In the world of the ridiculous, American Airlines has decided that charging an extra $25 for a second checked bag is not enough to save them from inevitable bankruptcy and government takeover. In a rather pathetic attempt to "save money," the company has decided that if you check ANY bag, you're going to tip them $25 for the pleasure of doing so. What's next, charging for every piece of baggage you carry-on? See American Joins List of Airlines Charging for a Second Bag.
It's bad enough that all you get (if you're lucky) is a crummy mini-bag of stale pretzels/airline chex mix and, sometimes, a can of soda. I was on a four hour American Airlines flight a couple of weeks ago, and they actually ran out of the snack bags after handing out the first fifty. Their response? "You should complain to the website." Obviously the quality control of this company is up their with the clowns that ran Chernobyl. It makes me wonder if any merger with this company is possible. See How Bad Does it Have to Get Before American Airlines Does a Deal?
Is there anything passengers can do to stop this insanity? That's the most unfortunate part. Unless you are planning on flying Southwest, you're pretty much going to be screwed no matter which carrier you choose. In my experience, I've had bad flights with all major carriers, except Southwest. Maybe the rest of these companies should track their business model by temporarily alleviating long term fuel costs by locking in oil prices at the current $130/barrel for the next four or five years in order to save a bit on the end when prices jump even more astronomically. It's not a perfect solution, but it's something.
Or maybe we need to develop a more fuel efficient jet? Get on the ball Boeing, you're killing us.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
American Airlines attempts to show that it's not going bankrupt by gouging passengers who wear excessive amounts of clothing, such as shirts
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Spitzer call girl sues 'Girls Gone Wild' and thinks she has a better chance than the Borat Frat Boys
Here's a quick morning headline sure to get a laugh: Spitzer call girl sues 'Girls Gone Wild.'. A few weeks ago, when 'Hookergate' was all the news in NY, there was some talk of having this call girl pose nude for 'Girls Gone Wild.' But, upon doing a little internal due dilligence, it turned out she had already posed. See Spitzer escort's 'Girls Gone Wild' videos surface. Offer yanked, so sorry. While there was some earlier talk that she may have been 17 at the time of the videos, it seemed to have died down due to unknown reasons. But, today they have resurfaced.
Apparently, she is claiming that she was drunk and underage when she signed the contract. Obviously both are valid defenses, but I'm guessing there must be some sort of ratification based on payment or subsequent contact if the 'Girls Gone Wild' founder, Joe Francis, says he and his company "have nothing to worry about." In either case, she wants $10 million for her hardships due to this nudery. I'm sure she will have about as much success as those clowns from the Borat movie. How long did that one hang around, a month? Guess those efforts at being a call girl aren't quite as lucrative as one may have initially thought.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
High school skipping to meet a presidential candidate costs him his presidency
A rather simple observation on a rather silly story that was on the news today. Apparently a couple of high school seniors caught wind that Senator Obama was taking a pit stop near the high school and two of these guys decided to cut class to run out and meet him. See Students Suspended for Skipping Class to Meet Obama. What makes this story moderately newsworthy is not that the kids bothered to go back to class and then tell everyone about how they skipped school, or the fact that they got caught and basically got an in school suspension for it. No, one of the kids was forced to resign as senior class president.
What a joke. Graduation for high school students there (like anywhere else around the country) is about a month away give a week or two. What message can this possibly bother to send? Chances are this class president isn't a bad kid, and is probably going to go on to college and do great things. Hell, I was senior class president of my high school and I turned out fine.
If this happened to me, with a month of school to go (if that), I would be livid to no end, and would make sure to make it a point to embarrass the school officials for enacting such a ridiculous punishment. It would be almost enough for me to decide to go to law school just out of spite for the absurdity. I particularly like the administration's lame excuse and elitist attitude: "Assistant Superintendent William King says the rules are clear, and adds that if the students had approached a teacher about wanting to leave campus, they probably would have been given permission." Sounds like this guy needs a lesson from his his supervising superintendent in management.
In all seriousness, the press this kid should get out of this, and the opportunity to rip on his school administration for being so short-sighted should provide for some great stories. If this kid plays his cards right, maybe he would be able to get a sweet internship after his first year of college.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Texas polygamy and the family lawyers/judges that are fixing their coffee right now
I make this note only in passing because I have a couple of friends who are involved in the family court system either as lawyers or clerks. Supposedly, or at least according to the attorneys I have spoken to, at some point in one's legal career, one crosses paths with the wonderful world of family law. And sometime today in the great state of Texas, 400 or so kids and their respective attorneys are going to try and explain why they should (and why they should not) be taken away from this alleged polygamy sect. See Custody Hearing to Begin in Polygamist Case.
I saw some of the coverage on tv last night as a few of the parents(?) who live(d) in the compound explained how hunky doory it was there. The interview seemed sort of stilted and rehearsed, but what do I know as an average viewer. The whole case to me reeks of nightmarishness for all those involved (including and particularly the court system itself) and the fact this is going to keep playing on the news for however much longer the press can drag it out almost makes watching the election coverage or who gets kicked off American Idol appealing. Almost. Intead, I am enjoying what is beginning to be nice weather and the wedding season.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
The Sky is Falling and NASA gets into a pissing match with a 13 year old
I just saw this story this morning and since I vaguely remember reading something about this a few years and again a few months ago, thought I would click on it. Supposedly, an asteroid is projected to come within a few thousand miles (which is close, relatively speaking) of Earth in about 20 or 30 years. NASA put the odds of hitting at 1 in 45,000. Apparently, a 13 year old German boy, as part of a school project, calculated that the odds were actually closer to 1 in 450.
Whether the 13 year old exposed a massive coverup to avoid general panic or these physicists and mathematicians who are among the most elite in the world miscalculated something a 13 year old could do. The funny thing, to me anyway, isn't whether NASA is right or wrong, but how two different groups are reporting the story. See German Schoolboy, 13, corrects NASA's asteroid figures (I'll change this link once I find the more permanent one). Cf. The Register: Schoolboy's asteroid-strike sums are wrong (stating that the numbers the boy used to make his calculations were actually incorrect).
So who is right? Does it really matter? As is plainly evident by the way things are handled nowadays, I see this as being the next generation's problem. For now, I'll stick with NASA's estimations.
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
AA starts to fly south, will dissenting shareholders skybus back?
I have no idea whether AA is publicly or privately owned, but with all of Wall Street shaking on Bear Stearns, subprime mortgages and other messes, I can only imagine the types of litigation brewing in the airline industry (and particularly AA given that flights are being cancelled left and right). And I don't mean crying over spilled coffee or scantily clad airline personnel or passengers (or airlines). I saw on the WSJ Law Blog the other day that during these tougher economic times, it's the lawyers who survive, so maybe our profession is heading into a bull market. Let's hope so.
And I also heard today that there's a plan for some sort of emergency cell phone system. See Nationwide Cellphone Alert System in Works. See also FCC to Propose Emergency Text Messaging System. I remember how annoying the "tests of the emergency broadcasting system" are when they interrupt a television show with an obnoxious and loud screech and beeps.
Now, I wasn't in New York on September 11, so I don't know if something came across the EBS then, but I can just see how potentially bad this idea is if cell phones are going to start beeping incessantly for 40 or 50 seconds during these monthly "tests." And if everybody's phone is going off at once, I can see patience for the Cellphone Emergency Broadcast System wearing out even quicker. But I'm sure it serves a greater economic purpose on some level that warrants its inclusion into our already saturated airwaves.
And to complete the trifecta of legal news saturating the AP wire today, the ad wizards at Microsoft-Yahoo-Google continue to duke it out. See Yahoo/Google Deal is Anti-Competitive says Microsoft.
Enough ranting for now, I have to read some briefs.
Read more!
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Internet outage equals less spam?
Although I rarely post from work, because I know I'm not going to be on the internet for a few days, due in part to the season premiere of Lost and my weekend plans (and the Superbowl, of course), I thought I would chime in with this latest report that came across the CNN wire. See Internet Failure Hits Two Continents. Since one of those continents is North Africa, which seems to be a hotspot for the various lotteries I have one and home of several hundred dead relatives I am somehow related to, maybe this will cut down on spam for a couple days. Just a thought.
Back to work. Hopefully our internet stays up. That would suck if it did not. I don't know anymore how just 15 years ago, we lived without it.
Read more!
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
The media's hate for the economy and how Tom Brady has decided to attack it
Just a quick note on how I am continually amazed at the level of negative press that is given about anything remotely related to the economy. It's borderline of a test to see how influential the current media market is, with the theory being that if by scaring people into thinking that a depression or recession is inevitable, it will actually happen. Are they that desperate to sell newspapers? And who is this "they" that hates the economy so much?
Anyway, since bad news sells news nowadays, I saw that some astute paparazzi photographed Patriots quarterback Tom Brady wearing a walking cast. See Video Reveals Secret Brady Injury. Now, I know that when I was an athlete, I wouldn't go that far, but I certainly wouldn't rule out doing something like that merely to psych out my opponents and get them to underestimate me a bit. And, knowing that this sort of gag would get gobbled up by the press, it wouldn't be too hard to make sure that someone would catch it and exploit it. It certainly appears that that is the case.
Now, maybe it's real, and I'm sure he'll make his way through it. But in the same way that the media believes that this subprime mess will usher in the age of the euro, they sure appear to be pushing the negative idea that the Patriots shouldn't win. Am I the only one who is getting sick of this fear campaign (across the board, not just in sports or regarding the economy)? Who is orchestrating it?
Of course, I clicked on the article, which undoubtedly garnered revenue for someone somewhere, but what can you do. Further, I can't complain too much about this most recent rate cut since it will undoubtedly have a positive effect on my student interest rate. Nevertheless, I still find the overwhelmingly negative press coverage (for just about everything nowadays) a little disturbing.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Dr. Phil is no doctor and other misconceptions
While I have no personal interest in the personal lives of the celebrities (other than one or two I may potentially date one day), it's hard to avoid the Britney Spears saga that permeates pop culture nowadays. I'll only comment on one segment of it, the fact that Mr. Spears called "Dr. Phil" to come and talk to his daughter and try and talk some sense into her. The news reports are conflicting as to exactly the order of events, but it is undisputed that he was there for some time. Cf. Dr. Phil: Britney Spears is 'in dire need' of help with Britney Spears Rejects Visit from Dr. Phil.
I only bring all of this up because Dr. Phil isn't a medical doctor (or a D.O. or a dentist or any other legitimate medical professional). He has a Ph.D., so he's entitled to the title, but isn't his act a little misleading to the general public? I know if someone hung a shingle and called themselves a "J.D.," you can rest assured that someone from that state's bar would be raising an eyebrow if that person all of a sudden started representing clients.
According to his Wikipedia page, Phil McGraw got his psychology degree from Midwestern State University in Texas and got his Ph.D. in clinical psychology from University of North Texas. What I learned (at least according to Wikipedia) is that even his own profession has sanctioned him: "The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists imposed disciplinary sanctions on McGraw on January 27, 1989 for an inappropriate "dual relationship" reported in 1988 by a therapy client/employee from 1984." And, the real kicker: "As of 2008, McGraw has not completed the conditions imposed by the Board of Examiners of Psychologists, and he is not licensed to practice psychology." So, at least the profession considers this guy as a sort of rogue psychologist. Like Mumford.
My point to this isn't to knock Dr. Phil; obviously he provides a service to many people's daily afternoon routines. My problem is with the media's coverage of this and how many people will be mistaken in thinking that Dr. Phil is some sort of miracle worker doctor that can help Spears (or anyone for that matter) out. At least he didn't try and prescribe her medicine and in the end, simply advised the family to that she needs to seek professional help. Well Dr. Phil, it doesn't take a Ph.D. (or a J.D.) (or any other degree) to figure that one out. But hey, it's all about ratings anyway in the television world, right? And any press is better than no press.
At least those in the medical profession have criticized this blatant publicity stunt. See Oh Dr. Phil, Leave Britney Alone and Get Real. Leave that type of work to the real celebrity doctors, like Dr. Drew. At least Dr. Drew has his M.D.
Friday, January 04, 2008
Harvard Law 1, Yale Law 0 (UNC Law 0.5)
As evidenced by every major news organization, Sen. Obama led the charge out of the primary gates. See, e.g., CNN's recap of the 2008 Iowa caucus results. So, score one for the Crimson. And, as I predicted almost a year ago, Sen. Clinton's steam has started to run out before the race has even started.
The next question is whether she will be able to overcome her perception of being a) an old woman, and b) a Washington insider. Considering that photos speak louder than words sometimes, my suspicion is that maybe the Democratic party better start uniting behind one person instead of three sooner than later. My anti-Yale sentiments haven't quite reached Thomas proportions, but I'm going to take a shot from the bow and say that Obama is going to have an even more decisive win in New Hampshire on Monday. As I said yesterday though, it's going to be a lawyer representing half the country, and we'll see how much more or less that figure is come November.
And since I'm in the fair and impartial side of the business right now, Huckabee has continued his march toward the Republican nomination. Since this race isn't nearly as interesting as the Democrats', I'll side with my friends from Massachusetts and wonder outloud which party will unite behind their candidate (e.g., Huckabee) the fastest. I'll speculate on who I think has a better shot when it's down to two.
After it's all said and done, I'll revisit my prediction from the midterm elections in 2006 regarding the anti-incumbency movement. If Sen. Obama's success last night in Iowa is any indication, television's coveted 18-49 generation finally has a candidate they can relate to, and another percentage of the incumbents in the House and Senate should start thinking (or more likely, worrying) about their marketing strategy and other young and charismatic up-and-comers. As I said in November '06, "Carry the youth vote over the 72-is-the-new-69 demographic and any election is yours." It certainly seems my uninformed opinion may not have been so uninformed after all, at least for now.
In any case, I have two interesting stories my friends forwarded to me, which I am going to try and write something about this weekend. Until then, I'm out to party with some clerks who remain stuck on a west coast happy hour schedule.
And, so that no bulldog comes after me, I agree that the "we suck" prank was pretty good. The evolution of that prank (as well as the original and the latest) can be found here.
Thursday, January 03, 2008
The Hawkeye State: One of these lawyers are going to win
Well, considering that Senators Obama, Clinton, Edwards, and Biden are all lawyers, the only thing for sure that we'll know tomorrow is that the Democratic frontrunner, at least as claimed by a few Iowans, will be a lawyer. Yay law! (I don't think Gov. Richardson is a lawyer, however, but I think he's got as good a shot as Sen. Biden, so I'll take that action).
I tried to do a quick google search to figure out why Iowa is so important to the democratic process. I did find one older article about how they conduct their "caucuses," which I guess is fairly unique to the Hawkeye State, but nothing that really explains why I should care about what a bunch of midwestern Democrats think. Isn't this whole primary process a little archaic in itself? For that matter, isn't the idea of campaigning for president two to four years in advance even tackier?
Like the President, I'm not going to lose sleep over this thing. I'm sure it will be all over the news tomorrow anyway with all but three or four (both Ds & Rs) calling it an election. After all, there's absolutely nothing I can do about how this one plays out, and again, why everyone is so keyed in on what the state of Iowa thinks remains a mystery to me.
If you know however, please feel free to post relevant links and commentary. I'm sure I'm not the only one who is befuddled about the importance of Iowa.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Unbelievably busy days
Who would think December would be so hectic? In either case, my schedule is finally starting to settle down again and so I thought I would chime in on what I think is the most interesting internet/free speech/criminal law question around nowadays and that is this cyberspace myspace case in Missouri. The brief facts are that one girl (Megan Meier) pretended to be a boy named Josh, created a relationship with another girl who became devastated when "Josh" told her something that upset this girl, who then hung herself. I'm going to have to spend some more time thinking about this one, and I can't imagine this bizarro fact pattern would show up on the east coast, but the case certainly could represent an interesting intersection of free speech and criminal liability. I would imagine the national press this case has already gotten will spurn some great commentary from more educated free speech enthusiasts.
My thoughts, and they are really only limited to a couple of articles since I'm almost two weeks behind in my RSS feeder, is that free speech may not protect her on this one. Unlike being a pamphleteer shouting from his internet soapbox, this is much more targeted. Somehow I don't think the framers had this sort of thing in mind in protecting speech. But I guess that will be up to either the Missouri courts or some Missouri district court to decide. Should be interesting.
I will save my comments about the recent Supreme Court crack/powder cocaine case after I've read more about it. Since my clerkship doesn't have too much to do with sentencing, I'm not sure how much my ivory tower opinion would matter on this one.
I'm also thinking of taking another bar or at least exploring other parts of the east coast. More on that after I investigate this whole reciprocity idea.
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Has the media given any thought to the possibility that the Republicans can sweep in '08?
It is no secret that the media is pretty liberal. Even some of my thoughts are pretty liberal. I'll refrain from my thoughts of where the political parties have spun to for now, but it strikes me that this song and dance about political plants and pre-ordained questions happened in 2004 (and 2000, 1988, 1984, etc.). The fact it simply gets more press now just goes to expose the bias of the mainstream media.
For example, Drudge has reported several times as of late on the hired guns by Senator Clinton at the last debate. The most recent one gives me pause. See "'Diamonds v. Pearls' Student Blasts CNN." Now, I'm not knocking the question or how this process plays out on a day-to-day or debate-to-debate basis. My pause arrives from how the media is spinning this whole process.
It seems to me that the over-reporting of these early debates may be playing into the Republican machine's hand. And I just wonder at what point the Republicans are going to start rallying behind one person and use the discord among the Dems to focus their campaign. The same thing happened in 2004. If you remember, shortly after Sen. Kerry got the nomination, there was a brief pause in support before the Democratic party rallied around him. The Republicans, by contrast, were unified and lock step behind President Bush. I distinctly remember this article, but the only one that I can find that comes close to supporting my point is from the Intellectual Conservative: Why Kerry is Winning the Democratic Nomination. In reading that article, I can't help but wonder if the same story is playing out this go round. And if so, are the Republicans simply waiting in the wings to exploit this back and forth again?
This post doesn't seem to have a point other than I am beginning to think that neither Clinton nor Obama can pull off a victory as president. And if Edwards wins, I will have to see what happens. And maybe there's a fourth candidate that is going to pull out and surge past any of those three. In any case, I just wonder who would be vice president. Yet, given all of this, if the Republicans come through next year and lead for another four years, how will the rest of the world react? I don't think there's a clear answer yet either way.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
California wildfires have a culprit; hopefully his parents have good insurance...and lawyers
Since I mentioned this briefly last week, I saw on CNN this morning that some junior pyro has admitted to starting one of the California wilfires. See Juvenile admits starting fire that burned 38,000 acres. Maybe Gov. Schwarzenegger will grant him immunity.
Second, I saw that Latham is giving its clerks the same $50,000 signing bonus. Since I am in the midst of this whole process, I can state, definitively, that such bonuses are being taken into consideration. Particularly when they are paid, in full (after taxes), the day after your clerkship. The thing I am anxious to hear is how long you have to work in order to keep the bonus... I've heard between 1 and 2 years, but have not gotten a straight answer. Probably because most, including myself, are confident that they will be working for said BigLaw well past whatever this deadline purports to be.
If there are current second-year associates who just finished their clerkship last year and have started (although I suspect some are starting tomorrow), I am anxious to hear about the whole integration into the firm culture and how the clerkship has helped thus far.
Monday, October 29, 2007
Various legal conundrums and bad reporting
First rule of appellate clerking: Don't spend in excess of five hours working on something if the trial court hasn't addressed it first. I can assure that I won't do that again.
Since a lot of legal stuff has been on the news as of late, I thought I would comment on two or three recent articles that caught my attention. Some thoughts on Blackwater and the Genarlow Wilson case appear at the end of this entry.
The first is the one that said "U.S. Supreme Court lets Liz Taylor keep van Gogh painting." Well, this caught my attention for the obvious reasons. Unfortunately (or fortunately for the advertising cookies that were deposited into my cache), the article title is very misleading, at least from a court perspective. First, as the article reports, the U.S. Supreme Court didn't do anything but deny cert. While the effect is the same, as any lawyer knows, the denial of cert. doesn't mean anything except that the circuit court ruling is upheld. I need not dwell on this point further other than to express my disappointment that I was duped into clicking onto the article
Second, this whole Blackwater thing. See Immunity Deal Hampers Blackwater Inquiry. While I am not working on anything to do with this particular case, there may be some issues involved that could intersect with various things I am working on, so in a public forum and to remain consistent with my other posts and current commentary dialog, I will simply state that the Blackwater contracts as reported throughout the news are certainly interesting on all legal and academic levels. Personally, I think that mercenaries have been used in wars since Roman times, so I'm not sure exactly how, if at all, this issue can be resolved.
Third, and this is the most interesting case from an appellate court standpoint. Genarlow Wilson of Georgia got caught up in a legal nightmare surrounding a party he went to as a teenager. Although it looked like it was finally over back in June, the State of Georgia decided to appeal. After years of fighting the good fight, justice has finally prevailed and the Georgia Supreme Court, in a 4-3 decision, let him go. See Genarlow Wilson: Plea Deal would have left me without a home and the WSJ's Blog regarding that the voided sentence. I'm not sure I would call this "real, strange news" as the WSJ columnist suggests. In fact, I'm not endorsing the coverage of either of these articles. The Atlanta Journal Constitution does a pretty good job covering it, but the link to what you are looking for is right here, and you can read it for yourself. Wilson v. State. The Supreme Court of Georgia also posts their own press release about it. Read both and judge for yourself.
I will reserve any comment about it because I haven't read the opinion, but from my own following of the case, I would suspect that the court reached the correct result. By contrast, I will state that the whole "evolving standards of decency" standard is too mushy for my liking, and the mushiness appears to have helped Wilson win his argument. I guess in a few months, the whole world will know out how exactly the Framer's intended "cruel and unusual" to mean. Enough for now.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
California Wildfires
There are probably ten entries I need to write about based on the events of the last week. Fortunately (or unfortunately), I get to tag along to a conference that will take me away from my precious internet and westlaw research for the next couple of days. It is not a conference in California, but since that's all the news is about nowadays, I thought I would express my sympathies toward the mass migration that is going on at the west coast. I hear that more people have had to temporarily evacuate than during Hurricane Katrina.
If this does turn out to be completely arson related, which is a sad commentary in itself, what remedy does anyone really have against this person or persons? I saw the government is offering a $50k reward, but how fast would that person or persons declare bankruptcy and shield themselves from any lawsuits the thousands of insurance companies would bring? Regardless, I see the wildfires as causing a bigger problem based in part of the subprime crisis currently dragging our economy through the mud.
While I have no understanding of the mortgage business other than what I saw on the news and learned in part in a couple property classes, I have no idea whether it's a safe assumption that the mortgage would be essentially subrogated to an insurance payout. Or are these two different things? If someone could point me in the direction of a site that actually explains this in layman's terms, that would be great. In the meantime, I guess all Chargers fans are going to have to hope that some Cardinal fans help fill the stands this weekend.
Also, what is it like over in California right now? I'm left only with limited commentary on the internet and Yahoo answers. Any west coasters that feel like commenting on the situation, feel free to contribute by posting a comment.
