On Facebook, I've called Sarah Palin a cunt. Why? She's the stupidest bitch around. Born an Idawhore, she is raised either by just as ignorant parents or is an older sister who feels that she has to be better than everybody else. I have a sister like that (but she's still a Democrat). The problem is that Sarah feels that she doesn't have to be better than everybody else; SHE IS BETTER THAN ANYBODY ELSE, despite her limitations. If she was going to be a journalist, what type of education did she get?
Now, I don't always like Jim Hill. However, he's a better football player than most Americans (Hell, he played for the Chargers.). He knows football, and has been off and on KNXT/KCBS-TV and recently with KCAL-TV for over 35 years. When Jim Hill jumped to KABC-TV, KCBS-TV hired Keith Olbermann from KTLA, and he became the sports anchor until 1992 when KCBS-TV changed general managers, and insisted on having Jim Hill back. KCBS-TV then fired Olbermann, despite being over-qualified and sarcastic. Olbermann didn't become a hit on KTLA by doing what Palin did, merely read from a teleprompter and whose only qualification was having tits and ass. Olbermann wasn't a Mr. Olympian, quarterback, pitcher, point guard, or jockey, but he delivered sports news with eloquence, even though Hill still had 15 years experience at the time. Playing favorites at KCBS-TV don't work very well still, and they haven't been doing good since 1975 when they fired Jerry "From the Desert to the Sea, and to all of Southern California" Dunphy as Anchor. Both Olbermann and Hill are qualified as Sports Anchors. Who the fuck is Sarah Palin?
Palin is the bitch you want to beat up in Carson, California in broad daylight. She is a diva bitch who thinks she knows everything, but actually doesn't know shit! She sits on a pedastal thinking that she's all holier than thou. She is actually a sociopath, which is now typical of the Republican Party. I don't like Hill, but after seeing Sarah for the last two years, Hill can do a better job at being the Governor of Alaska (In a good way, not like what Tony Montana said to Seidelbaum after he got arrested.).
If McCain got elected as President, we certainly would have been in a Depression with Marie Antoinette Palin of Idawhore/Alaska next in line. People would be so sad and pissed, doctrines such as Communism would be appealing as it was in 1932. In the ghettos, it would have been worse than the French Revolution, because that Revolution was at least organized hell. She still wants offshore drilling. TELL THAT TO THE PEOPLE OF LOUISANA! She no concept on anything correct. She makes the actual Marie Antoinette look like Kirsten Dunst in real life. She attracts the stupid American types who have no clue on constitutional rights, economics, history, etc. She believes in being Born Again as in God does everything and provides. Yeah, right! God invented physics, and He knew that if people have to do anything, effort must be applied. This issue was already conclusively decided before the Creation. Satan and his followers went down to Earth without a body because he wanted to force everybody to be good, and everybody to get back to Heaven. On top of that, he wanted all the Glory. Sound familar?
Olbermann, now of MSNBC's "Countdown", has called her an idiot. That is being too nice. If she ever became President, she would make Nixon a liberal Democrat. (And hell, Nixon was a crook!) Nobody with a college education would vote for such a cunt. She lacks compassion for people, especially the poor and minorities. Why would she support Jan Sewer and SB 1070? She doesn't give a shit about Latinos. She also doesn't give a shit about Asians and Blacks. I was in a cunt rant against Palin when she said in 2008 "S---- beat the Bitch" as in Obama get the nomination over Hilary Clinton.
President Barack Obama did not earn his title by being on "America's Most Wanted", by ditching school and tagging private property, by playing Nintendo all day, by rapping about rape, or being a drugged-up overhyped athlete. His mother made him do his homework at 4:00 a. m. in the morning. Name a Black parent that does that. Not many. Our President does not need to be referred to a title of a now-discredited restaurant! He was very elected, and he EARNED the title as President of the United States. Bush had to get help from the U. S. Supreme Court in 2000, and the Ohio Supreme Court in 2004 to be SELECTED as President. President Obama has a MANDATE! Bush is a spoiled spoon bitch and cunt! As for the cunt Palin, she needs to be left on a iceberg drifting from Alaska! We need brains not stupidity at the White House, and to quote Vice President Joe Biden, "YES, IT'S A BIG FUCKING DEAL!"
Now, from deadlawyer.blogspot.com:
The Myth of the Constitutional Lawyer
My favorite news columnist today referred to Barack Obama as a “constitutional lawyer.” I forgive her, because the term was relevant to her point, even though there really is no such thing.
When I was a twenty-something law school graduate aspiring to be the world’s greatest trial lawyer, I landed a job working for a large insurance carrier. The position had been a stepping stone for many of the most respected and successful trial lawyers in my city, as it offered a wealth of courtroom experience and the opportunity to dole out millions of dollars in settlements in a short period of time to feeding-frenzied personal injury lawyers.
For a relatively modest salary, expense account, and company car, I exclusively defended lawsuits against employers insured by our company brought by employees who claimed to be disabled on account of a work-related injury. This was a specialty area of practice, with a dearth of paperwork, and the primary function the development of favorable trial testimony from tricky witnesses.
The critical component of any case’s value was expert medical testimony. Whether it be an orthopedic surgeon, neurologist, heart specialist, or psychiatrist; a medical expert was required to prove or disprove disability. The employee’s lawyer would hire a doctor to examine the guy (or gal) and to testify the guy was in his opinion disabled, and we would hire one to examine him and testify he was not. They had their whores; we had ours.
Because courts move at the pace of a physically-challenged snail, and because they schedule trials and witness testimony therein like a cable TV company on acid (“sometime between 9 am and 5 pm tomorrow, next week, any Tuesday afternoon on a first-come, first-served basis; or one of those same times six months from now”), doctors are usually allowed to testify by deposition. The lawyers, a court reporter, and the doctor hold court in the doctor’s back office.
Medical opinions are rendered in response to the legal device known as the hypothetical question. You ask the doctor to assume a certain set of facts, hopefully for your sake the relevant facts developed or to be developed in all the other trial testimony, and then ask for his opinion based on those assumed facts. It’s the other lawyer’s job to object like crazy to the question because the assumed facts are all BS.
One day at one such deposition about a year into the job, a well-established plaintiff’s lawyer who once held my job asked the standard hypothetical question, and because I wanted to impress him, I let loose with a series of pro forma, dippy-shit objections to his question. As the court reporter struggled to keep up with me, the other lawyer chuckled inwardly. Incredulous, he looked at me with the disdain reserved for someone who was wasting his time, and declared “I suppose next you are going to object because it’s unconstitutional.”
I grinned and stood admonished, as there is almost nothing more irrelevant to the everyday practice of law than the United States Constitution.
The Constitution broadly defines the authority of the Supreme Court, the extent of and limitations on Congressional and Executive power generally. Those powers do not have to be explicitly stated, they can be “implied”, or ancillary to one of the powers specifically listed in the Constitution. That notion is reinforced by the “necessary and proper” clause of Article I, Section 8.
The document also broadly outlines a “federalist” system, where a national government coexists with the government of each of the states. Amendments to the Constitution generally have further ensured in general terms the protection of individual rights, and further defined limitations on federal or state power.
The bottom line is that rarely does a legal problem or question get answered by a reference to a specific part of the Constitution. The provisions of the document are interpreted through a series of ostensibly precedent-setting appellate case decisions by the Justices of the Supreme Court—in other words—largely according to the politics of the day. Politics change, and what were case precedents one day can get overturned the next. What might be constitutional in one era; segregation for example, may be reversed and held to be unconstitutional in another.
The pace of constitutional interpretation and change thereto has but minuscule bearing in the professional lives of 99.8% of all lawyers. State trial courts almost never declare laws or practices unconstitutional, and state appellate courts do so with only slightly more frequency than almost never. Federal trial judges will occasionally in egregious cases declare a law or practice unconstitutional; however, much of constitutional doctrine is developed in case controversies by the federal courts of appeals, with the final rules determined by the United States Supreme Court largely through its power of discretionary review, called “certiorari”.
“Constitutional lawyers” in effect are lawyers who practice regularly in the United States Supreme Court, a very select group. Though many of them are brilliant, able, and scholarly, it is not necessarily their ability to understand the Constitution that qualifies them for their jobs. More often, it is their work and political connections combined with their familiarity with the practices of the United States Supreme Court and its Justices that result in their employment and appellation as “Constitutional lawyer.”
Barack Obama probably said the word “constitution” once during his two summers in Chicago as a clerk with the law firms of Sidley Austin and Hopkins & Sutter, and he would have been referring to his ability to digest the food and drink at a firm function rather than the eighteenth century document.
Obama secured a plumb job right out of law school at the University of Chicago in order to write his first book, and he almost immediately thereafter became an instructor in Constitutional Law at the law school without ever having practiced law. He was, in name, hooked up with a Chicago civil rights and neighborhood development law firm for a few years while he taught Constitutional law, but my bet is that he was fairly inactive with the firm. He then became state lawmaker, then President. He hardly ever practiced any law at all, much less enough or the type to be called a “Constitutional lawyer.”
That does not mean; however, that he is not extremely well-qualified. It is hard to say what effect his racial background had, because it surely cut both ways. He was held back in some ways because he was black, and he advanced in some ways because he was black. Regardless, you do not graduate from Columbia, graduate from Harvard Law School where you serve as editor of the Harvard Law Review, and teach Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago unless you are an exceedingly gifted, brilliant, and hard-working man.
Nor do you become state lawmaker and rise to the office of the President, particularly given his background of relatively few, if any, connections to wealth and power, unless you are an exceedingly skilled and effective politician.
Compare those qualifications with, say, a “constitutionalist” beauty pageant contestant who found it necessary to attend 4 different relatively small colleges in the Northwest, who takes a job as a sportscaster reading a teleprompter (not that there’s anything wrong with that), shortly thereafter marries into an Alaskan fishing business, becomes the mayor of a small town in Alaska, and then rises to Governor of Alaska, a job she quits halfway through to acquire riches from her new-found 15 minutes of fame as the Republican vice-presidential nominee in 2008.
I suppose in large part it depends on your politics, but let’s get real, this is really a no brainer—who would you rather have appointing people to interpret the United States Constitution?
We do not need to kill the Constitutional Lawyer, he never really existed. The Politicians do.
Mayeux on the Federal Courts and Criminal Justice - *Sara Mayeux, Vanderbilt University Law School*, has posted The Federal Courts and Criminal Justice, which is forthcoming in *Approaches to Federal Judicia...
52 minutes ago