Excuse Me?

What's wrong with this picture:

 Agents shut down a popular Web site that allegedly had been distributing copyrighted music and movies, including versions of "Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith." Homeland Security agents from several divisions served search warrants on 10 people around the country suspected of being involved with the Elite Torrents site, and took over the group's main server.

Forget about the movie. Why are DHS agents are enforcing copyright law? Aren't they supposed to protect us from terrorists? I would think this type of thing would be handled by the FBI.

Andersen Verdict Overturned

The Supreme Court has unanimously overturned the conviction of accounting firm Arthur Andersen. Professor Christine Hurt of Conglomerate Blog thinks that this was the correct decision, but points out that it doesn't do much for Andersen: 

Of course, how do you reverse a death penalty that has already been

inflicted?  This reversal is as heartwarming as your high school

boyfriend confessing that now that he thinks about it, he shouldn't

have broken up with you.  Thanks.

FUCK

Like getting punched in the stomach.

Saudis Understandably Outraged

The LA Times reports that Saudi Arabians are upset about the possibility of women being given the right to drive. Really though, can you blame them?

Gonzales v. Raich

Majority opinion, footnote #37 caught my attention:

We acknowledge that evidence proffered by respondents in this case regarding the effective medical uses for marijuana, if found credible after trial, would cast serious doubt on the accuracy of the findings that require marijuana to be listed in Schedule I.

See here, here or here for interesting commentary (on the opinion, not the footnote).

Volokh Conspiracy Happy Hour

This was of obvious interest to me:

[Orin Kerr, June 7, 2005 at 3:49pm] 0 Trackbacks / Possibly More Trackbacks
Happy Hour Reminder: Just a reminder that this Thursday, June 9th, from 6:30pm to 8:30pm, the VC will be hosting its first Official VC Happy Hour at Karma Lounge (19th and I Streets) in DC. All are welcome. Among the bloggers likely to be in attendance are 3 or 4 Conspirators, a few PrawfsBlawgers, and I think some SCOTUSbloggers, too.

I will be in attendance, let me know in comments if you will be too.

The Two Sides of the China Coin

China-alarmists would do well to read this analysis by Jing-dong Yuan over at Asia Times Online:

Beijing's good-neighbor diplomacy, including the promotion of multilateral security institutions, is largely driven by its interests in dispelling "China threat" concerns and developing stable environments for economic growth. While it is true that China hopes these arrangements offer alternatives to US bilateral military alliances, it would be an exaggeration to argue that Beijing is deliberately challenging and balancing against US interests. Except for the Taiwan issue, Chinese anti-hegemony rhetoric is just that, and no more. China is not the Soviet Union during the Cold War.

DC Metro

The Washington Post reports that the Metro is poorly run. In other news, the sky is blue.

Murderer Convicted of Manslaughter

If you live in the DC area, you might remember hearing about a US Marshal shooting a 20-year old on Rockville Pike. The Marshal was convicted of manslaughter today and was acquitted of first and second degree murder. This seems like bullshit to me because:

1. The victim was shot in the back while sitting in his car
2. The defense was allowed to put the victim on trial, but "[t]he judge did not allow evidence of several prior violent acts that

   Lloyd is alleged to have committed. Twice in the last three years,

   Lloyd's wife, Wanda Guzman, filed restraining orders against Lloyd,

   alleging that he slammed her head into a kitchen door."

Sounds like a real charmer.

Link: Former U.S. Marshal Convicted of Manslaughter.

A Modern Urban Ascetic in D.C.

Did you see that story in today's Post about the professor from Northern Virginia Community College?

In the last 35 years, by working part-time jobs and forgoing sucheveryday comforts as a home telephone and vacations, by living in anefficiency apartment and driving an old car, [Richard] Semmler has donated asmuch as half of his annual income or more to charity.

Holy toledo. Ok, so the guy wants to give money away and build houses and stuff. Fine. But he is a professor, and so he probably has some sense; what made him so sure he wouldn't lose his job and really regret being so ridiculously generous?

One beneficiary of his largesse: his employer. Since joining NVCC in1974, Semmler has given $355,000 to fund scholarships as well as theschool's distance-learning program, where he often works.

Interesting strategy. But Richard Semmler is the real deal folks:

But Semmler's approach isn't checkbook philanthropy. He stays involved with his money.

"Most of my dollars go to very specific projects, so I know what I'm funding," Semmler said. "I want to see my dollars at work."

Oncea week and on holidays, he serves dinner at the Central Union Mission,and he offers math tutoring to clients seeking their high schoolequivalency diploma. His NVCC and Plattsburgh contributions go toscholarships and to specific programs at the schools. He serves on theboard of the Habitat chapter in Northern Virginia and always assists inbuilding the houses he helps fund.

"He puts his hands where his money goes," said Steve Greene, manager of volunteers for Habitat.

Admirable.

American Fundamentalism: As Crazy As The Rest Of The World

In an article titled, Lost to the Only Life They Knew, the LA Times profiles a young man you was kicked out his polygamous howntown.

Gideon is one of the "Lost Boys," a group of more than 400 teenagers — some as young as 13 — who authorities in Utah and Arizona say have fled or been driven out of the polygamous enclaves of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City over the last four years.

His stated offenses: wearing short-sleeved shirts, listening to CDs and having a girlfriend. Other boys say they were booted out for going to movies, watching television and staying out past curfew.

Some say they were sometimes given as little as two hours' notice before being driven to St. George or nearby Hurricane, Utah, and left like unwanted pets along the road.

Authorities say the teens aren't really being expelled for what they watch or wear, but rather to reduce competition for women in places where men can have dozens of wives.

You hate to think that shit like this goes on in the year 2005 in the US of A, but you probably hate a lot of things that are equally real. But wait, it gets worse:

According to Gideon, he is one of 71 children born to his father, 73-year-old Dan Barlow, and his father's eight wives.
...
"If you have 71 brothers and sisters in the house, how can you establish a relationship with your father?" he asked.

Terrible:

Many of the boys said children didn't attend school past the eighth grade and that they were taught that blacks were inferior — the offspring of Cain and doomed to slavery. Such views have earned the FLDS a hate-group designation by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

The children are told that dinosaurs came from another planet, and man never walked on the moon. More important, they learn the outside world is wicked and salvation comes through obedience to the prophet, who channels God's will.

What is wrong with these people? Read the whole disturbing story here.

Online Poker Players Beware

If, like my roommate, you play online poker, you should be aware of people like Roger Gabriel.

Chutzpah

What qualifies someone to judge the merits of someone else's speech? How does one acquire the skills to evaluate whether someone else's words are harmful or "over the top"?

You might be a prolific constitutional law professor, specializing in 1st amendment rights (see, for example, Eugene Volokh). Maybe you are some other kind of scholar, particularly attuned to the nuances of language that can cause harm and incite violence. Those people, it seems to me, would be qualified to make pronouncements about the appropriateness of language in a given setting.

Now, who might we find unqualified for such a task? We might regard someone as an unfit arbiter of speech if they've previously been careless with their own words. Certainly, someone who has been offensive or inflamatory in the past would make a poor judge of appropriateness. We might also want to consider ruling out those who have tried to use their speech to intimidate. In fact, we may want to consider excluding anyone who has ever served in the House of Representatives.

I take the time to consider all of this beause of an article on Yahoo!, noting Vice President Cheney's characterization of Howard Dean's recent (stupid) comments as "over the top". Egad, man! Have you no shame, Dick Cheney? Telling U.S. Senators to fuck themselves and having extensive expertise in the field of fearmongering does NOT mean you should start judging what is and isn't "over the top".

Intelligent Design = Socialism

Mark Klieman, Jim Lindgren, and David Innes all agree that Intelligent Design theory, philosophically, is strikingly similar to socialism.

The Soft Bigotry Of Low Expectations

Anybody remember that faux-dating service bit that MadTV use to do? "Lowered Expectations" it was called, and it had a catchy little jingle. This Juan Cole post reminded me of that, and now I can't stop hearing that damn catch line!

Containment Won't Work

Henry Kissinger explains why China isn't the new Soviet Union in today's Washington Post.

(Footnote: I still think Kissinger is a war criminal)

Taking the Metro...to BWI??

The Washington Examiner reports on a cool sounding plan "concept" that would connect the Green line to BWI. Cool!

Note that I linked to the Examiner today.

Reihan on Batman Begins

The American Scene reviews a "disappointing" Batman Begins, with palpable hatred of Katie Holmes.

Surprise, Surprise

Terri Schiavo's autopsy report was released today. The results should come as a surprise to no one:

"The brain weighed 615 grams, roughly half of the expected weight of a human brain," [Pinellas-Pasco Medical Examiner Jon Thogmartin] said. "This damage was irreversible, and no amount of therapy or treatment would have regenerated the massive loss of neurons."

Shocking! Just so no one forgets, this is what Bill Frist thought:

Emphasizing that he was "speaking more as a physician than as a U.S. senator," Frist concluded, "there seems to be insufficient information to conclude that Terri Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state."

Bill Frist kills stray cats.

That's all I have to say about that.

KPMG

I get the feeling that there isn't much sympathy out there for soon-to-possibly-be-federally-indicted KPMG. However, as a former accounting student (not to mention the fact that several friends of mine are employed by this particular firm), I find the whole situation lamentable. Here are some opinions from around the internet:

Tom Kirkendall:

So, the dubious governmental policy of criminalizing merely questionable business practices may result in some big companies not being able to to find an accounting firm capable of providing adequate audit services at all.

Larry Ribstein:

If the obstruction claim is, in fact, a strong one -- flat out lying and cancealment [sic] vs. following a document retention policy in the Andersen situation -- then it's too bad Justice squandered its credibility in its zeal to get Andersen.

Joseph Grundfest:

The prosecutor's decision to indict is largely immune from judicial review. The prosecutor acts as judge and jury. Traditional due process safeguards, like the right to confront witnesses, can't protect the potential corporate defendant. The innocent can therefore be punished as though they are guilty, and penalties imposed in settlements need not bear a rational relationship to penalties that would result at a trial that will never happen.

Christine Hurt:

I am intrigued by the fact that a company may be sufficiently innovative and entreprenurial to create a legal scheme designed to reduce taxes, but when the scheme is later declared "abusive," the company can then be served with a criminal indictment.  Was the scheme clearly abusive from the beginning?  Did the scheme clearly violate a tax code provision, regulation, bulletin, revenue ruling or private letter ruling?  Did KPMG attempt to get a private letter ruling?  I get the feeling that we encourage tax accountants and tax attorneys to distinguish themselves by being creative with tax planning, but if they get to creative and cost the treasury too much money, then we threaten indictments.