I'm a bad liberal
 

There is interesting news going on all over the world, but it is a damn sight cheaper to have a schmuck like Bill O'Reilly at a desk fulminating about the War On Christmas than it is to pay reporters to go places and find stuff out.

This is what makes the whole thing ridiculous. Dividing districts based upon racial grounds should be unconstitutional (not the other way around). Assuming that you can only be properly represented by someone of your own race is beyond absurd. However, the these minority voting districts usually help Republicans because minority voters are concentrated all in one district preventing them from being spread around to various Democrat leaning districts. Texas seems to be the exception not the rule.

But I still think the whole idea is absurd.

I'm a bad liberal
 

Less used to call this the talking heads syndrome. We were roomates during the Gulf War and he pointed out that on every channel there was some idiot babbling and no real footage or reporting of the war.

They are being Lazy and Cheap.

They don't get paid as much, so they have to get their jollies (read: utils) in other ways.

The staff attorneys didn't have the juice to get political appointments, so they had to get civil service jobs. Not so for the guys at the top, who are predictably much more partisan -- in any administration, in any branch of the government, I'd wager.

I'm a bad liberal
 

Good grief, is this a tie-in to the FB's discussion of Springsteen ("57 channels and there's nothin on). What has the world come to?

What's the third dimension? Is she one of those people who think maps are brainwashing us into thinking that Canada and Argentina are tiny?

I'm a bad liberal
 

It's not their fault -- an invisible hand is controlling their puppet strings.

Quick question- remember back to your first year- always writing memos? sometimes the partner would say "research this issue- I want to know if our client can do this- be objective. consider both sides fairly."

Sometimes partner might say "our client has done this, and I want to know how to best position our arguments."

I liked the first kind! you just say "here's an argument- here's a counter argument."

second kind is like "here's our best argument- they'll say this, but we can answer that."

But I've never really seen a 10 page memo with only arguments for one side advanced, and this memo was what 60 pages? Maybe if I was trying to fool the partner into taking a position I might have a memo with only one side considered, but why would I try and fool the partner?

Unlike the legal research memos drafted by your firm's first-years, it sounds like the DOJ memo actually dealt with facts.

I'll edit this in an hour and delete your response- you go back and edit- and deal with this- a 60 page memo that includes no arguments for one side. I remember when I was a quasi-judicial officer of the United States Dept. of Commerce- anyway when i would get a 2 page brief saying I was wrong I was a lot more nervous than when I got a 20 page brief. 60 pages? ain't no way there's not 2 sides to that story- and there isn't a contrary argument? I think you all should be attacking the Bush admin for the incompetant memo drafting.

I heard it would have been a 30 page memo, but they used lots of big words.

Big words? Coup is 4 letters.

You're counting "coup"?

198-7:( :(