Won a motion for summary judgment today for our client in one of our few contingency personal injury cases.

It was a tough motion on an area of law that was bad for us. The judge's tentative was against us on every point (including on some bogus points). We would have lost but for one thing: the defendant tried to sandbag us with new evidence in their reply brief, which is inappropriate on summary judgment. Based on that we convinced the judge to let us file a sur-reply. Based on the sur-reply we won—in part because of our own new evidence, but mostly because the sur-reply let us target the judge's concerns in the tentative and led to the judge (or the clerk) taking a new look at our arguments.

Karma's a bitch. And sandbagging, whatever its occasional benefits, is perilous. I might have mentioned that to opposing counsel when he gave me attitude in the hall.

I have a vewy gweat fwiend in Wome called Biggus Dickus.

The only high point in the tragedy going on in Jamaica, entirely made in the USA as a consequence of our foolish drug war, is that the drug lord at the center of a manhunt that's put the country under martial law and killed 73 people is named "Dudus Coke."

I couldn't help but laugh when I read that.

There are times in life when you should shut up and not make any of the comments that come to your mind. Among these times is when your spouse sustains a Pilates injury.

Today's challenge:

Step one, visit www.americaspeakingout.com, a web site created by the Republican party towards the admirable goal of soliciting popular input into policies, goals, and solutions:

It will be a clearinghouse for the free exchange of ideas that will build a strategy to move our nation forward in a positive way. By embracing state-of-the-art online and social media tools, this effort will be vital to building a people-powered platform — one that can ensure our nation a more prosperous and secure future.

AmericaSpeakingOut.com is more than an online tool. It is a pledge by Republicans to involve the American people in a sincere process in order to more responsively address their concerns and respect their rights.

Step two, identify (a) the most hilarious and/or offensive sincere suggestion from a member of the public, and (b) the most hilarious and/or eerily credible suggestion by a anti-Republican troll. Avoid banging your head on the table as a result of kludgy site design and repeated run-time errors.

Step three: post it here. Be prepared to defend your assertion that the real suggestion is real and the troll suggestion is trollish.

I'll go first.

Real suggestion:

I have the right to formulate judgments on behaviors and to express those opinions. That is free speech. Just as I am entitled to make my case for why consuming high-fructose corn syrup is unhealthy, I likewise can make a case for why some other human physical activities are unhealthy. And be it about high-fructose corn syrup, gay physical expression, or the price of tea in China, you likewise may accept or reject my arguments; and respond to or ignore them. But the day you label my opinion as hate-speech, as criminal, or as otherwise disallowed, then we have ceased to be a free society where free speech is allowed. Our very Constitution is imcompatible with the doctrine that forbids divergent opinions on personal behaviors and practices.

[Yes, this is real. You hear the "halp, halp, vigorous criticism of me breaks free speech" whining all the time.]

Troll suggestion:

If you're sick of this obvious non-American socialist president and want to take our country back, please visit and support us at LemonParty.org Together we can retake our country! Be a Patriot! It's what our founding fathers would have wanted.

[Note -- DON'T VISIT THAT SITE, dumbass.]

This is not intended [only] as ridicule of the Right or of Republicans. There's some perfectly sensible ideas on that site — in part because the general populace is more sensible and committed than the Republican Party to limited government, fiscal responsibility, and individual liberty. It's not even intended as a commentary on Republican internet cluelessness — Democrats are just as clueless. It's more a commentary on this: open forums on the internet will never run smoothly, and foolish is the politician who fails to recognize that.

Looking for evidence of that injustice is rife? Look no further than the fact that wood chippers are common in California, yet professional dirtbag Joe Francis has not yet fallen (or been shoved) into one.

I previously identified the verminous Francis as an example of someone I would never defend, simply because his continued existence offends me too much to allow me to be an effective advocate. This four-year-old article gives you a hint of why — though he's put in four years of sub-human behavior since then.

Case in point: Joe's porn company is threatening web sites with lawsuits because they've repeated reports that Santa Monica police investigated claims that he assaulted a pregnant employee for leaking stories of his bad behavior to the press:

To whom it may concern,

Demand is hereby made that you immediately remove the Article from your website. The Article contains false, defamatory statements as well as statements that are in violation of agreements signed by the former employees involved with the report.

This letter serves as a formal notice of our demand that you immediately remove the Article from your website located at http://celebrifi.com/gossip/Joe-Francis-Allegedly-Attacks-Employees-Including-A-Pregnant-Woman-2551384.html as well as any other websites owned and/or controlled by you. We hereby reserve the right to take such action as necessary to protect our rights, business and reputation. Make no mistake: we will sue you, and seek injunctive relief, damages and attorney’s fees.

So that there is no possibility of misunderstanding, know this: we take this matter very seriously and will take appropriate action to protect our interests. The only way for you to possibly avoid such action is to contact me immediately. Nothing in this letter should be construed as a waiver, relinquishment or election or rights or remedies by Mantra Films, Inc. and its related companies, all of which expressly reserves all rights and remedies under all applicable federal and state laws. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter.

The low level of legal literacy in this letter is entirely consistent with the fact that a paralegal at a porn company wrote it. Francis has no prospect of winning in any attempt to secure prior restraint of reporting on police investigations, nor damages for the same. His demand is merely characteristic thuggery. If he sues that or any other web site, they should prevail under California's admirably strong anti-SLAPP statute. You'd think that Francis and his various pseudo-legal flying porn monkeys would know this. After all, it's been barely three months since he got his ass handed to him on an anti-SLAPP motion when he sued one Jayde Nicole for having the temerity to accuse him of assault after he assaulted her on videotape.

I'm not saying that being a thug who uses his wealth to threaten or file pervasive censorious harassment suits is as bad as being a thug with an established history of violence against women. But it's in the ballpark. And if, like Joe Francis, you're both — well. Not sure what to say about that, except to hope that the next woman Joe Francis gets mad at is a lifetime NRA member.

So our third kid, Shiva the Destroyer of Worlds, who is 3.5, has been chewing her fingertips (not her nails, the fingertips themselves) to the point they are often raw and chapped and torn and even bleeding.

This isn't even during a month when we've been withholding food to promote discipline. She destroys all obstacles to her will without apparent effort, and I had her removed from that Obama Death Panel, so it's probably not stress.

Has anyone else dealt with this particular bad habit in a kid? Can anyone suggest a remedy (like that foul-tasting stuff you put on fingers, or thumbs, to prevent thumb-sucking) that works? We can always break out the Skinner box, but I'm hoping for something that takes less effort. Thanks!

One of my partners just walked in with a brand-new 64 Gig 3G iPad.

Because he likes to torture me, he handed it to me for 10 minutes.

Played with email. Noted speed of Safari. Looked at books. Then selected a video from his unlimited Netflix account and watched it stream.

Forgive me, Father, for I am lost in the sin of geek lust.

[Note for those who are my wife: yes, I know I don't need it.]

I am not a big Twitter guy. It seems like an unholy magnification of the narcissism of the Facebook status. Still, every once in awhile something comes along that shows me the good that Twitter might do. But, nothing prepared me for this: SI Sports Vault.

This Twitter is the people at SI tossing up random photos from their immense archives each day. It's even better than their website, because the poster has a nice sense of photos that are topical, but still very obscure. Current favorites include this astounding shot of Manute Bol swimming and this shot of Larry Legend with his game face on.

If you are a Twitter person, this is definitely one to follow.

Of all the places I thought I could count on for participation in Draw Muhammed Day, the funny pages of a daily newspaper wouldn't have made my list. I wouldn't expect most daily-strip cartoonists to do anything controversial and I definitely would expect most daily papers to run a substitute strip. And yet, this morning, in today's Daily News, was this Over the Hedge:

Kudos to Michael Fry, T Lewis and the editorial staff at the Daily News.

Empire Strikes Back is almost as old as I am! I still remember being in a theatre in Little Rock when the first rumble of the AT-ATs hit. Check out Peter Mayhew's awesome walking stick!

The history of medical experimentation in America is not a pretty one. From the Tuskegee syphilis experiments to J. Marion Sims' experiments upon slaves to the U.S. Government's experiments with drugs and radiation and bioweapons, America has seen many grotesque abuses of the oblivious and the helpless.

Still, experiments occasionally have the capacity to shock us — particularly when they are related to, and conducted in support of, medical practices that still exist today.

Case in point — the experiments of Dr. George Rekers. You might remember that Rekers, formerly a prominent member of the "being gay is evil, and we can cure you" movement — was caught, as dramatic and narrative convention now requires, hiring a rent-boy to go on a European vacation with him.

If you're wondering whether to view Rekers as sad and tortured, or overtly malign, consider the experiments he conducted in pursuit of his belief that being gay can be "cured":

In 1974, Rekers, a leading thinker in the so-called ex-gay movement, was presented with a 4-year-old "effeminate boy" named Kraig, whose parents had enrolled him in the program. Rekers put Kraig in a "play-observation room" with his mother, who was equipped with a listening device. When the boy played with girly toys, the doctors instructed her to avert her eyes from the child.

According to a 2001 account in Brain, Child Magazine, "On one such occasion, his distress was such that he began to scream, but his mother just looked away. His anxiety increased, and he did whatever he could to get her to respond to him… Kraig became so hysterical, and his mother so uncomfortable, that one of the clinicians had to enter and take Kraig, screaming, from the room."

Rekers's research team continued the experiment in the family's home. Kraig received red chips for feminine behavior and blue chips for masculine behavior. The blue chips could be cashed in for candy or television time. The red chips earned him a "swat" or spanking from his father. Researchers periodically entered the family's home to ensure proper implementation of the reward-punishment system.

After two years, the boy supposedly manned up. Over the decades, Rekers, who ran countless similar experiments, held Kraig up as "the poster boy for behavioral treatment of boyhood effeminacy."

At age 18, shamed by his childhood diagnosis and treatment, Rekers's poster boy attempted suicide, according to Gender Shock, a book by journalist Phyllis Burke.

The very people who condemn homosexuality and claim that it can, and should, be "cured" are philosophically disposed to assert that moral relativism is wrong, that some things are wrong and some things are right regardless of circumstances, and that there are both good and evil in the world. In the spirit of that philosophy, let me say this: this conduct is evil.

[Hat tip to Chris.

Nixon had his CREEP and enemies lists and dirty tricks and ratfucking. Clinton had his string of assassinations of political enemies, conducted so covertly and skillfully that they could only be uncovered by people who make a living by selling VHS tapes through the mail. Bush had Gitmo.

But that's just not how Obama rolls. If you fuck with him, you may find him thwarting your run for state office by propping up an ex-NFL player to run against you and then torpedoing your campaign by hiring guerrilla artists to circulate oil paintings of you giving birth to a pancake. Or possibly a placenta; its hard to tell whether that's a pat of butter or some sort of afterbirth.

At least that's what the reliably crazy real estate agent/dentist/lawyer Orly Taitz believes:

Exihibit A, says Taitz, is a series of paintings of her by Dan Lacey, the so-called “pancake painter,” who achieved minor celebrity during the 2008 presidential race for his numerous depictions of a naked, muscular Obama perched atop a unicorn. He’s also painted Sarah Palin, John McCain and Mother Theresa, among other famous figures, with a pile of pancakes atop their heads.

But Taitz doesn't feel flattered to be in such company. She maintains that the painting titled Orly Taitz, Pancake Birther actually portrays her holding a placenta rather than a pancake. "This is really despicable,” she says, theorizing that one of her many political enemies put Lacey up to the work.

Which enemies are those? Why, it's the CIA, using the Goldfish Fanciers to attack the Orbital Mind-Control Lasers to control. Wait, I mean it's Obama and his supporters, who want to prevent her from winning the election for California Secretary of State and thus demanding that Obama produce his birth certificate and reveal the NSA's secret tinfoil hat technology.

Dammit. It's impossible to satirize this woman. I feel so powerless.

There was a time where the most reliable way to get a reliable supply of the strange was to be a rock star or actor or pointlessly famous rich person.

Now, it would appear that the best way is to be a "family values" politician.

Today's hypocritical douchebag: Mark Souder, eight-term Republican Congressman from Indiana, who as dramatic convention requires, was "[e]lected as a family values conservative as part of the Republican revolution in 1994," but has now been caught screwing a staffer. Souder's resignation statement shows that he previously could not locate his family values and now cannot locate his sense of shame, personal responsibility, or the caps-lock key:

IT IS WITH GREAT REGRET I ANNOUNCE THAT I AM RESIGNING FROM THE US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, AS WELL AS RESIGNING AS THE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE FOR CONGRESS IN THIS FALL'S ELECTION.
. . .
I SINNED AGAINST GOD, MY WIFE AND MY FAMILY BY HAVING A MUTUAL RELATIONSHIP WITH A PART-TIME MEMBER OF MY STAFF.IN THE POISONOUS ENVIRONMENT OF WASHINGTON DC, ANY PERSONAL FAILING IS SEIZED UPON, OFTEN TWISTED, FOR POLITICAL GAIN.
. . .
BY STEPPING ASIDE, MY MISTAKE CANNOT BE USED AS A POLITICAL FOOTBALL IN A PARTISAN ATTEMPT TO UNDERMINE THE CAUSE FOR WHICH I HAVE LABORED ALL MY ADULT LIFE.
…
I HUMBLY ASK YOU, FOR THE SAKE OF MY FAMILY THAT YOU RESPECT OUR PRIVACY IN THIS DIFFICULT TIME.

This is the same Mark Souder who said:

I believe that Congress must fight to uphold the traditional values that undergird the strength of our nation. The family plays a fundamental role in our society. Studies consistently demonstrate that it is best for a child to have a mother and father, and I am committed to preserving traditional marriage, the union of one man and one woman.

The importance of Judeo-Christian values in America cannot be underestimated. Yet, in the public square, religion has been maligned by the courts to a point where children cannot pray in school and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit struck down the Pledge of Allegiance. I am committed to fighting the assault on American values.

It is not immediately clear to me why, if "upholding traditional values" is a legitimate activity for Congress and a basis on which Rep. Souder campaigned, it is "twisted" "political football" and an invasion of "privacy" to comment when a Member of Congress cheats on his wife with a staffer. Certainly if a politician rubs our noses in it — for instance, by appearing in a video in which his lover interviews him on the subject of abstinence — it's fair comment.

Mark Souder joins folks like John Ensign and George Alan Rekers as professional moralists who violated their own purported moral code. It would be nice for this sort of thing to lead the professional moral scolds to engage in some reflection. But it's not likely — the typical professional moral scold position is well-entrenched as "well, at least we have values to betray" and "nyeah nyeah, we're saved and you aren't."

Why do I keep emphasizing these stories? Well, because (1) I approve of anything that promotes increased hatred and distrust of professional politicians amongst the populace, and (2) I approve of anything that undermines the concept that the state, rather than families, should have a role in promoting (not to mention imposing "family values."

For years, this has been the face that I present to the internet:

Last night I decided to change my avatar on all of the sites where I write or comment.  Pardon the self-indulgence as this is no brilliant observation, but the odd thing is that when I write using my new avatar, I've already noticed that my mood has changed subtly.

I suspect that in years to come, as we progress from humanity to facets of an uploaded global consciousness, virtual presentation in the form of graphics will become as important as wearing the right clothes.

I'm going to be honest.  I haven't read either Graham v. Florida or United States v. Comstock, both handed down by the Supreme Court this morning.  I don't need to, or care to, because sex offenders aren't my business.

But what I've read in the media is enough.  Thanks to the Court's wisdom, we have the paradox in which a state may not sentence a 17 year old rapist to life in prison without parole, but when his sentence ends the federal government may imprison him without a trial until his bones rot, on the say-so of a psychiatrist.

Bear in mind that in order to have convicted our 17 year old in the first place, the sentencing court must have found him to be sane.

No amount of craft, sophistry, verbal cleverness, or "yes but" can reconcile these opinions.  Only in an ivory tower could such a house of cards stand.