Author: ssw15

The weather is soo much better today. But, the subways are still hot and yucky. Blech.

“Batman Begins”! The reviews make it sound pretty darn good. And, Christian Bale. I haven’t actually seen a Bale movie before (clips of “Empire of the Sun” don’t count; and I’ve been too chicken hearted to see his grizzlier movies) – – – but he does seem hot. Hmm…. 😉

It’s NYC Restaurant Week – 6/20 to 6/24 and 6/27 to 7/1 (therefore can’t take advantage for the weekend). NY Times’ article considers whether Restaurant Week has been worth it for restaurants (sort of is).

The news on tv – “Jackson’s lawyers say that Jackson to Change Behavior” – no, really? (pardon the obvious sarcasm there). A jury of your peers say you’re not guilty, but no one thinks you’ve regained your credibility. Yeah, I think a change in behavior is certainly in order.

So it goes…

And so it’s Monday. Pardon the long post – keep cool while reading. Oh, and how’s the deep dish pizza, FC?

The Michael Jackson verdict! The analysis of Slate was interesting. Personally, I barely followed the coverage – it was too stupid and excessive for its own good (like I needed to read or hear the analysis of every criminal lawyer out there). I don’t think it’s about a celebrity who gets away with it; it’s about the lack of evidence that met the standards (not to mention what it says about the California counties’ prosecution). But, does that mean I would trust Michael Jackson? Not exactly – he hardly regained his credibility as it is. Methink he ought to just lay low, raise his family in peace, and start using better judgement (assuming he is innocent – and a jury said he was “not guilty” – at the least, he ought to – as his defense seemed to suggest – stop being so darn generous to people who’ll get him into trouble). And note – I don’t practice criminal law, so I’m in no position to say more than my so-called opinion.

ABA E-Journal apparently has decided to consult Judge Richard Posner, famed for his Law and Economics analysis and for being that conservative but really amazingly intellectual federal judge of Chicago. And what do they talk to him about? Style. And, what does Judge Posner have to say? Well… Look:

How would you describe your look?
Brooks Brothers. I’ve dressed this way since college.

Do you prefer certain suit cuts?
I don’t know of any choice. It’s a pretty uniform style.

Being tall and slender, is it hard to find suits that fit?
It’s a little difficult in the Midwest, where people tend to be very stocky. In the East, people are smaller.

What do you look for in ties?
I don’t like them to be too flamboyant. […]

Law and economics—how do you apply that to fashion?
That’s implicit! Anyone who buys clothes, consciously or not, is comparing costs and benefits. There are different types of clothing, different styles of elegance and so on—that’s the benefit side. The cost side, that’s easy—it’s just the price. You don’t have to be an economist. Everyone knows that.

Umm, okay. Great advice, Your Honor. Well, the suit stuff’s okay, anyway.

NY Times’ Edward Rothstein has a great analysis of “Don Quixote” in today’s newspaper, on the occasion of the book’s 400th anniversary. He notes:

Why was “Don Quixote” originally written in Arabic? Or rather, why does Cervantes, who wrote the book in Spanish, claim that it was translated from the Arabic? [….]

But aside from its literary achievements, “Don Quixote” sheds oblique light on an era when Spain’s Islamic culture forcibly came to an end. Just consider Cervantes’s playful account of the book’s origins. One day in the Toledo marketplace, he writes, a young boy was trying to sell old notebooks and worn scraps of paper covered with Arabic script. Cervantes recounts how he acquired a book and then looked around for a Moor to translate it. “It was not very difficult” to find such a Moor, he writes. In fact, he says, he could have even found a translator of Hebrew.

The Arabic manuscript, the Moor tells him, is the “History of Don Quixote de la Mancha, written by Cide Hamete Benengeli, an Arab historian.” Cervantes brings the Moor to the cloister of a church and commissions a translation.

We know this is all a jest, as is the very name of the historian: “Cide” is an honorific, “Hamete” is a version of the Arab name Hamid, and “Benengeli” means eggplant. [….]

But Quixote rejects the notions of caste and of blood purity that characterized 16th-century Spain. Benengeli’s manuscript is partly a ghost story about a lost world. Quixote is born of ideas latent in extinct, condemned texts, whether Arabic or chivalric. He has unswerving principles, but even they are inadequate to a world of disguise, enchantment, illusion and delusion. In her book “The Ornament of the World,” the scholar María Rosa Menocal compares Quixote’s mental universe with the world of the Toledo marketplace, with its conversos [Jews who converted to Catholicism in the era of the Spanish Inquisition], marranos [Muslim who converted to Catholicism for similar reasons] and moriscos [the Jewish converts who secretly remained Jewish in practice]: “Who in this world ever says that he is what he seems to be? And who seems to be what he no doubt really is?”

So Don Quixote’s Spain, instead of displaying triumphant absolutism, is a world of shifting appearances. “Don Quixote” is a resigned acknowledgment of a new kind of terrain that defined modernity: in it, very little is certain and much is lost. The book’s power, though, also comes from Quixote’s stubborn quest: he won’t entirely let us accept that something else isn’t possible.

Wow. It almost makes me want to re-read “Don Quixote” (and I was really close to finish reading the whole thing way back in college, when I had really much too little during the summer after freshman year – taking that whole required reading thing too far – I really wanted to throttle Cervantes and Don Quixote).

Slate’s Sarah Dickerman explores what is a good cookbook for the husband/new father who doesn’t know how to cook. I thought it was good for reviewing the handiness of cookbooks (not that I’m taking up cooking anytime soon; I’ll continue watching the cooking shows on PBS, thank you very much).

I watched the first episode of FOX’s new summer programming, “The Inside” – wherein Special Agent Rebecca Locke, FBI, joins the Los Angeles branch to work under Supervisory Special Agent “Web” Webster’s serial crime investigations unit. Locke is a former child victim of a brutal crime, making her specially attuned to victims and tracking down the nasties (while never quite getting over the nasty who brutalized her – it’s left unsaid exactly what the nasty did to her). She has the whole “I’m A Tough Ingenue” look down right, and then there’s her new partner, a guy who Webster recruited to be his conscience. Locke’s partner’s a cute guy determined to protect her, because only he and Web are aware about her past – which could render her a vulnerable agent.

A good number of the professional tv critics observe that “The Inside” feels like an unoriginal rehash of other shows (“CSI” and its progeny; “Cold Case”; “Without a Trace”; “Medium”; etc.), so they’re not really pleased by it. The writing isn’t that tight. The first episode was yucky (serial killer who skins his victims – ugh). And, really, I’ve seen too much “X-Files” with Agents Mulder and Scully to watch anymore FBI stuff. Watching those FBI people in “The Inside” with their FBI jackets, the skeptic partner vs. the partner who takes her hunches and faith – well, it felt too much like the FBI of “X-Files” all over again (yeah, I was just waiting for X-Files’ Assistant Director Skinner to walk on the screen to bark at the agents).

The good stuff was in Web – played by actor Peter Coyote (who has a great voice – there was that weird time that he was the voice of the Oscars). He’s the personality – one wonders what makes him tick (he’s a borderline jerk, on top of that – are they going down the route of “House”?). Oh, and the cute guy. 😉 Well – at least it’s not a reality show (ok, I confess – I was watching “The Scholar” and “Beauty and the Geek” – forgive me for I have sinned)…

Enjoy the (too-high-temperature) work week.

Ugh – I hate humidity. Summer’s not going to be that pleasant, I can say.

Enjoy the deep dish pizza, FC. I do wonder if it’s better in Chicago (since it is a classic Chicago dish).

The whole speculating on who’s going to be the next Supreme Court justice (assuming anyone will even step down from the high court) is getting nuts (not that the speculating isn’t fun or never crazy to begin with). Apparently, the Associated Press is taking the up the idea that the White House would want to nominate one of two conservative Republican Senators. Good grief. Can we stop the insanity? A senator? Well, I should be grateful that they don’t appear serious about nominating anyone more conservative from the House.

The (more conservative) House panel committee apparently voted to make a steep cut in the funds for Public television’s Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). Among other things, NY Times’ Stephen Labaton reports:

By a voice vote, the House Appropriations subcommittee adopted a measure that would reduce the financing of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the organization that directs taxpayer dollars to public television and radio, to $300 million from $400 million. The subcommittee also eliminated $39 million that stations say they need to convert to digital programming and $50 million for upgrading aging satellite technology that is the backbone of the PBS network.

The cuts in financing went significantly beyond those requested by the White House and are likely to be approved next week by the full Appropriations Committee and then by the House. Lobbyists for public television and radio say they hope to have the money restored in the version of the bill prepared by the Senate, where they have support from several senior Republican members. The final legislation will be the product of negotiations between the House and Senate.

Republican lawmakers said the cuts were not aimed at punishing public broadcasting but were the reality of preparing budgets at a time of growing deficits.

Yeah, right. Not punishment? Not trying to be vindictive? These conservatives are the same people moaning about sex and violence on tv, but won’t support quality tv (not unless it followed some conservative Christian agenda). They feel that PBS has too much liberal bias, as if being “liberal” is somehow a dirty thing (as it is, lately, I try very hard not to equate “conservative” in such terms, but that’s because I’m objective and all that, and I’m neither “liberal” nor “conservative” – in fact, I’d like to think most Americans are somewhere in between, if it weren’t for the loud and annoying fringe). Ugh. Oh, and by the way, I don’t see anyone else in the tv industry, except PBS, producing educational tv for people (seriously, where else do you find GED programs or learning how to read stuff? Or the ballets or the orchestras or operas on the air?).

All right, off the soap box. I did my ranting for the day.

An interesting article on Slate about the history of “American Gothic” – the famous painting with the stern farmer and his wife (or daughter – no one, not even the artist, Grant Wood) figured out which).

Enjoy the weekend.

Been putting blogging to the backburner for a variety of reasons – been running around tending to family things, a summer course in Negotiations, alumni events, and a lack of really gripping reading material (besides still shaking my head about Deep Throat revealing his identity).

Finally been inspired to blog, as I’ve now found interesting reading, and as far as interesting reading material goes: Slate.com presents a funny entry from David Plotz, its deputy editor, who has been pursuing a story about Nobel Prize winners who donate their sperm. Plotz’s two year project has culminated in a book, so Slate has some excerpts (the original Slate entries were also terrific, by the way, and Slate has links to them), with this particular excerpt – “The Genius Factory: My Short and Scary Career as a Sperm Donor” – wherein Plotz notes, among other things:

After talking to donors from the Nobel sperm bank, I remained puzzled about why they had bothered with such a peculiar and burdensome enterprise. That’s when I realized that I needed to donate sperm, too. Not because I wanted to, quite the contrary. I already had two children, which seemed more than enough on most days. My lack of desire to donate is why I felt obliged to do it. No matter how often donors explained their rationale to me, sperm donation befuddled me. Why had the repository donors subjected themselves to such inconvenience and embarrassment? Why had they been willing to father children—dozens in some cases—that they could never know? What was donating like? I had to find out for myself.

I dutifully informed my wife about my plan. “No way,” Hanna said. I argued that it was all in the name of research. She was unimpressed. I promised that I would stop the sperm bank before it could sell my sperm. She didn’t believe the bank would make such a deal. I swore that there was no chance they would use my sperm. I begged, which was not a pretty sight. She relented. [….]

Uh hmm. Sure Plotz. 😉 Thumbs up for good reading.

The local PBS is doing its usual pledge drive, and it showed “Journey of Man.” Curiously interesting stuff, wherein Dr. Spencer Wells, geneticist (an admitted blond, European-ancestored gentleman), attempts to show, via DNA, the descent of (hu)man from the cradle of civilization in Africa and migrating and evolving (a brave journey indeed) all over the world (except Antarctica). Dr. Wells posits that race is fictitious, since ultimately, everyone is related to each other. It’s a fascinating documentary (inconsistently cut by pledge drive moments), although you kind of wonder why does Dr. Wells insist on pushing the science when the Navajo Native Americans noted that their own origin stories highlighted the ideas of migration and creation. Watching Dr. Wells interact with the Navajo made me wonder: as much as I’m fascinated by the science, I’m curious by the history – what remnants of ancient humanity remains in our language and ideas (via “myth” or literature or folk stories or traditions and customs), which may or may not support what the science says about human evolution? Have we truly forgotten our past, such that DNA is the only remnants (considering the lack of archeological evidence)? Or maybe history and sociology can still figure something (well, my knowledge of ancient history is spotty, so maybe there are studies out there). I guess Dr. Wells, considering his expertise, can only focus on so much. Nonetheless, fascinating stuff.

And, on an entirely superficial note, the good doctor has an uncanny resemblance to the British actor Colin Firth. Hmm…

Why are they bothering to release John Kerry’s college transcripts now? Anyway, it doesn’t seem that bad – so he had a lousy freshman year and slowly improved. So did George W. Bush. I read somewhere during the 2000 election that even Al Gore didn’t have a stellar transcript from Harvard. I think only Bill Bradley or Bill Clinton might have had lovely looking transcripts (well, they did become Rhodes scholars). I thought our real concern should be how they do their jobs, not necessarily how they did in school…

I watched the 2nd half of “The Ring” on ABC last night. Creepy movie, wherein Aussie actress Naomi Watts tries to figure out how this video tape kills people and prevent herself and her own weird little boy from being victims – an American remake of the (reputedly – not like I’ve seen it) creepier Japanese original movie. “The Ring” reminded me why I usually don’t watch horror movies.

The passing of NYC’s own Anne Bancroft. She and Mel Brooks had quite a marriage, and she had quite a career (more than just “Mrs. Robinson” – but it certainly made her an icon).

Pardon if I go AWOL again. By the way, has YC returned to Asia? Got around to enjoying the sultry NYC metro area weather? Ah, did we even have spring??….

So… good to hear that YC’s mom’s doing ok.

So… the secret on “Deep Throat” is out, now that the old Washington Post duo Woodward and Bernstein confirmed that ex-FBI deupty Mark Felt was their source. Disappointing that the mystery’s over, and the thought that Felt decided to finally come “out of the closet” (so to speak) for alleged monetary reasons left a poor taste in my mouth:

Felt had expressed reservations in the past about revealing his identity, and about whether his actions were appropriate for an FBI man, his grandson said.

According to the [Vanity Fair] article, Felt once told his son, Mark Jr., that he did not believe being Deep Throat “was anything to be proud of. … You (should) not leak information to anyone.”

His family members thought otherwise, and persuaded him to talk about his role in the Watergate scandal, saying he deserves to receive accolades before his death. His daughter, Joan, argued that he could “make enough money to pay some bills, like the debt I’ve run up for the children’s education.”

“As he recently told my mother, ‘I guess people used to think Deep Throat was a criminal, but now they think he’s a hero’,” Jones [Felt’s grandson] said.

Maybe Felt’s daughter felt that money might have been a good reason to make the revelation, maybe his family (and maybe even Felt himself) felt he deserved accolades, but I kind of feel that a mystery ought to remain a mystery. Knowing who Deep Throat is changes things, doesn’t it?

So… fascinating profile of David Brancaccio, the guy who takes over for Bill Moyers on “Now”:

Mr. Brancaccio has been associated with the program since the fall of 2003, when it was known as “Now with Bill Moyers.” With Mr. Moyers’s retirement in December, the show’s name was changed to reflect its founder’s departure, and Mr. Brancaccio was promoted from co-anchor to sole anchor.

But those were not the only changes. Because of financing issues, the show was cut from an hour to 30 minutes, and once a month the show features all interviews, which are less expensive to produce than heavily reported pieces from the field.

“I’m agnostic on the change from an hour to half an hour, but one beautiful thing has happened as a result,” Mr. Brancaccio said. “Even now, six months into the change, we are getting cascades of e-mails complaining about the shorter show. But that means that nobody is complaining about me – we’re not getting those letters that say, ‘You’re no Bill Moyers.’ ”

When and if that charge is made, Mr. Brancaccio is fully prepared to concede its truth.

“Bill was a lightning rod because his life experience allowed him to put things together in a way that my life experience, which is shorter and different, doesn’t,” he said. “I was not the deputy director of the Peace Corps. I did not work for Lyndon Johnson. Oh, and here’s something else: I am not a Baptist minister. I’m the product of two parents from Brooklyn, one who was Jewish and grew up in Coney Island, and the other an Italian from Gravesend. And no matter how you add those up, you don’t get Baptist.”

Hehehe. You’re right, Brancaccio – Coney Island Jew plus Gravesend Italian does not equal Texan Baptist. And, I do miss Now’s one hour format. I feel a half-hour format’s a little restraining, locking me in to that one storyline (well, I also miss the Texan Baptist Moyers, but oh well).

So it goes…

Take a moment to think about those who sacrificed or served for this country this weekend.

The men and women in uniform have been in town for Fleet Week. Salute them for their service. And, well, I must say, those men in uniform are definitely cute. But, it’s getting to that point where looking at them is making me feel old, because some of them are just kids and well, I’m not. Eh. 😉

“Green Acres”‘s Eddie Albert passed away. Green Acres was before my time, but Albert’s one of those memorable character actors. He wasn’t a lawyer, but he played one on tv.

Can’t find an article right now, but Frank Gorshin, who played the Riddler on the old Batman TV series, passed away two weeks ago. Great character actor too (having recently played George Burns the comedian on Broadway).

Ken Jennings finally lost in the recent Super Tournament of Champions on “Jeopardy.” But, at least he was a good winner, writing “Go Brad” in his final answer. Brad Rutter won, and apparently he did so with Jennings’ strategy of beating-everyone-to-the-buzzer tactic (and have the right answer).

I’m still behind on “Alias” episodes, but I skipped the ones I missed and jumped right into the final two – wow. Massively scary and crazy season finale – and enough to make me want to choke that J.J. Abrams (the creator/mastermind of Alias) for having again thrown another idiotic cliffhanger. Argh.

And, “House” – ah, this has got to be my favorite tv show this year! The last two episodes were hilarious. And, Hugh Laurie is a great actor, making Dr. House a man we love to hate and love. A man in pain, who just has to be always right, even if we wish he was wrong (and there was the one time he was wrong). Sela Ward plays his ex Stacy the last two episodes – she and he are such great actors, convincingly playing exes who still obviously love each other even if the tragedies of life will never let them be together. I’m so looking forward to next season! And, so good – FOX is showing House reruns this summer! Cool!

I’m on this Ewan MacGregor kick – I watched the “Big Fish” movie on DVD. Billy Crudup plays Will, a guy trying to get through to his dad, Albert Finney playing the elderly Edward Bloom, who is dying of cancer. Edward, you see, tells tall tales of his youth (wherein McGregor plays young Edward in flashbacks) – but Will is no longer a kid to accept the bull – except maybe some of the stories aren’t bull. McGregor plays the role so well, and so does Finney. Thumbs up.

So it goes. Enjoy the rest of the weekend.

So – Star Wars – Obi-Wan Kenobi is the man, even if Episode III isn’t the happy movie (no, you’d have to watch IV and VI for the happy stuff). I’ll say it again, if necessary (don’t mind me, I ended up watching Episode II: Attack of the Clones on FOX tonight, and I still saw Ewan MacGregor with the best acting out of the entire cast, able to rise above George Lucas’ lame lines). Anyway, I do recommend watching Episode III if you’ve watched the previous five movies; get some closure, you know.

Enterprise rant time – ok, I might as well admit it – the next to last episode, “Terra Prime” is the true “Enterprise” series finale – the entire cast had lines and acted decently; Capt. Archer had the right speech, and T’Pol and Tucker had something that resembled resolution in their relationship. The xenophobic faction on Earth tried to derail the foundations of the Federation (intergalactic cooperation and all that good stuff), they violated Tucker and T’Pol’s privacy by stealing their genes and creating a hybrid child doomed to die. Tucker’s quite a character and even T’Pol proved capable.

But, the series finale “These are the Voyages” – look, I loved seeing the Star Trek: The Next Generation’s Enterprise again, but Jonathan Frakes (Riker) and Marina Siritis (Troi) were ten years too old to be playing their characters dating from a 10-year old episode of Next Generation (and, while a fascinating episode, it wasn’t an episode I’d pick as pivotal to be an Enterprise episode). And, while I always wanted to see an episode taking place in the 24th century (contemporary) Trek reflecting on Archer’s time period, it wasn’t terribly fair to be a series finale episode. And, of course, saying goodbye to Tucker, probably one of my favorite characters on the show… Well, the episode’s on again this Friday or Saturday, so fans get to pick at it again.

Finished reading “Ex Machina,” by Christopher L. Bennett – good Star Trek reading. It’s a sort-of sequel to “Star Trek: The Motion Picture” – and reflects on the legacy of the departed Capt. Decker and other consequences of that movie. Kirk, Spock, and McCoy at their best and worst, I say, as they try to figure out how to help this unstable society. Sulu gets comfortable with the command chair (now I see why fans get all convinced he’ll be a great captain; while I still don’t quite see the greatness in Sulu, I see how he has potential). Chekov is Chekov (I see his new maturity; but he’s not one of my favorite Original Trek characters). Greater insight into Uhura (which can be accredited to the expansion of the status of the communications officer in “Enterprise” and the character of Hoshi Sato). Oh, and Scotty doing a little engineering (giving the command chair man a conservative time limitation and you’ll come out looking like a genius if you can get things done in half the time). Thumbs up.

Another work week…

“Star Wars: Episode III” – saw it last night. Two words (for now): Ewan MacGregor. He’s quite an actor. Oh, and cute too. 😉

Saw “The Interpreter” today. Good movie. Beautifully weaving in NYC and the United Nations. Sean Penn is a great actor. Nicole Kidman – ok, she’s pretty good too.

I actually watched “CSI: NY” today (a Saturday showing, since CBS apparently has nothing to show on Saturday nights). Very interesting stuff. (although, not terribly accurate – I’ve heard that in NYC, we don’t have Crime Scene Investigators but the unit’s called something else; plus this episode actually has Melina Kanakaredes’ character making a reference to “Bowery Street”?! Who calls it “Bowery Street” – it’s just “Bowery” – are they just trying to make the out-of-towners feel good?). I like Gary Sinise – he’s a good actor (but I get the feeling he’d like to do more than just the usual CSI-procedures-and-morbidity stuff). Is it just me or did his character and Kanakaredes’ character have some kind of chemistry? (well, I certainly see chemistry in the original CSI characters of Grissom and Willow).

I’d watch original CSI once in a while (Grissom’s cool, and a character); and I’d watch CSI: NY (Gary Sinise!), but I cannot get myself to care for CSI: Miami. Everytime I see David Caruso, I see the ex-NYPD Blue man who’s pasty paleness just doesn’t jar well in Miami. Maybe it’s me. Oh well.

I still have to catch up on “Alias” episodes, but I did catch the major two hour episode on Wednesday night – yeah! Kick-ass “Alias” style – the return of Lena Olin, the actress who plays Secret Agent Sydney’s morally ambiguous mom, Irina. Sydney’s dad, Jack, gets to crumble. The season finale’s going to be crazy!

I’m still refraining from blogging a rant about the series finale of “Enterprise.” Oh, but it’ll be there soon…

I like how this time of year the tv networks try to get viewers and the advertisers excited with the previews. But, then comes the feeling of disappointment.

WB has reportedly cancelled “Jack and Bobby.” Argh.

Hmm. I do not know what to make of ABC’s fall preview – it’s sort of pushing the whole “Desperate Housewives” thing. But, nice to see “Grey’s Anatomy” being renewed.

NBC – I think it needs help. Badly. Their new shows don’t sound very good: ex., “Fathom” – wherein the cast investigates sea creatures. Umm. Ok…

I still don’t feel right about “Enterprise.” Apparently, the ratings of the last episodes were up – ironic? People watching the last of Star Trek, to bear witness.

Oh well.

The infamous bar review company, Barbri, has gotten itself in trouble out in California. People in California could actually get a refund from Barbri for Barbri’s alleged monopoly of the bar review market (or, at least, to the extent that it allegedly made a deal with Kaplan, that other test prep organization, to squeeze anyone else from entering the test prep industry – as if Kaplan’s this poor helpless organization):

Central District of California complaint states that the alleged agreement between Kaplan and BAR/BRI amounts to a per se unlawful market division to preserve BAR/BRI’s alleged monopoly on full-service bar review courses. The named plaintiffs, Ryan Rodriguez and Reena B. Frailich, are both Los Angeles lawyers. The lawsuit claims BAR/BRI students were overcharged about $300 million since August 1997, and seeks treble damages. Rodriguez v. West Publishing Corp., No. CV 053222R (NCx).

After Kaplan withdrew the offer to purchase West Bar Review, West Publishing sold West Bar’s assets to BAR/BRI. Then BAR/BRI was able to raise the price of its courses substantially, according to the complaint. In 2001, West Publishing re-entered the bar review business by purchasing BAR/BRI.

A spokesperson for West Publishing says the case is without merit, and the communications director of Kaplan Inc. made a similar statement.

Information for the complaint came from people then associated with both companies, says the plaintiffs’ lawyer, Eliot G. Disner.

“There are a lot of eyes and ears in the bar-review business—spurned suitors, former employees, competitors,” says Disner, who practices in Santa Monica, Calif. “I’m not going to say who told me everything, but it’s fair to say it’s a combination of people who put this together.”

If the case is successful, Disner estimates plaintiffs will receive approximately $1,000 apiece, depending on how much they paid for the BAR/BRI course.

“My goal is to get the [BAR/BRI] company broken up,” Disner says. “Over the years, there’s been a number of people interested in the bar business—it’s very lucrative—but BAR/BRI has done a very good job at keeping them out, I think illegally at some times.”

The lawsuit marks the second time Disner has filed a case against BAR/BRI. Previously he represented Bar Passers, a California business that was ultimately acquired by West.

“A pattern, on BAR/BRI’s part, is doing whatever it takes to keep control of the bar review market,” he says.

Others aren’t so sure.

“The sort of thing alleged here is textbook per se illegal stuff,” says J. Manly Parks, a Philadelphia antitrust lawyer. Plaintiffs’ witnesses, he adds, may have some baggage, but he doesn’t see that as a hurdle.

“If they’ve got a witness saying there was such an agreement, and the other side says, ‘No, there wasn’t,’ if that’s the key issue in the case, it’s going to trial.”

The government or competitors, not consumers, usually challenge such mergers, says Washington, D.C., lawyer Joel A. Christie.

“They’re basically asking for the court to order the creation of a separate and independent competitor, and I would characterize that as a very big stretch,” says Christie, who previously worked in the Justice Department’s antitrust division.

Hmm.

Today’s “Doonesbury” – May 16, 2005 – slight error by Garry Trudeau!
The character B.D., the veteran of the War in Iraq and who lost his leg, tells his daughter that he has to return to the hospital to check out his new prosthetic leg.

“You’re going back to the hospital again, Daddy?”
“Last time. At least, I hope so, Alex,” says B.D.

Umm, B.D. – I could have sworn that your daughter’s Sam (as in Samantha). 😉 “Alex” is the name of Mike Doonesbury’s daughter and she’s currently being recruited by the US Army for the war (much against Doonesbury’s stern objections).

Ah, that Trudeau. He’s quite a prolific cartoonist – years and years of “Doonesbury”‘s – and he forgets a character’s name… oops… 😉 Well, lots of characters, so it’s hard to keep track. Plus, it can get confusing, as B.D. and Mike both have daughters. But, really, Trudeau. Did the office intern/penciller mess it up this time? We Doonesbury readers deserve an apology! (tee-hee). Nah. Catching such a mistake was a laugh.

NBC previews next season – “Scrubs” is put off until mid-season?! Jerks!

Until tomorrow…