Longer Time No Blog

It's tougher these days. My best thinking is at work. But I can't look at or post to blogs at work. That, and the holidays. And most importantly, I need feedback to be useful.

But feedback follows new entries, so I best hold up my end of the bargain.

It's the holidays, though I worked most of the week.

Abramoff is the big news. While it's always good to see a stone unturned, I can't help thinking the lesson learned will be "don't get caught", not "don't commit treason against the Constitution by putting your interests ahead of your station". More worriedly, how many stones aren't unturned?

I hope everyone reading this had a peaceful and meaningful Christmas, Hannukah, or just holiday. My son officially entered his twos, so I await the onslaught.

Should be fun!

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Hail to the King

Lot's of Kings in Hollywood.

The King and I
All The King's Men
The Once and Future King
King Arthur
King Cobra
King Ralph
Lion King
The Scorpion King
Return of the King
The Fisher King
King of New York
King Solomon's Mines

But none of those kings matter. I love movies. All sorts of movies. I like to transported. I like to be entertained. I like to be inspired. I like to be moved. I like to be awed.

Peter Jackson, of zombie movie and Lord of the Rings fame, has written a three hour love letter to movies and movielovers. He's remade the most famous monster of all. And the biggest thing about this King is his heart. It's not a perfect film, and sometimes goes a little overboard, but three of the best cinematic experiences in my life occured in this film, and you'd be remiss to skip it on the big screen. Scratch that. You would be a complete fool. If you love movies at all, in any way shape or form, you owe yourself the three hours of KING KONG.

I could go on and on and on about this scene or that shot, or this actor or THAT ACTRESS, but you know the score. Admittedly I've seen better films in my life, but not many. And none were quite so heart-on-their-sleeve, unabashedly B-movie monster masterpieces.

Parenting...and the best TV show in years

Hey, Mary replied, and therefore set the genie in the bottle loose! It’s been a bit, so maybe I’ll cover a few topics, and try and stay away from politics. It’s easy to get consumed in that fire, and rarely does anything of value come from it. It’s also exceedingly boring.

My son is turning 2 on Christmas. Two years, and I can’t remember but a few months back. Seeing the baby in my arms in pictures just under two years old is like looking at someone else. He changes so much, so quickly, that my memory is having trouble keeping up. I don’t blog about parenthood too much, because my few and far between readers are most likely not parents. But this is about being a child as much as a parent, so I wanted to share a few thoughts. In the Christmas season, and in life itself, it is often remarked that giving is a greater gift than receiving. I am certain there are psychological reasons for this, as well as spiritual lessons, but it’s a true maxim. Parenthood is a major expression of that. It hasn’t been easy. I dearly miss the freedom I had without such responsibility. You lose a bit of that when you get married, so many here can appreciate the sentiment. Gaining a child is exponentially more restricting. At the same time, it is a bit more liberating. But I’ll cover that another time. One of the most critical things Clark has given me is perspective on my own parents. The efforts, the fears, the sheer WORK involved in raising a child are astronomical. I understand them now better than I did before, thanks to the simple paradigm shift. I might also mention that I have a pretty easy kid. I’m very lucky in that respect. Fear is what changes your daily life, I suppose. Fear of failure. Fear of losing him. It’s not crippling, but it’s ever present. My wife and I were watching Angel Season 3 (S3…S? is always Season ? of some show) for my son’s first month or two. Please recall that Buffy S2 stated if Angel had a moment of perfect bliss, he would lose his soul. My wife wondered if having his child would give him such a moment, but I immediately recognized that Angel would NEVER be perfectly happy again. More happy than before, certainly. But never perfectly happy. I don’t think a parent can ever be truly content, given the nature of life and parenthood. Not unless they can disconnect happiness from worry completely. I can’t. I’ll be on my deathbed a little worried for my son.

Scrubs is coming back in early January. Yes, the TV show. Not many people watch it, though it has a smart and dedicated fanbase. It’s about a million times ballsier and funnier than most of NBC’s recent sitcoms, and everyone should watch two or three episodes. You’ll fall in love. It’s not something the ads can sell. Much like another brilliant work of comedy – Galaxy Quest. I cringed at the trailers, and was forced to see it by my sisters. Well, a broken clock is still right twice a day (my sisters and I don’t see eye to eye on entertainment choices), as it was quite a gas. It gets funnier every time I see it. The mark of a great comedy. Anyways, Scrubs. Probably the last season, as NBC has no idea what they are doing, and the creators see the writing on the wall.

More, much sooner. I get better with feedback, even if miniscule.

I enjoyed C-SPAN this morning. Two sharp lawyers on either side of the military recruiting at law schools debate. I’ve made my biases clear…I’m very pro-military. I ‘d like to explain that more clearly…that does not mean I am pro-USE OF military, or pro-military across the board. My love of soldiers et al. usually dies right around when they achieve flag rank (General, Admiral) and become politicians. I love the dogfaces, the young men and women who work in the front without complaint (and oftimes without support). I am sensitive to situations where they become proxies for a war, or an administration, or a sensitive issue. Such is the case here.

I know I am going to get lambasted (as I have a dear friend who is a homosexual and a lawyer and will probably skewer me), as the crux of this argument is the policy (for the schools at least) is “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” My problem is that the law schools are punishing the military for a policy IMPOSED on them by the government. By a democrat named Bill Clinton. Do the law schools prevent the government itself from recruiting? No...just the military. My personal opinion is that this stems from a bias many in academia feel against the military. It’s not enough that you get your students to listen 24-7. You are taking away ONE DAY for the military to make a pitch to INTERESTED students.

And yes, I’m being disingenuous. The schools are doing it to protest the discriminatory policy of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Yes, Bill put it in, because it was the best he could get from the military. Yes, it is a shitty policy, and not Constitutional to boot. And I disagree with it personally. BUT…it is the accepted law, and there are solvent intelligent reasons for it...because the military is NOT a law firm. As bastions of intellectual morality and ethical behavior, the law schools are saying they don’t agree with the LAW OF THE LAND, and they are punishing the military for it. Frankly, the military should get special consideration from law schools, but career professors who labor under the artificial world of academia have it all figured out apparently (until the Supreme Court finds against them…as it is certain to do). Long story short, they can refuse the government aid (public dollars) and do as they wish. But they want the money, and the right to refuse entry as well. They want the government money, but the means to prevent government access in the form of military recruitment. Bzzzzzzzt. Wrong answer. One comes with the other, in my opinion.

Gays in the military is a hot topic. It should be. But the military is a poor test tube; it is not governed by the same moral drivers as is the regular world. Watching clueless yuppies and/or their kids take issue with the military under the guise of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is insulting. As is the policy itself (I READILY ADMIT), but take that up with the government, not the military. They should have access equal to that of any law firm. Feel free to criticize the policy. I certainly do. But until then, it’ll cost schools to have such impeccable standards. They have the choice. They seem to not have the courage of their convictions. Much like the Virginia Military Institute, which was dead set against females being admitted. Until the specter of public money being removed was dangled in front of them. Then they became perfectly happy to accept women; so much for their moral arguments.

Take the fight to Congress…where it belongs. It's a dated, poor policy. It's easy for a law school (often ones that get most of their students from upper class families, I'd bet) to make sweeping moral judgements, but the reality is not that simple. I do not defend the policy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Nor do I defend military recruiters in general. Some of them are scum. But not the ones they send to law schools (or med schools, for that matter). Law schools allow firms that defend some of the most despicable citizens of our nation access with open arms...they defend those people because it's their duty...it's the law. Don't ask, don't tell...it's the law. That, and these rights are protected by many who could never see the inside of one of these schools. They deserve good lawyers. The military has the right to recruit, whether the faculty like it or not. Whether the students like it or not. The students may always choose to not go.

I'd like to tackle the existing anti-military feeling amongst the intelligentsia later.

To FM, I still love you. Don't hate...participate :)