Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
No pressure. If the rest of the country cares what it looks like when Democrats are in charge, California, Oregon and Washington are textbook examples.
It must be interesting to be Gavin Newsom. He has presidential ambition seeping out of his pores. Yes, he personally told Biden that he’s not running. Biden ran as a moderate — which the country wanted, he was the only Democrat who could beat Trump — yet he has given much of his party’s policies over to the Progressives, who are considered far left by most of the country.
When it’s Newsom’s turn — and I believe he thinks his turn will come sooner rather than later — the Far Left dominates California politics, and frankly, the country just isn’t ready for it. I know that Newsom thinks he has a grand story to tell: economic success of California, at $3.63 trillion, the 4th largest economy in the world. He trounced the recall effort, rolled over the November election, and has spoken in Florida and Texas on the California miracle, such as it is. In all likelihood, he’s shooting for 2028, rather than 2024.
So Biden will run again, presuming he’s still alive, and the country’s first octogenerian President may — or may not — get re-elected. Not sure what will happen to Kamala, I think she’s short-term only.
Food for thought. Newsom might be running for Feinstein’s Senate seat. She’s 89 and should retire soon, although she filed the paperwork with the FEC that indicates she’ll run again in 2024 when she’s 91.
Good find. Whitmer won the recent Governor’s election big, riding abortion as her key (really sole) focus. She spent millions on pro-abortion ads when the Republican candidate literally didn’t answer. Spent nothing. Whitmer was sworn in two days ago for her second term. Michigan Democrats now have control of the House, Senate and Governor’s office for the first time in 40 years.
Whitmer’s interesting…super smart, with comparatively few people skills and super tone deaf. My favorite part of her first election was that she ran on getting funding for both roads and schools, and then reneged on both promises.
Good quote:
While Michigan has been slow to bounce back from some of the country’s strictest COVID policies, Whitmer has said priorities in her second term include bringing auto jobs back to the state and helping small businesses recover.
Yeah…she’ll be able to do that. Sure. Another great quote from Rosemary Bayer, a Democratic state senator first elected in 2018. She and others already have tried to lower some expectations and focus on passing legislation that has widespread appeal across the state.
“Pressure from lobbyists and special interest groups already is immense, and Democratic caucus members are having internal debates about how to proceed. “We can’t do everything at once,” Bayer said. “We don’t want to scare everybody.”
Love that. Don’t want to scare everybody. And speaking of scaring everybody, last quote is best, from State Sen. Mallory McMorrow, who received national attention after a viral speech on the state Senate floor in April, said what Michigan Democrats are able to accomplish could stand in contrast with Washington, which will have divided government with the GOP holding a slim House majority.
“It feels like Michigan is going to be a real opportunity to signal to the rest of the country what it looks like when Democrats are in charge,” McMorrow said.
Yep. It sure is.
‘You’ve got to deliver’: Democrats take charge in Michigan (clickondetroit.com)
I wish you, but in no way guarantee, a reasonably Merry Christmas and/or festive period, including, but not limited to a reasonably happy twelve (12) months from this date hereof.
That was a really good read. Funny how the infiltration only happened outside of academia when academia stopped having capacity. Wonder where all the DEI experts go when companies start cutting costs aggressively.
I have a feeling our DEI head will have to find alternative employment in 2023. It isn’t a cost-cutting move. She’s basically flipped the table on the culture that’s been curated over 75 years (offending basically everyone), she has poor interpersonal skills, she treats budgets as if they don’t matter, and she very clearly exhibits preference for and support of one very specific diverse group at the expense of all others.
California is home to 11 million immigrants, overall. As of 2019, 27% of Californians were born in another country. Foreign born residents are at least 1/3rd of the population in five counties, including Santa Clara (39%), San Mateo (35%), Los Angeles (34%), San Francisco (34%) and Alameda (33%). 53% are naturalized citizens and another 25% have some kind of legal status (green card, etc.).
Interesting charts in this article. Since 2007, Asia was the source of the majority of immigrants to California:
Immigrants in California – Public Policy Institute of California (ppic.org)
The funding thing isn’t bothersome to me as it remains aligned with the same incentives that exist when the law firm does the funding itself. There was already big money there. Now, if you are saying those particular incentives are shit and we need tort reform, then I agree. But the foxes have been guarding that henhouse forever. Most politicians are lawyers and are unlikely to hurt their guild.
The legal profession, as a guild, takes myriad steps to reduce competition. In spite of the fact that there are 1 million+ lawyers practicing their craft, they’ve set up the rules for their profession to maximize income for lawyers, period, at the expense of their clients. Clients have made inroads here and there; e.g., through use of Alternative Legal Service Providers (ALSPs) and AI, but the anti-competitive barriers are still in effect, particularly for B2B purchasers of legal services. Part of the issue is that anti-solicitation rules remain in effect, so clients are underinformed. Part of the issue is that the internal buyers are lawyers themselves. That’s not to say that they don’t seek competition among the law firms from whom they purchase, but they aren’t particularly aggressive about it. If you want to see reduced legal fees, you’d see the use of reverse auctions (bidding out of legal matters/projects) on the rise. In fact, the only time I’ve ever seen a standing ovation at an industry conference that wasn’t related to a retiring lawyer was from a roomful of people after the 2009 financial shocks. There was a client panel of five very senior GCs, and the first question from the audience was whether the GCs intended to expand use of reverse auctions. The seniormost GC (IIRC) was from 3M, and he looked up and down the panel before he reluctantly said “No.” The entire place leapt to their feet and cheered.
As for litigation funding, that started in Australia 27 years ago from insolvency litigation when the courts there, and later in the UK and America recognized that legal claims were assets and permitted insolvency practitioners to enter into contracts to finance litigation. The Australian High Court held that third party litigation funding served a legitimate purpose and were not an abuse of process or contrary to public policy. So the niche has been around for more than a quarter century. We have about 300 litigators, but our use of litigation funding is extremely limited.
El Paso is preparing for a surge of as many as 5,000 new migrants a day.
US border cities strained ahead of expected migrant surge | AP News
Title 52 had deterred more than 2.5 million migrants from crossing since March, 2020.
I think the capper for me was Bernie Sanders wanting all convicted felons in prison to vote, including the Boston Marathon bomber “even for terrible people.”
(1) Bernie Sanders Says Felons, Including Boston Marathon Bomber, Should Be Able To Vote – YouTube
Buttegieg says, at least wait until they’re out.
FAIR estimates that there are now 15.5 million illegal immigrants in the United States, led by California with 3.266 million illegal immigrants.
When Title 42 ends in five days, estimates are that illegal crossings will increase from 1,000 to 4,000 per day, or nearly 1.5 million annually.
End Of Title 42 Caps Worst Year Of Illegal Immigration Ever (thefederalist.com)
Reminds me of California Supreme Court Chief Justice Rose Bird, who overturned 65 death penalty verdicts during her tenure. She taught at Stanford Law School from 1972 to 1974.
She was despised by the associate justices on the court. She forced them to schedule an appointment to talk with her, for any reason. She substituted her opinion for rule of law, according to other liberal justices. In 1982, she argued that the Victims’ Bill of Rights (Proposition 8) should not have been allowed on the ballot, said proposition supporting restitution to victims, school safety, the right of public safety superseding guaranteed bail, limitations to plea bargaining, higher levels of proof for insanity pleas, introduction of prior felony convictions without limit in subsequent court cases, victims were granted the right to be notified when criminals had parole and sentencing hearings, limitations on excluding evidence, etc. Despite Bird’s attempts to keep it off the ballot, it stayed and it passed, 56% to 43%.
1982 California Proposition 8 – Wikipedia
She was voted out by a 67% to 33% vote. I wonder if the next Oregon governor will support similar commutations?
And China leads in space-based weapons:
The sad thing is that Mrs. Mick detests seafood, she doesn’t even want to see me eat it at a restaurant. So I don’t really have any seafood dishes from Mrs. Mick.
That said, however…my son lost a bet in which he had to eat a pescetarian diet for three weeks. He divided his meals into three: salmon/non-salmon/sushi.
I won’t opine on sushi, it’s too personal of a taste. But here was his favorite salmon dish, which was rosemary salmon with orange. Super easy:
Ingredients
- 1 garlic cloves
- 1 or 2 small rosemary sprigs chopped or 1 tablespoon dried rosemary
- 1 or 2 6oz salmon filets
- Dash of sea salt and black pepper
- 1 tbsp Orange peel or grated Orange zest
- Balsamic glaze
- Olive Oil for cooking
Instructions
- Preheat oven to 425°. Next chop garlic and rosemary and mix together with orange zest.
- Place salmon in foil or oiled baking dish. Drizzle each filet with olive oil and sprinkle with the rest of your herbs/seasoning. Including the salt and pepper. You can also drizzle a little balsamic glaze over each filet if you’d like.
- Place baking dish in oven for about 10-12 minutes or until the salmon flesh is flaky.
- You can also grill this in foil for about 10 minutes Both work!
As for non-salmon, my current flavorite is perch. Best recipe, also easy:
Ingredients
- ½ cup butter, melted
- ⅔ cup crushed saltine crackers
- ¼ cup grated Parmesan cheese
- ½ teaspoon dried basil
- ½ teaspoon dried oregano
- ½ teaspoon salt
- ¼ teaspoon garlic powder
- 1 pound yellow perch fillets
Instructions
- Preheat oven to 350 degrees F (175 degrees C).
- Pour butter into a shallow dish. Combine cracker crumbs, Parmesan cheese, basil, oregano, salt, and garlic powder in a separate shallow bowl.
- Dip perch fillets into melted butter and press into the seasoned cracker crumbs to coat. Arrange coated fillets on a baking sheet.
- Bake in the preheated oven until the coating is browned and fish flakes easily with a fork, 25 to 30 minutes.
Best of success!
Two thoughts. First, with respect to the wrongful death aspect of suicide, it needs to be examined whether Stanford owed Katie Meyer a “special duty of care,” which covers a fairly broad ground. If Katie was on prescription meds, or under the care of a psychiatrist, therapist or doctor and Stanford was aware of same, then Stanford would be wise to construct a thorough legal defense. And in fact, Katie did seek care at Stanford’s Sports Psychology Clinic, she talked about considering suicide and was prescribed medication. Similar goes if Katie felt bullied, either by the school or the football player. Bullying isn’t just person-to-person, institutional bullying can be argued as well, particularly since they didn’t hold the football player to the same level of (semi)legal scrutiny. If any administrator at Stanford ignored a direct or indirect plea for help, well…
Separately…I worry about the “always believe women” position. When I grew up, my mother hated men (with good reason), and she would predictably take my sister’s side over that of my brother and me, every single time. That led to some monstrous behavior on the part of my sister. Professionally speaking, I’m aware of numerous situations in which women were believed completely, and incorrectly. In that environment, when a woman can speak no wrong, is it a far jump to imply that she can do no wrong; e.g., throwing a cup of coffee on someone who offends you is perfectly acceptable. Gives rise to “Karens” everywhere, is my concern.
One final point…as Harvey Weinstein is about to go down for the third time, it’s easy to point out what a reprehensible lizard he was. Imagine, demanding sexual favors in trade for career advancement. Horrific, I agree. And yet…while it is awful for the gander, it’s acceptable for the goose? How is that different from what Kamala Harris did? She carried on a public affair (so public that it was discussed in Herb Caen’s column) with a highly placed public official, Willie Brown, who gave her the first two political positions she had. And a BMW, as Willie proudly noted. Like a budding actress, she slept with a powerful man and received favors. Why no public outcry? Why was it off-limits during the campaign?
