women's Facility in Chowchilla, for the fine care they have thus far rendered. Who says that the government doctors don't know how to practice medicine?

No Tip for This Waiter

The story in Newsday (to which I unhappily subscribe because it is (maybe) a half-step better the New York Times, the only other viable daily rag on Long Island now that the New York Sun has folded) is "Waiter Serves Fear at Wedding" by Matthew Chayes, Newsday, 10 January 2009, p. A13.

The first paragraph is as follows:

"A waiter at a Jewish wedding who is considering converting to Islam interrupted the celebration's final prayers with recorded Arabic chants of "God is great," sparking fear among the 700 guests of a terrorist attack, Nassau police said Friday."

And now Thomas H. Spreer, Esq., Stephen Buttafuoco's lawyer, trained in the art of criminal defense, is calling the felony aggravated harassment charge "heavy-handed."

My first impulse is to agree with Mr. Spreer. Buttafuoco claims, and not without credibility, that he wasn't aware that the sound bite would be piped over the PA system throughout the building. Seems like a sophomoric prank by a 23-year-old of teenage maturity. It's kind of picayune and penny-ass.

But the deeper I read, the more convinced I am that the DA is coddling Buttafuoco a bit too much. Specifically, (1) Buttafuoco admits that he was trying to privately disrespect Judaism; and (2) Buttafuoco is now curious about converting to Islam.

Those of you from Denmark might correct me if I am mistaken, but it is my understanding that according to Islamic teachings, Muslims are required to kill those who insult Islam.

But this is America, where there should be no religious favoritism. Accordingly, Buttafuoco should be charged not merely with a felony, but with a capital offense!

Unfortunately, even wanton premeditating cop-killers are not subject to capital punishment in New York, thanks to the sob sisters on the New York Court of Appeals.

Probably the most realistic scenario is that Buttafuoco will exhibit enough contrition (or at least appear sufficiently contrite) to do a plea deal for no jail time. And if the hosts of the wedding (and/or the bride and groom) are so inclined, they might file a purely civil lawsuit against Buttafuoco and sue the beitzim off of him.

What's in a Name? [Part 2]

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the conviction and sentence of William Bullock, Jr. under the Armed Career Criminal Act. The case is United States v. Bullock, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 25355, and, for the moment at least, is posted on the Internet here and here.

Essentially, Bullock, a three-time felony conviction loser, was found to be in possession of 8 rounds of ammunition. His conviction mandates, per 18 U.S.C. Section 924(e), a minimum 15-year sentence. The pertinent quote from Judge Jacobs's opinion is as follows:

"Bullock argues that there was insufficient evidence to establish his constructive possession of the ammunition found in the bedroom dresser drawer and that the government proved no more than that Bullock and his fiancee shared the bedroom and that Bullock had access to the dresser.

Bullock understates the quantum of evidence, which included: (1) that correspondence addressed to Bullock was found in the drawer with the ammunition; (2) that the ammunition was
discovered in a drawer with men's underwear in a dresser with only men's clothing; and (3) that $1,543 cash was found in the drawer, including $30 of pre-recorded buy money given to Bullock a few days earlier. Given this evidence, a 'rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.'"

So what's in a name? Bullock's defense attorney was Bryan E. Rounds, Esq., of the Kingston, NY law firm of Rounds & Rounds. Should the name of one's attorney matter? Theoretically, it shouldn't. But I cannot help but wonder whether the fact that an attorney named Rounds was defending a client accused of possessing rounds of ammunition made some sort of subconscious impact upon the jury.

This isn't the only criminal case where the defense attorney's name might have dropped some subliminal suggestions to the jury. In State v. Smith, 1980 Ohio App. LEXIS 10946 (OhioApp. 1980), the defendant was convicted of felonious assault with firearm. His defense attorney was named Michael T. Gunner.

And the defendant in United States v. Schlesinger, 390 F. Supp. 2d 274, the defendant was convicted of arson. Nat Schlesinger's defense attorney was Douglas T. Burns, Esq.

As for the famous Miranda v. Arizona case, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), where Ernesto Miranda's conviction on a rape charge was vacated (but he was convicted at subsequent retrial), one of the attorneys on the amicus brief (effectively arguing against Ernesto Miranda) was the Attorney General of Wyoming, John F. Raper, AG of Wyoming. 384 U.S. 436 (1966).

And then, there is the matter of Straight v. Dykes , 418 S.E.2d 65, 1992 Ga. LEXIS 354 (Ga. 1992), affirming, without published opinion, some sort of civil dispute.

Johnny I Hardly Knew Ye

Three years ago this past summer, the Israeli government forcefully removed all of the Jews from Gaza. A Judenrein Gaza, the theory went, would go a long way towards placating the Arabs there and induce them to make peace with Israel.

Almost every day since, the Hamas terrorists have launched rockets from Gaza into Israel with impunity. Moreover, most of the rockets are specifically aimed not at military targets, but at civilian communities.

For reasons having to do more with Israeli partisan politics than any principles of integrity, the government of Israel has finally, at long last, done what virtually every other government elsewhere on the planet would have done after three days -- Responded with military force!

So now, I just got an e-mail from the UJA-Federation of New York, copying its website posting, entitled "UJA-Federation Response to Israel Crisis." For the uninitiated, the United Jewish Appeal - Federation is the charitable fundraising apparatus of the so-called "Jewish Establishment." I call it the "Judenrat," for it tends to pander to the leftward-leaning elements of the Jewish population by effectively apologizing for staunch adherence to Torah values and Jewish strength. Needless to say, I am not and have never been one of their regular contributors. Liberals, as many of you have surely realized, are hung up on victimhood and guilt, and become most apologetic whenever they escape victimhood and become successful.

The NY UJA-Federation, from time to time, sponsors seminars which qualify for Mandatory Continuing Legal Education credits, of which I and other New York attorneys must rack up twelve per year in order to retain good standing to practice law. The costs of the UJA-Federation seminars, on a per-credit-hour basis, is typically very competitive, and so, as a result of my attendance at one such event a number of years back, I am on the Judenrat's e-mail and snail mail lists (though, in all fairness to UJA-Federation, they are not nearly so obnoxious in their use of these lists as are many other organizations).

But I digress. The first 4 paragraphs of the E-mail I just received read as follows:

================
"The government of Israel has initiated military efforts to bring peace to its southern area and the border with Gaza.

These efforts were undertaken after the inhabitants of Sderot and neighboring communities endured months of missile barrages emanating from the Gaza Strip. And it ought to be noted, those missiles were launched after Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza, providing the Palestinians with the opportunity to live side-by-side in peace with Israel.

The results — whhat we are reading about and viewing on TV today — are tragic foor all people in the region.

The Israeli government concluded there is no alternative but to undertake an effort to end the rocket attacks and violence, so the people of Israel's south can live in peace. We mourn the loss of innocent life on both sides of the border, and we join with all people of good will in hoping that these efforts are successful in ending the threat and reality of missiles hitting civilian communities."

=================

The e-mail/web posting appears over the signatures of John M. Shapiro, UJA-Federation President; Jerry W. Levin, Chair of the Board; and John S. Ruskay, Executive VP and CEO. The e-mail, in fact, is from Ruskay.

I am old enough to remember who John Ruskay is. Back in the 1970's and the 1980's, John Ruskay, son of a successful garment industrialist, was active in supporting the so-called "Peace Now" movement in Israel, which advocated a withdrawal from Gaza and Judea and Samaria.

In full-page advertisements that appeared in the New York Times on 20 January 1988, p. B6 and 26 January 1988, p. A22, Ruskay was among the Peace Now signatories who advocated "against the occupation, for territorial compromise." Ruskay was a signatory to a full-page ad with a similar message that appeared in the New York Times on 16 March 1988, p. B2.

Well, Israel DID withdraw from Gaza, and look what is now happening! Israel got itself into its current jam by pursuing the very policies advocated by Ruskay 20 and 30 years ago!

So now, I get this e-mail from John Ruskay, incredulous at the perfidy of the Arabs after Israel showed its good faith (read "stupidity") by withdrawing from Gaza, and beseeching me to make a donation to help alleviate the suffering!

The basic fault is the fallacious presumption that the Arabs are capable of negotiating in good faith with the Jews. This is clearly not the case. Nor can the Arabs be trusted by anyone else! Leftists cannot recognize that there is such thing as evil people. Hamas hates the Jews and wants to kill us! Period! End of Statement. The only thing they understand is strength and force turned against them!

As for Ruskay, he differs hardly one iota from the arsonist who rushes to the conflagration he himself ignited, urinates into the flames, while proclaiming to the world that he is helping to extinguish the fire!

Keystone Cops are Out of Ammunition

My holiday is now Chanukah. To all who are celebrating it, I wish a Happy Chanukah. And to all of my friends who are now celebrating Christmas, you all have a merry one!


I have long questioned the wisdom of the various gun buy-back programs which are periodically conducted by prosecutors and law enforcement authorities. The entrepreneurial types among the gangs can finance their operations and lifestyles by stealing guns, and then selling them to the DA for $200 a piece, no questions asked.

Nassau County (NY) DA Kathleen Rice claimed that her recent anonymous weapons buy-back was a success.

The eastern boundary of Nassau County, NY, dividing it from Suffolk County, was once (with slight variations) the international boundary between the Dutch New Netherlands and the British New England. Kathleen Rice's successful program in Nassau County can be compared and contrasted with the gun buy-back program across the border in Suffolk County.

The first five paragraphs of the article "Gun-Buyback Glitch" by Ann Givens in Newsday, 24 December 2008, p. A8 [Denoted in Newsday's Internet edition here as "Suffolk Runs out of Cash for Gun Buybacks"] say it all:


===========
Mark DeAngelis heard that Suffolk County was giving people $200 gift cards to turn in illegal handguns last weekend, so he looked behind a rafter in a warehouse he rents and found a revolver he stashed there 20 years ago, he said.

He called Suffolk's Third Precinct in Bay Shore, confirmed that they were still doing the program and then drove there and turned over the gun, he said.

But after he handed the gun to the officer, he said he got bad news: There was no money left.

"He basically said, 'You just gave me an illegal handgun. We're out of money. Do you have a problem with that?' " said DeAngelis, 43, of Patchogue, who said he bought the gun to get it out of the hands of a man he considered dangerous.

"He said he would give me a receipt if I went in the back and showed him some ID," DeAngelis said. "I just walked out. I thought the whole point was that the program was supposed to be anonymous."
===========

As explained by Lt. Bob Donohue of the SCPD Community Outreach Bureau, the bottom line is "If they hand us an illegal handgun and we have no money, we can't give back the gun."

And so, Suffolk County's anonymous illegal gun buy-back program is neither a buy-back program, nor anonymous. And the bait-and-switch tactics conceivably might not even be legal!

Accordingly, Suffolk County residents who wish to voluntarily relinquish their firearms are best advised to cross what formerly was the international border, and sell their guns to Nassau County.

Burnout

I'm all burnt out, after a busy week. In no particular order:

My Final Exams are finished -- sort of. There are still 4 students who need to take their Final Exams, what with conflicts and medical issues and the like. I'm not much on making the special arrangements, but these four all had legitimate situations.

Actually, the exams were originally scheduled for first thing this coming Monday morning, but none of the students were too keen on the idea, and I was even less keen on the idea (and I had a conflict, to boot). So I was able to get a room (ironically, the same room in which the class had normally convened during the semester) in the late afternoon to the evening, so I held two exam sessions, and covered all but 4 students. That's not bad. And, what with the snowstorm(s), I guess that the students and their instructor really lucked out.

But now, I need to grade the Exams. That's my project this coming week -- along with grading the Term Papers.


2. Our fatso friend, referred to as "He" in prior postings here and here and here, was our houseguest this Shabbat. He initially had set out to go to the city to visit his son and daughter-in-law, but the snow was coming down and he saw the aftermath of a collision, so he called our rabbi, with whom he also has an open invitation. The rabbi's daughter had 3 friends staying over, and one of the rebbitzin's friends was also there, so the rabbi called me to ask us to put He up for Shabbat. It was no problem, especially because our son was still away at school (his last final exam is this coming Tuesday).

The best thing is that He didn't have a chance to stop at the bakery for his usual fattening cakes and pies, so my wife wasn't tempted to eat those things (believe me, she ate enough as it was, especially for Shabbat lunch, when the Ivy League lawyer mentioned here also joined us, thus replicating the same situation -- and results -- as the Shabbat on Sukkot when I was the only nonfatso at the lunch table. But we all had a good time, as usual.

3. A law review article of mine, written and published a couple of years ago, came to the attention of a lawyer with whom I am acquainted. Turns out that it is relevant to a case he has. The upshot is that I got paid to do an hour's research regarding related issues in his case. If he plays his cards correctly, his client stands to gain a nice piece of change from some of his former business associates.

4. Tonight is the first night of Chanukah. It was just me and my wife, being that our son is still away at school. But that's not so bad either!

Happy Chanukah (to all those who celebrate it)!

Yoga and Taxation

When I was in law school, I took one course in taxation. Had you told me then that I would eventually specialize in taxation law, I would have laughed derisively. But take note, all you law students and prospective law students: You won't find your legal specialty; your legal specialty will find you! I shall not now bore the reader with a rehash of the chain of event that resulted in the discovery of me by the taxation specialty, other than to say that by the end of my first day with the IRS, I was hooked on taxation.

The question is frequently asked as to what I find so interesting and intriguing about taxation. Here is just one of the reasons for my fascination: Washington State Department of Revenue, Excise Tax Advisory No. 2034.08.183 (1 December 2008) [Reproduced in its entirety]:


The purpose of this Excise Tax Advisory is to explain the tax reporting responsibilities of persons providing Yoga, Tai Chi, and Qi Gong classes.

“Physical fitness services” are included within the definition of “retail sale” under Washington’s excise tax laws. RCW 82.04.050. Income from physical fitness services is subject to business & occupation (B&O) tax under the retailing classification, and retail sales tax must be collected and remitted, unless an exemption applies. A personal service or activity that is not included within the definition of “retail sale” is generally subject to B&O tax under the service & other activities classification.

Physical fitness services are activities involving physical exertion for the purpose of improving or maintaining the general fitness, strength, flexibility, conditioning, and/or health of the participant.

Yoga originated as an Eastern philosophy and discipline approximately 5000 years ago. In addition to physical postures (“asana”), traditional Yoga classes typically emphasize significant breath regulation (“pranayama”) and meditation (“dhyana”) components as well as significant discussion of the historical and philosophical origins of Yoga. Participants will generally enjoy physical benefits from a traditional Yoga class, but those benefits are not the primary focus of the class. Similarly, Tai Chi and Qi Gong are Chinese martial arts in which physical fitness is not the primary focus of the traditional disciplines.

When physical fitness services were first included in the statutory definition of “retail sale,” Yoga had not been introduced into the mainstream fitness industry. It was largely practiced in Yoga studios and practitioners’ homes. Over the last several years, the traditional practices of Yoga, Tai Chi and Qi Gong have remained the focus of many facilities and practitioners; however, other facilities and practitioners have begun to make the physical benefits the primary focus of their classes.

The Department generally presumes that classes offering the traditional practices of Yoga, Tai Chi and Qi Gong do not constitute “physical fitness services” because physical fitness is a secondary or incidental benefit of these classes, but it is not typically the primary focus. This presumption may be overcome by showing that the primary purpose of the class is physical fitness.

However, when these classes are conducted at a health or athletic club, fitness center, health spa, or similar facility (“fitness facility”), the presumption is that the primary focus of any such class is physical fitness, and that the class therefore does constitute a “physical fitness service.” Community centers, parks, school gymnasiums, universities, colleges, hospitals, medical facilities, and private residences are not considered “fitness facilities” for purposes of this advisory.

A person providing Yoga, Tai Chi and Qi Gong class(es) at a “fitness facility” may overcome these presumptions that the class is a physical fitness service with evidence demonstrating the primary purpose of the class. Such evidence may include, but is not limited to, lesson plans or other similar materials that identify the specific curriculum followed in the class indicating that physical fitness related activities are not the primary focus of the class. For example, in the case of a Yoga class this would include a class curriculum that places significant emphasis on breath regulation, meditation, and/or discussion of the historical and philosophical origins of Yoga with the incidental physical fitness related activities.

# # # # #


You just cannot dream this stuff up!!

The Madoff Scandal

There is so much on the Internet about the Bernard Madoff scandal, and the story will likely persist for some time to come. We obviously haven't seen the worst of it yet.

In addition to my agreement with all that it is a big disgrace, and in addition to my joining those who call for Madoff's incarceration and impoverishment, my specific commentary is as follows:

1. If indeed Madoff was running a "Ponzi" type scheme, then, by definition, the later the scheme collapses, the greater the numbers of victims and dollars that are involved. Better it should fall apart now than a month from now.

2. I don't have any money directly invested with Madoff, but the effects on the market cannot help but affect my other investments.

3. A few of the affected investors, institutional and corporate, have evinced arrogant attitudes towards the public in general and/or me personally. Maybe, just maybe, this will inject into them a small quantum of humility.

What's in a Name?

The absurd cases that appear with some frequency in America's courtrooms never cease to amaze me.

The law in New York is that anyone has the right to use any name of his or her choosing, unless there is some motive for fraud or other nefarious purpose. In order to change one's name, one can take either or both of the following legal paths:

A. File a petition in the court to obtain a court order allowing the change of name; and/or

B. Simply adopting the new desired name (with or without the court order).


The Appellate Division, Third Department, has overturned a trial court's denial of a petition for a name change. The case is Matter of Earl William Golden III, ___ A.D.3d ___, ___ N.Y.S.2d ___, 2008 NY Slip Op 9333, 2008 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8983, N.Y.L.J., 12/9/2008, p. 30, col. 1 (3d Dept. 2008). The uncontested contentions in the petition are that the person who was born a baby boy and named Earl William Golden at birth now identifies with the female gender, and accordingly, seeks to change the birth name to Elisabeth Whitney Golden. The trial court noted the likelihood of confusion in the change of name from the male to female gender, but the Appellate Division panel found that this alone was not sufficient reason to deny the name change.

What is so absurd about this case? Apparently, "[i]ncluded in the submission was an affidavit from petitioner's spouse indicating that she supported the name change request and had no objection thereto."

So has Golden transitioned from a man to a lesbian? Is his "spouse" a real woman? A former woman? What's going on here?

The court can only go by the evidence before it. I cannot help but wonder, however, whether there might not actually be some sort of ulterior motive based in fraud or confusion. Either that, or this guy/gal is just plain wacko after all.

Hot Rod: Some Dots to Connect

I am not, and have never been, an intense watcher of Illinois politics.

Accordingly, I will defer to those pundits whose working knowledge of the Chicago political machine is superior to my own (with due regard to their personal political agendas).

Having stated that, I cannot help but find a few dots to connect in the emerging Blagojevich scandal:

1. The Service Employees International Union ("SEIU") looms large in the Complaint against Hot Rod Blagojevich.

2. During the big 1989 hospital strike in New York City, Local 1199 -- which in 1998 affiliated with SEIU -- was greatly aided in their strike efforts by Jesse Jackson.

3. The Reverend Jesse Jackson's son, Jesse Jr., is a Congressman who hails from Chicago.


I make no presumptions and level no accusations. But it wouldn't surprise me in the least if, when all is said and done, Jesse, Junior and/or Senior, were somehow involved in this Hot Rod Blagojevich affair.

Prison for the Clueless

This New York taxpayer will be supporting one more clueless nitwit for at least 19 more years. And that suits me just fine!

Edwin Frazier just got a 19-to-life sentence for his role in a home invasion that turned fatal.

Frazier, Ernest Johnson, Jovan Phillips and mastermind Eric Calace (spoiled rich kid whose father and grandfather are noted real estate developers) went to burglarize the home of Dane Aulak, Calace's cannabis connection. Aulak was home at the time, and accordingly, a struggle ensued with him. Aulak was fatally shot by Johnson and/or Phillips, but, in the struggle, managed to flip a gun away from Johnson or Phillips. Aulak's brother Jesse caught the gun and, in self defense, fatally shot Johnson and Phillips.

Here is the Suffolk County DA's press release, with all its updates at the bottom.

Calace, who was waiting in the car when it all happened, cut a plea deal for 17 years in exchange for his cooperation with the Suffolk County. [Eric the Spoiled Rich Kid Calace actually has something resembling a chance. His sentence ends in 2024, but he might get out in 2021 if he behaves well. If Dear Old Dad's real estate empire survives, then Eric might actually have a job to go to when he gets out. But I suspect that Calace, Sr. did his share to facilitate Junior's descent into hell long before he sprung for Junior's defense attorney.].

Frazier pleaded guilty to Murder II and was formally sentenced to a 19-years-to-life term.

So now, Frazier is whining to the Judge "How come I have to take their fall? … Why couldn't I plead to a burglary charge?"

To which I say, "Boo Freakin' Hoo," to borrow a quote my 2nd favorite Filipina, Michelle Malkin (my No. 1 favorite Filipina, now retired and doting on her grandchildren, is a Jewish girl from Manila who lost a brother during the Japanese occupation).

The exchange at the sentencing hearing between Judge Hudson and Frazier's mother is very telling:

"You didn't fire the weapon, but you held it," Hudson told Frazier. "Ready at your leader's command to kill."

"But he didn't!" the suspect's mother, Pamela Mays-Frazier, 40, shouted at the judge.


The way I read this, Frazier received, during his formative years, precious little guidance on how to be responsible for his own actions. And very few clues in matters of other common everyday wisdom. He certainly didn't get much from Mom.

Even Frazier's lawyer conceded, afterwards, that if Frazier didn't take the plea deal for Murder II, he likely would have gotten slapped with the maximum.

Frazier is lucky. His two accomplices got what amounts to the back door death penalty -- they were "victims" of justifiable homicide. It's the best we can do for capital punishment in New York, now that the sob sisters on the Court of Appeals have taken that prerogative away from the prosecution.

Frazier now has 19 years to get a clue or two before his first parole hearing. But I wouldn't bet that it will happen.

Meanwhile, we taxpayers will be footing the bill for Frazier's room and board. But that's a cheap and economical alternative to having Frazier out walking on the streets.

News Media Nomenclature

A. I heard some discussion on the radio in which the term "anti-AIDS activists" was used. Of course, those who might be labeled as "anti-AIDS activists" do constitute a diverse spectrum, so one cannot really apply any blanket generalizations to them.

But it seems to me that a fair number of individuals who would apply such a label to themselves do in fact engage in homosexual activity; and the engagement of multiple serial sexual partners is known to be very common among those who regularly practice homosexual activity.

Accordingly, aren't at least some of the purported "anti-AIDS activists" effectively PRO-AIDS activists?



B. Again on the radio, I heard the term "alleged Islamic militants" in connection with the Mumbai massacre. This was AFTER the Indian police had interrogated the surviving terrorist, who admitted that he came to Mumbai to commit terror with his group, in the name of Islam.

Why do they use the word "alleged" when it has already been established?

And, for that matter, why does the news media use the word "militants?" Why are they so reticent to use the word "TERRORISTS?"

Muslim Attack in Mumbai

Of course, the Muslim terrorist attack in Mumbai is all over the Internet.

My comment:

The line used by the Muslims has been that they don't hate Jews per se, but that they object to Jews taking the land of Israel.

If such be the case, how does one explain the terrorists' specific targeting of the Chabad House in Mumbai, and specific singling out of Jewish people in Mumbai as hostages and murder victims?

And where is the CAIR denunciation of this terrorist attack?

It wasn't on the CAIR website when I looked just before posting this!

Taxation and the Second Amendment

Sometimes the visceral impulse is at odds with the intellect.

For example, South Carolina will hold its annual Second Amendment Sales Tax Holiday on Friday 28 November and Saturday 29 November 2008. All handguns, rifles and shotguns (but not ammunition or other firearms paraphernalia) can be purchased in South Carolina, exempt of the state sales tax, during that window of opportunity.

On one hand, I get a nice warm feeling to know that at least one state is taking a stand in favor of the public's Second Amendment rights.

But, on the other hand, I believe that sales tax holidays are poor policy. They are complicated to administer, are tempting opportunities for tax evasion (and the consequent deterioration of respect for the law), encourage unnecessary consumption for consumption's own sake, and present an increased chance for the individual merchant of an encounter with the taxation authority.

On a personal level, this year, tax savings I might realize would be handily outweighed by the costs and hassles of traveling to South Carolina.

But hey, if you will be anywhere in or near the Palmetto State just after Thanksgiving, you can get a little tax break on your Second Amendment purchases.

Rest in Peace, Lt. Robert J. Ryan, Jr.

The Fire Department of the City of New York, which has already paid a very steep price for its collective excellence and dedication in protecting the city's populace, has lost another of its Bravest. Lt. Robert J. Ryan, Jr. fell in the line of duty while attempting to extinguish a fire in a Staten Island home. I, of course, proffer the all too usual condolences and regrets. My specific comments, other than those standard procedural sentiments, are as follows:


A. The posting of 16 November 2008 questions New York City's promotion policies for its uniformed services, including but not limited to posthumous promotions for those incurring line of duty deaths. This is, of course, an unpopular subject, but New York, like any other governmental unit, has the need for fiscal prudence, and also the need to appropriately reward/punish its employees for their performance. Oftentimes, these two imperatives are propelled on a collision course with one another, particularly in times such as this when the budget is exceedingly tight.

I do not know whether Lt. Ryan will be posthumously promoted to Captain, and do not now pass any judgment as to whether he should or should not be so promoted. What I do assert is that the decision, one way or the other, ought to be based upon the particular facts and merits of the individual case, whatever they happen to be.


B. Reportedly, Lt. Ryan was seriously burned in 2005 while responding to a fire. He worked hard to recover and to rehabilitate himself for more than a year, so that he could once again join the ranks of the active FDNY. Plenty of governmental employees have no doubt retired on disability for injuries which are superficial in comparison with Lt. Ryan's 2005 burns. Lt. Ryan surely could have gone into retirement and collected his monthly check while finding gainful employment in some sinecure position (or, perhaps, totally retired altogether). He affirmatively chose to make a comeback with FDNY. While this should not be dispositive in any posthumous promotion decision, it certainly should be among the many relevant factors.

C. Lt. Ryan apparently did work to reconstitute his firefighting unit following its personnel losses in the wake of the September 11th attack. This could not have been as easy as it sounds.


D. It is now reported that the occupant of the house which collapsed upon Lt. Ryan escaped unharmed. I know nothing about this person, but fervently hope that he or she is worth the trade, and will, in his or her own way, make positive contributions to society, just as Lt. Ryan did in his own way.



Rest in Peace, Lt. Ryan. Your family and colleagues have every reason to be proud of you!

Two More Slow Learners

Henry and Patricia Langer are slow learners. They have just lost their case in the United States Tax Court because they failed to substantiate the deductions claimed on their 2001 tax return.

The Internal Revenue Code is notoriously complex, convoluted and confusing. But one key rule in taxation is that the taxpayer must substantiate all claimed deductions. This can be done in various ways. For example, a contemporaneous automotive mileage log can substantiate deductible business miles driven. Accordingly, I maintain a mileage log, with the odometer readings at the various points of my daily itinerary. The log is consistent with my appointment calendar, and also with the gasoline purchase log, and also with the mileage readings when my car is serviced (which are noted by the automobile dealer, a disinterested third party).

The totality of Henry and Patricia's substantiation of items such as entertainment expenses, gifts for Patricia's piano students, business meals and travel was their own self-serving testimony, without any back-up documentation such as mileage logs, et cetera. And much of Henry's oral testimony only dug him in deeper. One of the claimed expenses was "A crystal vase costing $2,635 purchased to cheer Mr. Langer up after the events of September 11, 2001" because he likes fresh cut flowers. Folks, you don't have to spend $100 a seat to see Jackie Mason on Broadway; the comedy is almost as good in the Tax Court, which you can go in and watch for free.

But before you start waxing too empathetic for Henry and Patricia and their misunderstanding of the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code, note that this wasn't their first time in court to dispute their taxes. Patricia's business taxes for 1993 and 1994 were in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. In 1992, Henry and Patricia had an earlier Tax Court dispute over their 1984, 1985 and 1986 tax returns, in which they also failed to provide substantiation for their verbal assertions. Their 1983 income tax return was the subject of an even earlier Tax Court dispute in 1990, again with unsubstantiated testimony. One would think that by the time they did their 2001 tax return, Henry and Patricia would have learned to keep records.

And if you still feel sorry for Henry and Patricia, and their cluelessness as to the need to keep business records, consider that until at least May 1990, Henry was employed as an IRS Agent.

The best that can be said about the Langers is that they are model slow learners.

Timoshenko Killer Trial

As posted on this Blog here and here on 15 July 2007, NYPD Detectives Russel Timoshenko and Herman Yan were shot, Timoshenko fatally, while arresting three suspects driving a stolen BMW. Now, as reported here, here here and here, the trial is now underway for the suspects.

Of course I share the sentiments of the other law-abiding citizenry who will be following the trial. But this Blog is not intended to be a "me, too" screed, so this posting will zero in on some issues which are not being hyped in the mainstream media and mainstream blogosphere. In no particular order:


A. The suspects are now taking conflicting positions against one another. Accordingtly, three juries have been seated, one for each suspect. This is a wise economy of judicial resources, provided that Judge Lott conducts the trial in such a way as to avoid reversible error. Even if each of the suspects were tried separately, it seems that 90+ % of the evidence would be common to all. But Judge Lott has been on the bench since 1991, and, before that, had ample occasion to sit at both the Defense and Prosecution tables in criminal trials. There is every reason to expect that His Honor will conduct the trial in a manner that should withstand the inevitable appeals that will follow.


B. The prior posts refer to "Officer" Timoshenko and "Officer" Yan. The late Russel Timoshenko was posthumously promoted to Detective, and Herman Yan, still serving on the force, was similarly promoted following the incident. Such promotions are common, and, all else being equal, are fitting and appropriate ways to recognize heroism in the line of duty. But, as a New York State taxpayer (fiscally speaking, the suburban and upstate counties subsidize New York City), I will note, against all political correctness, that promotions of police officers and firefighters who were injured or killed in the line of duty also serve to increase pension and/or death benefits paid out from the public fisc. Without in any way detracting from the significant heroism displayed by the two, I did think about this taboo aspect of their respective promotions.

But as information surfaced regarding Russel Timoshenko's personal life before the incident which claimed his life, my reservations dissipated. He, in all likelihood, would have achieved promotion to Detective had he continued to serve.

Amidst the public hype on Detective Timoshenko, Detective Yan cut a very low profile in the media, no doubt due in part to his proactive efforts to stay out of print. Accordingly, I continued to wonder about Detective Yan's promotion to that rank. But Detective Yan once again made the news when he testified at the trial, and, having read about his comporture as a witness, I now have no doubt that he fully merits his rank, and would not be surprised to see him merit further promotions in the future.

Accordingly, this Post (and any future ones on the subject) will refer to the two officers by their respective ranks of "Detective" (unless, of course, Detective Yan advances to Sergeant).

This does not in any way invalidate my concern for the possible misuse of promotions to game the pension system. Public sympathies are not a valid excuse for fiscal irresponsibility. The public finances must be responsibly managed. And, at the same time, police officers, firefighters, and, for that matter, all other public employees, must be responsibly rewarded for individual performance.


C. According to the prosecutor, ADA Anna-Sigga Nicolazzi, the three did not wish to get caught in a stolen car filled with illegal guns, particularly Dexter Bostic, the one accused of actually firing the shots that killed Detective Timoshenko. The three wished to avoid going back to prison.

It would seem to me that if one desires to stay out of prison, then one does not ride in a stolen car (particularly a high-profile stolen car such as a BMW), and one does not carry multiple illegal weapons. And firing a weapon at a police officer, as I understand it, is the diametric antithesis of behavior calculated to keep oneself out of prison.


D. Other heroes in this affair are Detective Timoshenko's parents, who are attending the trial and staring down the three suspects. This must be exceedingly difficult for them, but it needs to be done, and they are doing it.


E. The three suspects, it seems, have no regard for the lives of their fellow human beings, and had they not been apprehended, they, in all likelihood, would have continued in their lethal practices. Unfortunately, the capture operation temporarily cost society the services of Detective Yan as he recovered from his significant injuries, and permanently cost society the diligent services of Detective Timoshenko.

My second 15 July 2007 posting stated: "The alleged driver, Lee Woods, was captured very shortly after the shooting. He would be the logical guy with whom to work for a plea bargain in exchange for testimony."

While one really cannot tell for sure, it doesn't seem like Woods has gotten into any plea deal at this point. It now seems that ADA Nicolazzi is going for full convictions on accomplice liability for all three, probably on account of such overwhelming evidence that Woods was more than a clueless chauffeur. If so, then maybe he, too, will spend the remainder of his life behind bars (few would bet that Dexter Bostic or Robert Ellis will ever find freedom in their lifetimes). If Nicolazzi gets the hat trick on all of them, then that will bring Detective Russel Timoshenko as close as he can get to a peaceful repose.

Bostic, Woods and Ellis are headed for the Big House. I am concerned for the Corrections Officers who will be watching over them.

Bubby

Though this posting is not primarily intended as a nostalgic memorial tribute to my two grandmothers, neither can it be entirely devoid of such sentiments. I was fortunate to have known all four of my grandparents. This was all the more fortunate because my mother, in attending to the medical issues which afflicted her at the time, frequently needed help in providing child care to me and my siblings. Much of that need was fulfilled by my grandmothers.

Later on, I was able, nay, privileged, to assist each of my grandmothers in their waning years. For quite a while, I was the one who took Bubby shopping every week or two. And while my other grandmother's living situation provided for those needs, I did attend to drafting and overseeing the execution of certain legal documents for her, which greatly simplified matters for her (and later, for her estate) in ways which were unexpected at the time such arrangements were made.

At the time of the first-mentioned Bubby's demise, I was employed at a situs closer to her apartment than to my home (I was still living with my parents at the time), so the usual routine would be that after I finished working at about 10 or 11 PM, I would drive directly to her apartment, sleep on her couch, and take her shopping the next morning (which was my day off).

One evening, when I arrived at her apartment, my parents, aunt, uncle and cousin were there. I instinctively knew that Bubby had passed on, and so, instead of taking her shopping, I followed Jewish law and tradition by taking my turn watching over her body until the undertaker's men arrived to remove her. I knew that my supervisor was still in, so I called him to inform him that I would not be coming to work for the next 3 or 4 days. My supervisor was certainly empathetic, and told me to take as much time off as I needed. But understand that I was paid on commission, and accordingly, did feel the financial pinch from my absence from work.

Approximately 20 years later, my other Bubby, who had survived well into her 90's, died. By then, I was married, had a child, and had moved away from the area. It was in the middle of the winter, and a storm was approaching. But my wife and I and our son traveled to the funeral, which was a quick and simple graveside affair. My wife and son promptly returned home, arriving just ahead of the worst of the snow. I stayed with my parents for a few days, and then returned on my own, using the services of various cabs and trains, in a 6+ hour trek.

My mother and her siblings all decided to go forward with the burial, even though her brother from California would not be able to arrive for another 36 - 48 hours. But he did arrive, and joined everyone else in sitting shiva at my parents' home.

The unexpected travel certainly caused some glitches in my law practice. My wife had to burn annual leave for the excursion. It was very inconvenient. But now, more than a decade later, nobody regrets how they handled the situation. My son was fortunate enough to know his great-grandmother, and to have had a relationship with her, and all the hassle of pulling him from school to attend the burial for the few minutes he was there was certainly worthwhile.

I cannot help but contrast and compare my family experiences regarding my respective grandmothers' funerals to the way Barack Hussein Obama is attending (or rather, not attending) to his own grandmother's funeral. It seems that Madelyn Payne ("Toot") Dunham's funeral is not planned until sometime in December, more than a full month after her demise.

The funeral arrangements for each of my grandmothers cost me money. Each disrupted my routine and plans, particularly the one after I had moved away from my hometown. As for my uncle, while he was not present at the actual burial, he did arrive as soon as he practically could, and there is no doubt that his plans were also disrupted considerably.

I can understand (and perhaps approve of) Obama's "The-Show-Must-Go-On" attitude when his grandmother died a little more than a day before the election. It strikes me, however, that once the election was over, a man of Barack Hussein Obama's wealth and power should certainly be able to find a way to get himself and his children to Hawaii to pay their respects to the woman who provided even more care to him than my grandmothers provided for me.

I stated it in my posting of 10 November 2008, and I shall now quote Justice Musmanno again:

"Those who have no respect for the dead can have but little appreciation of the dignity of man, either living or dead." -- Kotal v. Goldberg, 375 Pa. 397, 405, 100 A.2d 630, 634 (1953) (Musmanno, J.).


To which I shall add: "Or woman!"

The Citi Never Sleeps

Here are the first five paragraphs of a news item from this morning:

"NEW YORK – Citigroup says it is imposing a moratorium on most foreclosures as part of a series of initiatives aimed at helping at-risk borrowers remain in their homes — making Citi the latest big bank to announce sweeping efforts to try to curtail losses from souring mortgages.

Citi said late Monday it won't initiate a foreclosure or complete a foreclosure sale on any eligible borrower who seeks to stay in a home if it is the borrower's principal residence, the homeowner is working in good faith with Citi and has sufficient income to make affordable mortgage payments.

Citi said it is also working to expand the program to include mortgages the bank services but does not own.

Additionally, over the next six months, Citi plans to reach out to 500,000 homeowners who are not currently behind on their mortgage payments, but who are deemed as potentially needing assistance to keep current with their payments. This represents about one-third of all the mortgages that Citigroup owns, the bank said.

Citi plans to devote a team of 600 salespeople to assist the targeted borrowers by adjusting their rates, reducing principal, or increasing the term of the loan, steps known in the mortgage industry as a workout."


I'm sure that it will promote societal stability by keeping more people in their homes.


Query: How about people like me and my wife, who have at all times remained punctual and current in paying our mortgages to Citigroup? What sort of freebies do we get? Wouldn't we be better off defaulting, so that Citigroup can then reduce our mortgages too?

Just wondering!

Dissection for Dissection's Sake:

The case is Ross v Saberhagen Holdings Inc., which has been filed in the Superior Court of King County, Washington under Index No. 08-2-02434-2.

Mesothelioma is a type of cancer that can only be caused by inhaling asbestos. It inevitably is fatal. This is not in dispute.

James Ross, who lives in the Seattle area, has worked with asbestos and has contracted mesothelioma. This is not in dispute.

So what's the dispute? There apparently is a stupid-ass court rule which requires autopsy as a condition of a settlement payment to a mesothelioma victim's estate. James Ross does not want his remains autopsied. He believes that the autopsy is unnecessary because, barring some sort of accident or violence, when he passes on, there would be no question that his death will have been caused by mesothelioma.

Understand that Ross could, if he chooses, preemptively have his remains exempted from the autopsy if he were to declare that autopsy violates his religious beliefs (a stance I myself would in fact take were I in his unfortunate situation). Ross acknowledges that, unlike my own religious beliefs, his personal religious beliefs (whatever they may be) do not per se prohibit autopsy. But Ross objects to autopsy based upon on his personal moral values, religious beliefs notwithstanding.

And so, Ross has instructed his attorney to bring a lawsuit to declare this stupid-ass court rule unconstitutional because it requires inquiry regarding the cadaver-to-be's personal religious beliefs.


My comments:

(A) A quotation from the late Justice Michael Musmanno:

"Those who have no respect for the dead can have but little appreciation of the dignity of man, either living or dead." -- Kotal v. Goldberg, 375 Pa. 397, 405, 100 A.2d 630, 634 (1953) (Musmanno, J.).



(B) In this day and age of MRI and CAT Scan technology, can't they do a "virtual autopsy" of Mr. Ross when the time comes? That way they can see what went on inside of him without cutting him open. I don't know where Mr. Ross stands on the subject, but as for me, I have neither moral nor religious objection to such procedures.


(C) We have men and women who could have chosen safer and easier alternatives, but who have chosen to put on the uniform and place their lives on the line to fight to defend our liberties. James Ross surely has lots of things he wishes to accomplish and experience before he departs from among the living, but he has chosen to put his time and money into fighting for his right to have his earthly remains accorded some respect after his departure. And he is also fighting for your right, and my right, and everyone else's right to not have their corporeal infrastructures violated if we so choose. Accordingly, I publicly express my appreciations to Mr. Ross now, while he is still alive. Thank you, James Ross!


(D) Have you ever wondered why the cost of litigation and legal services has gotten more expensive of late? Have you ever wondered why the cost of health care has gotten more expensive of late? Have you ever wondered why the cost of insurance has gotten more expensive of late? James Ross might be on to something as far as connecting those mysterious fiscal phenomena!

Condolences to Obama

As has been bandied about the blogosphere and the news media within the past few hours, Barack Hussein Obama's grandmother, Madelyn Payne "Toot" Dunham, passed away today, the day before Election Day, at the age of 86.

I join everyone who, regardless of political affiliation, is extending their sincere and heartfelt condolences to Mr. Obama. I, too, was fortunate enough to have a grandmother who survived well into her years, and her loss was profoundly felt by the entire family. Toot's family, no doubt, feels a similar loss.

Having said that, I will suggest that given the lax adherence to statute and procedure exhibited by those involved in her grandson's campaign, it would be most appropriate for someone to check out and ensure that Toot's vote is not counted on a postmortem basis.

Off the Derekh

.

"Derekh" is Hebrew for road or path. Speaking of someone going "off the derekh" usually does not mean that the person is taking a detour for lunch or shopping, but rather, that he or she has strayed from the values of the Torah and Jewish law.

Judah Touro (1775 - 1854) was an American Jewish merchant and philanthropist who supported diverse charitable causes. In about 1971, Bernard Lander founded an educational institution called Touro College, which was named in honor of Judah Touro. According to its mission statement, Touro College was "established to perpetuate and enrich the Jewish heritage, to support Jewish continuity, as well as to serve the general community in keeping with the Judaic commitment to intellectual inquiry and social justice."

And indeed, Touro College's undergraduate units include Lander College for Men, whose students are all religious Jewish young men who learn Talmud and secular academic courses, and there is a Lander College for Women, which does ditto for religious Jewish young women.

So far, so good! A number of Lander men and women have been enrolled in some of the summer session courses I have taught over the years, and if they are any indication, then the respective Lander Colleges are fulfilling their missions rather well.

But all of those wonderful Jewish values seem to be circling the bottom of the toilet bowl when it comes to Touro's law school, more formally known as the Touro College Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center. I have had numerous occasions over the years to use the law library there, and now that Touro Law has relocated to a site across the parking lot from the Court Complex in Central Islip, New York, it is a good place to get a kosher meal.

As a lawyer practicing on Long Island, I can depend upon Touro Law's fundraising friends to send out those familiar solicitation letters from time to time. I am not particularly ashamed that once upon a time I did pull out my checkbook to respond to those solicitations, but neither am I particularly ashamed that, of late, I no longer do so. Okay, any law school anywhere will have programs and aspects which do not suit me; this is understood. But Touro Law has gone a bit too far off the derekh for my tastes and sensibilities.

For example, Touro Law now sponsors the William Randolph Hearst Public Advocacy Center. I cannot help but get an ever so slightly sour taste in my mouth from anyone in the Hearst family (except for WRH's granddaughter, Patty Hearst, who makes me feel like vomiting). But that wouldn't be so bad, except that the organizations hosted by the WRHPAC include ACORN and the Long Island franchise of the ACLU, and some other organizations having questionable compatibility with Touro College's state mission.

What would Judah Touro say?

Bits & Pieces

Okay, the holidays are over (they were very enjoyable), my sukkah is all dismantled and packed away for next year, and it is time to catch up on a few odds and ends. In no particular order:

1. Bianca Jagger: As noted on this Blog on 19 October 2007, Bianca Jagger, as an alien in the US on a tourist visa, could not claim the benefits of New York City's rent stabilization law for her NYC apartment. The case has gone to the New York Court of Appeals (which is the highest state tribunal in New York), and the landlord has been upheld. This decision is roundly applauded. Aliens are not necessarily entitled to the rights of citizens, particularly rights which weigh on the purses of citizens (such as Bianca's landlord). But by the same token, at least Bianca is here legally. How many illegals are benefiting from NYC rent stabilization?


2. An antidote to PETA: www.heifer.org. Check out the Heifer.org catalog.


3. Within the past 100 hours, I have had two manuscripts accepted for publication in prestigious scholarly journals. Estimated time before ink hits the paper (what with the editorial processes, etc.) is approximately 6 months. I am, of course, elated to the point of gloating over this. But if the author of an article (or book or other literary or creative work) fails to get excited by the prospect of publication, then that literary work probably has little or no redeeming value.


4. From Albany we get the news that Charlie O'Byrne, Governor Paterson's top staffer (who started his career as a horse in the Kennedy Family stable), has tendered his resignation following revelations that he failed to pay his income taxes for nearly 5 years. Definitely the appropriate thing to do! I have little sympathy for him. As a former IRS employee, I would be given very harsh treatment by the IRS and the courts were I to neglect my taxes for 5 years. In this era of New York State budget cuts, having tax evaders in high State positions sends the wrong message!

The news reports all speak of O'Byrne's FEDERAL taxes (that is, his tax debts with the IRS), but not a word thus far on his New York State income taxes. Usually, where there is a failure of a New York resident to file a Federal tax return and/or pay the Federal taxes, there is a corresponding dereliction for the state taxes. Are the Kennedy Family pursers going to help Charlie O'Byrne out on his tax debts?