Ravenhair

Members
  • Content count

    1,567
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ravenhair

  • Rank
    touring the facility

Profile Information

  • Gender Female
  • Location New Orleans

Recent Profile Visitors

4,928 profile views
  1. Come see us then. You have a place to stay; you know that.  
  2. Lily is a wonderful date, and we acted as advisors to one of Lily's neighbors who was meeting a crush in a bar.  The horror that unfolded was stunningly awful and awesome and ended with Lily, ever so gracefully, kicking the neighbor's crush out of the bar.  
  3. Was it a crime?  Debatable.  At play are the competing ideas of the right to free speech under the First Amendment versus the somewhat scary and overreaching auspices of the Department of Homeland Security.   The teacher and principal made a judgment call.  Most likely because of liability and terrorism fears, they felt their actions were warranted.  Other teachers would have spoken to the kid during or after class or would have sent the kid to the principal's office; these are also judgment calls.    Imo, of interest in this story are the fact that some of the kid's classmates clearly heard him reference "ISIS" during the pledge.  You can well imagine then the flip side of this tale:  Classmates who heard the reference go home and tell parents about the incident; parents inquire as to what was done; classmates say kid was sent to the principal's office; parents are outraged by the lack of protection being provided by the school, threaten local school board and/or file suit. Also, and perhaps most significantly, the kid has not been allowed to rejoin classes, and instead is being taught in a Board of Education Annex building.  The police determined there was no danger, but the federal officials declined comment.  Is the Department of Homeland Security still investigating this kid?  If not, they should so state, and then perhaps the kid would be allowed to return to class.  This kid's being in the limbo of DHS' declining to comment disturbs me the most.      
  4. The pledge was written as an assignment from the owner of the Youth’s Companion to a socialist minister, Francis Bellamy.  In context, at the time it was written, the Civil War had ended a mere 30 years prior, and the owner of the youth magazine was into patriotism and national unity, which is very right-winged now, but at the time, was most likely a rather liberal stance.  The 1892 version that Bellamy wrote began, “I pledge allegiance to my flag.”  The “my” was eventually dropped in 1923  because the thought was the flood of immigrants to the US would be pledging loyalty to the flag of their country of origin.  Eisenhower added the “under God” mess, and thankfully, the Bellamy salute that looked almost exactly like the Heil Hitler salute was dropped too.   The writing of the pledge and the changes thereto make sense when viewed in historical context.   Present day, the Supreme Court has already ruled that school children cannot be made to recite the pledge or punished for failing to do so.  So, Scot, you know there is no need to recite the pledge if you don’t want to.  I’m certain there are social constraints that make it difficult or strange for you not to do it, but that is more difficult to police.  (There is an internal inconsistency with your reciting the Boy Scout Oath with its duty to country and God and not reciting the Pledge of Allegiance as Nestor deftly noted, but we all harbor inharmonious thoughts, I suspect.)  As for the kid who inserted ISIS, calling the police, given our own historical context, may have been correct, or it may have been an overreaction.  That is difficult to gauge, and no one wants to be the idiot who does not alert authorities when a kid does that and then bombs the place.  Kids certainly do have all sorts of fun with the words of the pledge, and perhaps he was joking.  Not too smart of him to do, but the police acted appropriately at least.    As for the pledge itself, “pledging” is somewhat strange and certainly not my favorite part of what was written. I prefer the 1892 version with "my flag" and no "under God" if one feels compelled to pledge.  I did always like the end of the pledge best—liberty and justice for all.  That idea, in and of itself, is not a bad thing.   
  5. "I masturbate in the shower because my action figures judge me. Especially the Justice League." SlingBlade, from Tucker Max's Assholes Finish First

  6. Happy birthday Lily Valley!

    Happy Birthday, Lily! 
  7. Inigima Birthday Vanity Thread

    Happy belated birthday!  
  8. Jury Duty

    Lily, I told you that not all attorneys are good at jury selection.  Lawyers who never see the inside of a courtroom don't need to be good at it, but yes, the ability to conduct voir dire should be within a litigator's skillset.  This isn't something  taught in law school generally, unless you have participated in a clinic, taken Trial Advocacy, or worked with a judge.  Jury selection is learned by watching good attorneys pick juries and, as Sologdin mentioned, working with jury consultants can help.  There are books on the subject; CLEs devoted to the topic; and articles written about it. Most of all, though, attorneys learn to select juries by simply doing it again and again. Some basic attorney tips:  1.  An attorney starts trying a case during jury selection.  This is the time to build rapport, to educate jurors about your case by formulating your questions properly, and to find and eliminate unfavorable jurors.  2.  Attorneys learn by doing, and jury selection is no exception.  3. Lecturing prospective jurors is a turn-off.  Asking questions and then listening to the answers is key.  Here is where establishing a rapport begins.  4. Attorneys must realize a jury pool knows each other a bit by the time they get to the jury box.  If an attorney acts disrespectfully to any potential juror, he or she risks them all getting pissed off.  5. If a potential juror expresses an off-the-wall view, for example, the police are always right, the attorney should not shut the person down.  Rather, the attorney should ask questions of the juror to get the person to expand on his or her views, listen attentively, and then thank the person.  The attorney should then ask how many people agree with that view.  You find out far more information that way.  6. The prospective jurors should be doing most of the talking, not the attorneys.  A bad voir dire is one in which an attorney is talking a lot.  7. A catch-all that MacCarthy's Bar Rule summarizes as "talk in jury selection as you would talk in a barroom." This means use plain words; do not condescend; and do not act superior. There are many more tips to note, such as getting rid of the script, but this should give you a (very brief and incomplete) idea of what the attorneys should be doing.  If they are not, is it possible they are new? Could they have very little trial experience?  It is also possible they could just be bad. 
  9. Jury Duty

    Lily, CDC here stands for Civil District Court. Yes, the acronym could also be used for Criminal District Court, but it isn't in NO.  CDC refers only to Civil District Court. 
  10. She licked his face, of course.  
  11. Watch, Watched, Watching: Blame is safer than praise

    I just finished Episode 8 of Season Two.  This show is so excellent.  I looked for the thread from last year about the show, but my hangover is apparently affecting my research ability.  
  12. What are you listening to? Vol XX: Let me take you far away

    It plays in the background or on the radio in the Bluesmobile in the Blues Brothers.   Have you seen the movie?  If you like Sam and Dave, you'll probably enjoy it.  
  13. Happy Name Day to Our Darling Fragile Bird!

    Happy Birthday, FB!  Hope it is a great one.
  14. Dating, race, and you.

    As Min points out so well, neither kindness nor intelligence are filters that lend themselves to all sorts of incorrect stereotypes or fetishizations. Also, intelligence and kindness are not usually capable of getting a person killed, while skin color (or rather imperfect attitudes to skin color) has a long human history of engendering prejudice and concomitant discriminatory, and horrific practices. Returning more to the original topic, weeding out all black (or white or Asian, etc.) people from your dating pool smacks of possible racism, and in my opinion, focuses entirely on the wrong things we should seek in others. Too often, people with great dating potential are placed in a type of "no" pile because of superficial considerations and attitudes of "I don't date X." Min, that quote is so bad/good that I tried to relocate a quote I found from the California legislature (I think 19th century) discussing fear of the Filipino man because of his advantages in sexual prowess with white women.
  15. Dating, race, and you.

    Intelligence was, and is, the main factor in how attractive people are to me. However, some of the most horrendous people I know (90 days and counting ex-H included) are intelligent, but are also cruel and awful. So, along with being intelligent, the person must be kind. Just using these two filters alone weeds out a huge number of people. I really don't care about eye color, skin color, hair color, height, etc. Boyfriend, who leaves tomorrow :(, is a wonderfully kind, incredibly smart Asian guy, who just woke up long enough to mumble "Pacific Islander" to me.