...I promise to be better after November 4th. Until that day comes, in keeping with the theme of double standards...
(For some reason, the second of these two videos doesn't show up on an RSS feed. In other words, Christina go look at my actual blog. You won't be sorry.)
First this:
Now this:
I could blame the cooks, but I prefer to blame our kitchen. It's just unlucky. ;)
Below is a video that I found on a blog that my sister Big Colle recommends. I know where the video originated and where I found the video, but I didn't trace the in between. In any case, I thought this video was worth passing on for anyone out there creating something lovely in their lives right now:
A comment in the Sept. 15, 2008 New Yorker:
A couple of weeks before August 28th--the night that Barrack Obama accepted the Democratic nomination for President, in a Denver football stadium--Stuart Shepard, the digital-media director of the lobbying arm of Focus on the Family, one of the most powerful organizations on the religious right, posed a question to his Internet viewers. "Would it be wrong," he asked, "to pray for rain?" Shepard's answer, apparently, was no, because he proceeded to do just that. He prayed for there to be rain--abundant rain, torrential rain, "rain of Biblical proportions"--in Denver on August 28th. "I'm praying for unexpected, unanticipated, unforecasted rain that starts two minutes before the speech is set to begin," he said, adding, "I know there will probably be people who will pray for seventy-two degrees and clear skies, but this isn't a contest."
In the event, Obama gave his speech under clear skies with the thermometer at seventy-two degrees. It's hard to draw definitive conclusions from this about the efficacy of prayer. Still, Shepard and others who assume that the Almighty faxes meteorological talking points as a matter of routine must now be puzzling over what He meant last week by arranging for a hurricane just severe enough to disrupt the opening of the Republican National Convention (and freshen the public's memories of the present Administration's Katrina incompetence) but, mercifully, not so severe as to do too much damage to the innocent...
Just a little perspective on a campaign whose VP candidate is so fond of telling others that God's will just happens to coincide with hers (as evidenced here and here).
This is where I'm coming from. (Charles Rice, tenured and honored Notre Dame Law School Professor writing on the evils of contraception earlier this month. Rice frequently publishes in the Notre Dame newspaper with many supporters, including one woman who wrote after this article that contraception is only for the lazy and immoral.)
This is where I'm going. (Raoul Kennedy, a Skadden San Francisco partner, attends a Federalist Society meeting to debate gay marriage, coming down on the side of gay marriage. For those of you who don't know, the Federalist Society is an organization of law students and lawyers nation-wide who believe that "[l]aw schools and the legal profession are currently strongly dominated by a form of orthodox liberal ideology" and work to combat that force with an equally strong conservative force. You can imagine how popular the group is at Notre Dame.)
My future is bright.
We need more of this in our lives:
Anytime you want to pawn him off, Christina, we're ready & willing! :)
I've made all the calls and accepted my offer in San Francisco. I'm still a little uneasy about it because it was such a close call. In the end, I want to live in Chicago and work in San Francisco, and since work will likely consume my life, I went with the office where I was happiest. There are still a lot of things I'm worried about though....
1. The California Bar - the passage rate of the Illinois bar is 82%. The passage rate of the California bar is 56%.
2. Earthquakes - my knowledge of what to do in an earthquake is limited to what happened in the Saved by the Bell episode where there is an earthquake and Mrs. Belding goes into labor in the elevator. Wrap the baby in your football jersey. That's all I got.
3. The difference in cost of living - since I would have received the same salary in either state, I'm really going to miss Chicago when I'm paying prices that are close to NYC prices.
Despite these fears, the decision is made (if not totally cut in stone yet), and now all that's left is my 3L year, putting out 3 issues of the journal, and getting through the bar. Piece of cake!
Tomorrow morning I'm flying to Denver for the weekend. The stated reason* for this trip is that I want to disconnect for a weekend from school, the journal, and everything else so I can make my decision about what office I want to work at next year. Everyone seems to have an opinion on this question and 70% of the opinions are "Go to Chicago/SF because then you'll be close to me, I'll come visit you, we'll be in the same city, etc." I thought I would revive the Blog poll feature to see what the exact number of Chicago's to San Francisco's are. So check out the poll on the left and get your vote in by Sunday! And if you haven't already made up your mind about which city YOU'D rather visit, here are my main considerations that have nothing to do with who might be able to visit... (Don't kid yourself folks, 1st year associates are lucky if they get to come up for air let alone for visitors.)
Chicago:
-City is more my pace and style - I'm totally a midwestern girl at heart.
-City has a significantly lower cost of living and I'd make the same salary in either city.
-Office is bigger and has more clients and cases.
-Office will be moving to a brand new location two months before I start - I'd be in a brand new building and a brand new office.
San Francisco:
-City has NO winter. (At least not one to speak of relative to winter in New Hampshire, South Bend, or Chicago.)
-City has more liberals.
-Office is much smaller so I'd have more contact with partners and more abilities to do interesting work early on.
-Office lets me wear jeans on Friday, and I like 95% of the people I met there. A lot.
*Who am I kidding? The real reason is that I miss Miss Kitty and haven't been home since Christmas.
(Offensively political. You've been warned.)
This Sarah Palin lipstick comment has me furious! I first read about the story in class this morning: apparently Obama made a comment about McCain's policies and said they are the same old stuff from Bush packaged in a new way. The comment was "you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig."
All of the sudden McCain's campaign FLIPS OUT! They were demanding an apology from Obama because they say he was clearly offending Sarah Palin and being sexist. Sarah Palin said in her Convention speech that the difference between a pitbull and a hockey mom is the lipstick. Based on this lipstick connection, McCain's campaign said that Obama was clearly calling Palin a pig.
Take a look below: This is Senator McCain. He is talking about Hillary Clinton's health care plan. He is accusing it of being the same policy she had when Bill was president. Check out how he refers to the policy: (it's right around second 25)
Even if I have some work to do convincing others of it. I found this at my desk this morning in the journal office:
The name tag reads, "Megan Editor in Chimp." It was left by my arch nemesis, the Law Review Editor in Chief. Any suggestions on how to get back?
Lynn & I caved and bought season tickets again this year. We originally weren't going to do that, because last year we went to somewhere between half of one game or half of two games (depending on who you ask). But they dropped the price in tickets, and hopefully we aren't as bad this year as last year. We'll find out this afternoon.
"note: two things are certain in law school--you will drink, and you will cry"
-Katie, my former coworker at the child advocacy job in Indianapolis
