June 27, 2007

"Bong Hits 4 Lawyers."

That's the name of the name of the new Bloggingheads episode with me and David Lat. Topics:
How David became a muckraking law-blogger (13:04)

Virtual crossdresser exposed! (11:12)

Money-grubbing lawyers exposed! (15:17)

The AutoAdmit scandal: Can you sue an emoticon? (21:17)

Ann on Hillary's onion rings, Bill's carrots (12:47)

Judicial puffery in the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case (08:29)

41 comments:

Maxine Weiss said...

Do you like me?

Ruth Anne Adams said...

I disagree with using 'blogability & fun' as a criteria for selecting presidential candidates.

Bissage said...

Well, it looks like dave™© is stuck in traffic or something, and I enjoyed typing out a Maxine Weiss the other day, so let me take a whack at it:

Have another box of wine, you blithering idiot. Boy, you sure are a wine box drinking idiot blitherer, you box drinker, you.

(Now I'm off to the lavatory to wash the stink off my typing fingers.)

Maxine Weiss said...

My aren't we boozy today!

Jon Swift said...

Mr. Lat really seemed to enjoy the chopped up carrots you served him.

Maxine Weiss said...

Interesting that gender was the issue with him, and all about how he hid is gender, but nobody says a thing about him hiding his race.

He pretended to be a completely different race, as well as gender...but let's make sure not to talk about that.

ricpic said...

Money grubbing lawyers have:
a) big thick hard carrots?
b) limp shriveled carrots?
c) crunchy greasy onion rings?

rishi said...

Nice! Good to see you chatting with someone new. I will definitely watch/hear it tonight.
Your chats with the Ms.Gotlieb have been fascinating. Especially the line about denial being a form of intoxication. Thats a classic.

tc said...

We who are lawyers today really disgust me. During my days in prac- tice,I was a legal aid-type defense attorney in the Family and Criminal Courts of NYS as well as a private practice lawyer,handling real estate, wills,estates,taxes,corporations...
And I tried more than a few cases before juries and judges...
So I have seen and done all kinds of law,legal practice...and I have seen the consequences of what we do in the people I've represented as well as in the overall societal degeneration -nationally and inter-
nationally- that we are responsible for. This was not what I was brought up to believe we lawyers are supposed to do.
As a matter of fact,as I see it, we lawyers today are little more than leeches sucking the country's
blood and leaving its body dry. We are selfish egotistical children -
morons,even.
And I intend to change that -ra- dically- in the very near future.

Maxine Weiss said...

If you are going to be Filipino....you might as well look like Michelle Malkin....as she's much easier on the eyes.

If you are good-looking enough, race isn't an issue anymore.

Maxine Weiss said...

Ouch. I'm just kidding, as usual. I really didn't mean it. You all know that.

Fondly, Maxine

downtownlad said...

This Supreme Court is insane. "Bong Hit 4 Jesus" is not allowed to be uttered by an 18-year old who wasn't even attending school that day. But it's perfectly ok for a Christian student to turn to a gay student during class and say "Jesus wants you killed cause you're a faggot".

Seven Machos said...

But it's perfectly ok for a Christian student to turn to a gay student during class and say "Jesus wants you killed cause you're a faggot".

Has this been litigated?

Welcome back, downtown.

fanofalthouse said...

In case this hasn't been mentioned about boxed wine before: Stephanie Miller's show is a long, running gag on how funny some people's voices are and how drunk people become. Stephanie references her (fake) issues with boxed wine probably every day.

fanofalthouse said...

"Bong Hits 4 Lawyers" is Ann's best diavlog. We all known Ann (with her affection for our society's worst product: reality TV) isn't above a fake breast sized freak out to drive hits, but this was smart, in depth, and mostly about lawyering.

Still with the carrots. Bill + heart attack = no onion rings. Low-fat "table snack" possibilities: cucumbers, celery, broccoli, etc. They all have some extra significance to people who think Freud was onto something. Try to find a psychiatrist who does. Plus who's supposed to have injected this emasculating imagery? It's not as if Hillary needs to draw more female votes.

Blue blouse? Blue is a boy's color. It's a democratic color. Bill is a little chunky and is playing off a tough guy role. Chunky men and tough guys wear these exact shirts all the time.

Oh! and did you see that Bill was wearing make-up! They really toffed him up for this thing.

Eli Blake said...

Every time there is a vote anyplace on a ballot measure to decriminalize marijuana, the biggest contributors to trying to defeat it are lawyers. They give far more than religious, anti-drug or any other similar organizations.

Well, I guess if you are making a lot of money off of something....

Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
fanofalthouse said...

Great Theo Boehm,

Let's all feed trolls the pure, red meat by grading them higher for extra-trolly behavior. Do you want to transform every single comment board? Trolls from other sites might stream here just for the chance at extra negative attention.

Luckyoldson said...

President Bush was presented with a letter Monday signed by 50 high school seniors in the Presidential Scholars program urging a halt to “violations of the human rights” of terror suspects held by the United States…

"anti-bong hits for cheeta."

Seven Machos said...

What? High school kids have written a letter? They are urging?

It's all over.

Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Luckyoldson said...

seven,
and, as usual, you bypass the point.

duh.

Luckyoldson said...

Theo:
wow.

you are cool.

Luckyoldson said...

fano:
you're cool, too.

Palladian said...

"Did you hear the news, Mr. President? The students at the University of Pittsfield are walking out of their classes, in protest over the war.

—(spits out coffee) Wha— What did you say?

—Apparently, students are standing up in the middle of lectures and walking right out of the building.

–....How did you hear about this protest?

—The White House hears about every protest, no matter how small.

—Oh, right, I remember.

—You haven’t heard the half of it, Mr. President. The leader of the group says that if you don’t stop the war today they’re going to . . . to . . . I’m sorry, I can’t say it out loud. It’s just too terrifying.

—Say it, damn it! I’m the President!

—All right! If you don’t stop the war . . . they’re going to stop going to school for the remainder of the week.

—Send the troops home.

—But, Mr. President! Shouldn’t we talk about this?

—Send the troops home."

Simon Rich in The New Yorker

Seven Machos said...

A brilliant piece. It's what I was thinking of.

Seven Machos said...

—Mr. President! Did you hear about Woodstock?

—Woo— Woodstock? What in God’s name is that?

—Apparently, young people hate the war so much they’re willing to participate in a musical sex festival as a protest against it.

—Oh, my God. They must really be serious about this whole thing.

—That’s not all. Some of them are threatening to join communes: places where they make their own clothing . . . and beat on drums.

—Stop the war.

—But, Mr. President!

—Stop all American wars!

—(sighs) Very well, sir. I’ll go tell the generals.

—Wow. It’s a good thing those kids decided to go hear music.

fanofalthouse said...

Which is the most ridiculous:

1)Some students think a protest is going to influence our government to stop the Iraq War?

2)Most Americans think we should stop the Iraq war?

3)Most Iraq war supporters think Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11?

I go with (1).

Seven Machos said...

Statement (2) is quite arguably untrue because simplified polls cannot account for complex beliefs about foreign policy. Statement (3) is almost certainly demonstrably false. Shouldn't have used the word "most" in either of the statements.

I would argue, then, that Statement (3) is the most ridiculous because of its abject falseness. Statement (2) is next ridiculous because, at best, it relies on oversimplified questions. Statement (1), by default, is the least ridiculous statement.

Now, unleash anger at me because I have no doubt mistyped a word.

fanofalthouse said...

Seven Machos,

1)Of course!

2)http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-06-26-poll-results_x.htm?loc=interstitialskip
It's about half-way down.

3)http://www.zogby.com/News/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1169
It's also about half-way down.

Although I think this should maybe be saved for some other comment section. Ann does talk about the Iraq war sometimes, right?

Luckyoldson said...

Palladian,
the point of the posting was in regard to the court case, numbnut.

should the students be chastised in the same way as the bong kid?

duh.

Luckyoldson said...

fanofalthouse,
are you actually saying you believe Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11?

just what we need...another moron.

Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Seven Machos said...

Okay. Let's parse these statements, in no particular order.

Is 65 percent "most"? Only if 35 percent is "hardly any."

Is "was involved in" the equivalent of "connected to"? Certainly not. "Was involved in" suggests that he helped plan the attack. "Connected to" is much more vague. Could the pollster have known that "connected to" is vague yet chosen it, anyway? Gosh, pollsters never do things like that.

Fully 74 percent of the people polled in your USA Today article support leaving troops in Iraq for at least 12 more months, while 41 percent say we should stay "as many years as needed." By the rosiest interpretation, 59 percent must then be "most," which means that 41 percent is "hardly any." Further, your statement implies that taking up to a year or more still means that we should "stop" the war.

I hope you aren't a lawyer, Fan, because you do a vey poor job of coloring facts. I also recommend not linking to sites that don't back up what you say. It makes you look silly.

fanofalthouse said...

Luckyoldson,

I habitually point to several weird facts and polls whenever I come across someone like 7-m talking about Iraq. Although I've already seen that there'll be no pay-off because he doesn't admit when he's obviously wrong, I still enjoy arguing. So, no, I don't think Saddam was involved with 9/11, but Republicans do.

Moronic IQ is in the 50's and 60's.
Such hurtful language! Next time say, "I feel that your lack of basic knowledge about the Iraq war is detrimental to a reasonable discourse about current events."

Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
fanofalthouse said...

7-m

I'll concede on #2. It's not "most" but about half want troops withdrawn within a year or less.

Here's a different version of that question. What do you think the answer from 65% of Republicans would be:

"Do you agree or disagree that there was a connection between Kim Jung Ill and the 9/11 terror attacks?"

Or

"Do you agree or disagree that there was a connection between your mom and the 9/11 terror attacks?"

From Google "define:most"
most(a): (superlative of `many' used with count nouns and often preceded by `the') quantifier meaning the greatest in number; "who has the most apples?"; "most people like eggs"; "most fishes have fins"

65% seems to fit that def.

fanofalthouse said...

Theo Boehm,

That is deeply weird. I can't think of one single public commentator with a "house" rule like that ... except for Michael Savage nee Weiner. Everyone calls him Dr. Savage. Althouse only, eh?? Weird! Why not just legally change her first name to "Inga" or whatever?

Maybe ALTHOUSE! should have a list of rules and hot-buttons at the top of her page as there seem to be a lot. Perhaps instead of your troll impersonatathon you should host a session where people enumerate things that make ALTHOUSE! touchy and post the finished product. Or not.

Thanks.

Palladian said...

"Palladian,
the point of the posting was in regard to the court case, numbnut.

should the students be chastised in the same way as the bong kid?

duh."

I have no opinion on the cases you're talking about. Unlike you, I tend to withhold comment on subjects of which I have no specific knowledge, interest or interesting comments. You seem to believe your every foul-smelling fart is interesting. Well, sister, you're not interesting, you're not funny and you don't seem particularly intelligent. Your arguments, such as they are, are not convincing, which is to be expected since you're not here to convince anyone of anything. You're here to abuse people, in ways that you wouldn't dare in the physical world. A strange desire, indeed for a self-described liberal and child of the 'Sixties. Perhaps you feel powerless in your life and spraying rather weak insults at the more reasonable members of this forum, for whatever reason, allows you to retain some wan vestige of a sense of worth and power. Whatever the reason for your behavior, it's not worth investigation.

Know this: Don't attempt to argue with me, because I won't argue back. It's a waste of my time and yours. And don't insult me, because it is a battle that you will not win. I can run mental circles around you, and can sling barbs with the best of them. You come here to do battle with what you perceive to be the opposing "team". Well, I'm not a team player. My beliefs and philosophies about government and freedom and life are far too complicated and conditional to ever bind, package and stamp with the label of a party, and I suspect many people who come here would describe their beliefs in a similar fashion. You, however, seem too inapt and inflexible a thinker to understand such a concept.

So, I'll put it in terms with which seem in your range of comprehension: go f**k yourself, numb-nuts.

fanofalthouse said...

If Bill had said, "No dehydrated pears?" this Freudian stuff would make more sense. Barring, of course, the fact that onion rings were chosen by the Sopranos.

http://www.20un.com/images/feather_product/imanmehr/18-b.jpg

Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.