Month: October 2005

Sing with me, folks; sing to the tune of that little “Annie” ditty: Will the sun come out, tomorrow? … Meteorologist Nick Gregory on Channel 5 news reports that we got a season’s worth of rain within a week. Yowza.

So, we don’t know very much about Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers. But, she does seem like a witty tough cookie, according to the documents and transcripts or whatnot, as the NY Times’ Ralph Blumenthal and Simon Romero report:

[….] The documents, released on Monday at the archives and covering 1995 to 2000, did not touch on her views on sensitive social issues. They also were not related to Mr. Bush’s campaigns for governor and president. Those files are held with his father’s papers at Texas A&M and are not public.

Before the release, the papers were reviewed by the office of Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, which made no objections. The lottery commission blocked the release of two confidential memorandums with appeals to the state attorney general’s office.

The search produced more than 2,000 pages from the 2,000 cubic feet of documents from Mr. Bush’s files as governor and more than 20 square feet of records from the commission. Some papers from Ms. Miers’s time at the commission , a position to which she was named by Mr. Bush, depicted her as a bureaucrat with a keen eye for procedure. They also showed she sailed through her confirmation hearing. Minutes of commission meetings showed Ms. Miers in command, questioning employees and other commissioners on topics like advertising, charitable bingo operations and bids to help manage the lotteries. One lawmaker asked what groups could run bingo, saying, “Could the Ku Klux Klan?”

Ms. Miers responded, “Well, I would certainly hope not.”

Ah, good one, Ms. Miers. 😉 At least we know you’re not for the KKK having anything to do with the ole Texas Lottery Commission.

And, as an attorney in private practice, NY Times’ Jonathan D. Glater reports that she was your usual corporate law firm partner, with corporate litigation work, and while her colleagues and opposition thought well of her, even the things they say about her don’t seem that greatly impressive:

[….] In 1998, Ms. Miers was hired by SunGard, a technology company based in Wayne, Pa. According to court documents, Southwest Securities sued after SunGard began negotiating a business opportunity with two employees of a company that Southwest later merged with. Southwest contended that the talks violated the terms of an agreement between the predecessor company and SunGard. The case was eventually settled.

“It was a pretty standard case, in terms of just run-of-the-mill commercial litigation,” said Joe B. Harrison, a lawyer at Gardere Wynne in Dallas, which represented Southwest Securities. “There wasn’t anything unique about the facts or the law that I recall.”

He added that Ms. Miers was “well prepared, very courteous.”

Lewis T. LeClair, a partner at McKool Smith who faced Ms. Miers in another contract case, said she was a “different kind of lawyer.” “You can think of the Mark Laniers, the Rusty Hardins,” he said, referring to some of the more flamboyant courtroom advocates in Texas. “Harriet’s not cut from that mold.” [….]

Margaret Donahue Hall, a partner at Locke Liddell & Sapp, also offered plaudits for Ms. Miers. “She is really a unique person, and she does not go about things the way someone who rises typically does,” Ms. Hall said. “In my heart of hearts, I know she’d make a great Supreme Court justice, but it’s hard to put into words why.”

And that is the biggest challenge for Ms. Miers’s supporters, who can point to competence, toughness and niceness but offer few signs that she has wrestled with the sensitive topics that the public seems to care about most.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who was confirmed by the Senate last month, produced a rather spare paper trail that nonetheless looks exhaustive when compared with the one left by Ms. Miers. Senators grilled him about his thoughts on capital punishment, affirmative action and the right to die.

In all Ms. Miers’s cases on soured contracts and other corporate matters, there are scarcely even hints of what her thoughts on such issues might be.

Wow. Could you be a little more withering? Heck, you can’t even figure out how Ms. Miers was as a law review person: her one note, written back when she was a 2L in 1968, suggests she had legal thought, but nothing terribly inspiring or very indicative of how she is as a 60 year old lawyer. But, seriously, all I would want to say is that you don’t have to be an Ivy Leaguer, or a law review person, or a judge to become a Supreme Court justice. You should at least be significant or inspiring. Be someone who others (your legal colleagues, for example) may be able to clearly articulate why you deserve to be on the Highest Court.

And, in other news, Chewbacca is now an American. Well, at least the British-born actor who played Chewbacca of “Star Wars” got naturalized.

“I got married to a Texan lady. That more or less decided it,” said [Peter] Mayhew, who has been married to his wife, Angelique, for six years. [….]

When he takes his oath to become an American, Mayhew said he’ll recite what he can remember and “it will be a Chewie growl for the other parts.”

Wonder if R2D2 or 3PO (who I believe are also played by British actors) may end up becoming Americans next.

Oh, and a little more Smurfs – Anderson Cooper had a funny bit on the whole UNICEF Smurf commercial in Belgium:

Still to come, though, on 360, what’s blue and white and sort of shaped like a gumdrop with arms and legs? A smurf, of course. But why would someone bomb the smurfs? We’ll explain ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: First of all, we should tell you that although what follows is about some beloved children’s characters, notably smurfs, it really isn’t suitable for children. Unless you have the kind of children who like to see their beloved characters barbecued, in which case you have bigger problems than keeping them away from the TV set. So seriously, not for kids right now.

See, UNICEF has decided to bomb the smurfs in a new TV commercial. It’s for a good cause, but seeing smurfs oblito- smurferated (sic) is — well, it’s kind of shocking. See for yourselves.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You think all smurfs look the same.

COOPER (voice-over): Who doesn’t love the smurfs? Besides parents forced to watch them, that is. They’re bouncy, blue, three apples high bundles of smug happiness, baffling the plots of the evil sorcerer Gargamel and his mangy cat Azrael.

Generations have grown up entranced by the coquettish Smurfette and the gruff but lovable Papa Smurf.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Keep on smurfing!

COOPER: Who at the age of 542 looks pretty darn good.

But in a new commercial now running on TV in Belgium, all is not so smurfy in the mushroom-filled town of Smurfville. One moment, the smurfs are dancing around a campfire. The next, it’s Smurfageddon. Their cute mushroom homes are blown up, and so are a number of smurfs. The commercial ends with a child smurf left crying amidst the wreckage.

Who would do this to smurfs? Turns out the bloodbath is the brainchild of UNICEF Belgium. Belgium is the birthplace of smurfs, after all. And they are blowing them apart to raise awareness and money to rehabilitate children, kidnapped and forced to fight as soldiers in the African country of Burundi.

Will seeing their little blue friends blown up send thousands of Belgian kids into shock? Perhaps, but UNICEF says the ad is meant for adults, and will be aired only at night.

For their part, the smurfs aren’t talking, but we are sure with their can-do smurf spirit, they will be up and smurfing in no time soon.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: Oh, smurfs. Papa Smurf.

We did make a number of calls to UNICEF headquarters to give the organization the chance to comment on the story. None of our calls was returned. We’re also still waiting to hear directly from the official spokessmurf. That would be smurfirific (sic).

Tee-hee. Guess Anderson’s feeling a whole lot better after getting back to town from Katrina.

And, last but not least, last week’s Time magazine covers how former Los Angeles DA Gil Garcetti has found a fulfilling 2nd career: as a photographer. The pictures aren’t on the website, but they looked fascinating when I saw them in the magazine. It’s great to hear a lawyer do more than grab publicity (which weren’t pretty when Garcetti had the Menendez brothers and OJ Simpson cases) – but finding art in life.

Weeks of no rain leads to this: a whole week of rain. But, at least some people have perspective – the flooded folks out in NJ told some tv news reporters that, on the bright side, it’s not like it’s Katrina. People can deal. And, we can avoid a drought. But, the wet and gray can get tiresome.

Imagine the Smurf village getting bombed and poor Baby Smurf all orphaned and injured. I just don’t have that kind of sick imagination, but apparently someone in Belgium and/or UNICEF does. Yeesh.

Laura Bush apparently felt that some of the criticism of Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers could be due to sexism. When I heard that, I wasn’t overly impressed. I mean, honestly, Miers is nominated to replace the 1st woman justice; criticism may be attributed to elitism, snobism, or plain old justifiable criticism – but sexism? I almost want to say, maybe. Well. Slate’s John Dickerson says, “Get serious”:

Yesterday, the first lady tried to improve Harriet Miers’ confirmation chances by charging that some of the nominee’s critics were guilty of sexism. The powerful accusation may count in some quarters as an answer to legitimate criticism, just as it sometimes did when it was leveled at Hillary Clinton’s antagonists. But crying discrimination isn’t going to help Harriet Miers, both because there isn’t much truth to it, and because to the extent it’s a factor, it’s coming from the guy who appointed her.

The White House should have stuck with claiming that Miers’ foes were snobs and elitists. At least that had the advantage of being true: Many of the most outspoken opponents of the nomination are intellectuals, who are elitists almost by definition. The Bush side could make other plausible complaints about Miers’ critics: that some in the Senate are opportunistically looking for ways to draw attention to themselves, and that those on the religious right are being impertinent and fussy, demanding a second dessert after being served the treat of John Roberts. But sexist? It seems like the last desperate act of a team whose nominee is in trouble.

[….] The White House limited the field of potential choices to women. In ordinary English, that is called a quota. This admission of truth, which Bush’s father never made about Clarence Thomas, makes it hard for the president to rebut criticism that Miers is not the most qualified person for the job. We know for a fact that half of humanity—and a good deal more than half of the federal bench—was deemed ineligible to be chosen at the outset. I thought conservatives like the president believed that women could withstand open competition? Instead, Bush has subjected Miers to what he calls the soft bigotry of low expectations.

[….] President Bush will not give in to the increasing calls to withdraw her nomination. It’s not in his DNA to back down from a fight. Miers could withdraw herself, but that would only confirm another sexist stereotype: that when it comes to politics, women can’t handle the pressure.

The “soft bigotry of low expectations.” Hmm.

Well, meanwhile, Miers and the rest of us may check out Prof. Michael Dorf’s Con law Crash Course. I have to read this one very carefully – looks quite interesting… 😉

Ugh – more drizzle. Gray sky all day.

Angel beat the Yankees, and so they get to play ChiSox. Yanks and Bosox fall, and we get two different American League teams in the playoffs. So far, ChiSox lose Game One to the jet-lagged Californians. Methinks those Angels ain’t so jet-lagged (well, it’ll catch up to them soon enough). The Bosox’s championship last yet appears to set precedence for the ChiSox, so it’s possible that pigs may fly and yet another perennial loser team may end up being champs? Hmm…

Considering the line of work I’m in (focusing on the laws of anti-discrimination and all that) and my own interest in racial and ethnic histories of the USA, I still can’t make of my reaction of the following: when an Asian person walks up to you, an Asian person, and asks, “Are you Chinese?” (and yes, you are, but that’s besides the point), what are you supposed to do in return? I feel weird about it, and think of it almost as if it’s a total conversation stopper (before any conversation even begins). Perhaps this person is looking for someone of similar affinity or, perhaps this person (evidentally of Chinese origin and less-than-able English speaking ability) would like to speak to someone in Chinese (and I don’t fit the bill, as an ABC who has Learn to Speak Cantonese stuff collecting dust). Or perhaps I’m overly sensitive in feeling weird when someone asks “Are you Chinese?” – giving me that bad vibe of being seen as the “perpetual foreigner,” even to someone who’s also Chinese (who’d likely think less of me as an ABC anyway).

Daily News’ David Hinkley writes up on the 40th Anniversary of NYC’s All News radio station, 1010 WINS:

[….] The private anniversary celebration was held yesterday at Gotham Hall. The big public event was a listener poll earlier this year on the top-40 New York newsmakers of the past 40 years, with former Mayor Rudy Giuliani voted the winner.

Like all polls, it had some odd results – Bette Midler made the top 10 and David Dinkins didn’t make the list at all – but WINS published it and moved on.

WINS, as listeners know, rarely breaks its rhythm.

“With this station,” said general manager Greg Janoff, “people turn it on and within 30 seconds, they know if something is wrong. WINS has such a familiar sound that even a small deviation tips you off.”

In some ways, WINS’ sound hasn’t changed much in 40 years. The ticker. Traffic, weather, sports. Crisp delivery of the headlines. The three-times-an-hour news cycle.

“Give us 22 minutes and we’ll give you the world” is one of the city’s best-known slogans, though Janoff notes it does hide a small mystery: “No one knows for sure who at the ad agency first thought it up.”

Whatever that answer, [program director of WINS Mark ]Mason said the “22 minutes” mantra may also camouflage the fact that WINS newscasts are much different today than in 1965.

“The approach has turned almost 180 degrees,” he said. “In the beginning, the station concentrated heavily on traditional news like politics. But we found that what’s often more important to people is what affects them at that moment. When the Republican convention was here, we covered the political event less than the disruption.”

So in an age when many news/talk outlets channel everything toward the “big story” of the moment, WINS is more cautious. It takes a 9/11 or a Staten Island ferry crash for WINS to rearrange its news “clock.”

“We never break format lightly,” said Mason. “If we miss a traffic report, it’s a big deal. If we’re 40 seconds late for a traffic report, it’s a big deal.”

Whatever the WINS philosophy, it works.

In an average week, 2-1/2 million people at some point turn to WINS. If there’s a snowstorm, make it 3 million. In the weeks after 9/11, the total approached 4 million, an unheard-of number in today’s fragmented radio world.

“We’re as close to a mass-appeal radio station as you’ll find any more,” said Mason. “Because of what we do, our audience mirrors the city.

“We’re a utility. We’re like the light switch when you walk into the room. If you can rely on it to do the same thing every time you flick it on, it’s doing its job.”

Well, I can say that I spent way too many a late night letting the radio stay on 1010 back when I was in college, pulling all nighters and thinking that staying up with the Hawaiian overnight anchor Paul Guanzon would keep me awake. I liked how 1010 has its weird moments, when some stories sound unbelievably tabloid-y or brief to be taken too seriously, or how its on-air folks display their personalities (and their bios on the website are no less quirky).

Apparently, people didn’t recognize Justice Scalia while he was marching in the Columbus Day Parade, reports the NY Times’ Fernanda Santos; the article “Who’s That Guy? Without the Robes, Grand Marshal is Mystery” (got to love that headline!):

Justice Antonin Scalia, the first Italian-American to serve on the Supreme Court, returned to his hometown…

The highest-ranking government official to serve as grand marshal, Justice Scalia shares an honor bestowed in the past on the actress Sophia Loren, the racing champion Mario Andretti and the fashion designer Roberto Cavalli.

Despite Justice Scalia’s prominence, few paradegoers recognized him, a reflection perhaps of the Supreme Court justices’ long tradition of limiting their public appearances.

Still Justice Scalia, wearing the grand marshal’s glittery sash, was stared at, photographed and saluted by paradegoers as he made his way up Fifth Avenue, from 44th Street to the grandstand on 68th Street.

“Who’s that guy?” Frank Duarte, 38, a civil engineer from Wood-Ridge, N.J., asked his friend Mark Campesi, who suggested that Justice Scalia “must be some Italian politician.”

Moments later, Debbie Simunovich pointed toward the grandstand and urged her daughters to look that way, too. “Hey, I think that’s Roseanne Colletti,” Mrs. Simunovich, 45, said, referring to the WNBC correspondent who was reporting for the station’s live broadcast.

Asked about Justice Scalia, Mrs. Simunovich said: “I don’t know who he is. But he’s Italian, so that’s good.”

At the grandstand, Justice Scalia smiled timidly and waved at a crowd of onlookers, who chanted in unison, “Italia, Italia.”

“I feel wonderful,” Justice Scalia told the reporters who had followed him for 24 city blocks, peppering him with questions about Harriet E. Miers, President Bush’s Supreme Court nominee.

He refused to answer questions about Ms. Miers, and, at one point, asked one of the hulking men in suits who made up his security detail to clear away the reporters who were blocking his view.

Lawrence Auriana, the president of the Columbus Citizens Foundation, which organizes the parade, said the grand marshal “has to be a role model for all of us.

“We want, as the grand marshal, someone who is at the top of his profession and someone of good character,” Mr. Auriana said. “Justice Scalia fits the bill. He’s a man of passion – and that very well represents us, Italian-Americans.”

Justice Scalia, 69, had marched at the parade once before, five decades ago as a student at Xavier High School in Chelsea. Yesterday, he walked alongside a yellow Lamborghini that carried his wife of 45 years, Maureen.

Justice and Mrs. Scalia watched, for three hours, the floats, Lamborghinis, marching bands and law enforcement contingents that passed under an overcast sky. […]

When people recognize Roseanne Colletti more than you, you got to wonder, just a bit. Or maybe not, considering how hard those justices work at not being recognized. People may get J. Breyer and J. Souter mixed up; J. Thomas could be just another guy or J. Ginsburg just another lady. I guess they like it that way. So it goes.