Althouse: I'm glad someone was taking notes.

February 26, 2007

I'm glad someone was taking notes.

Simon blogs the hell out of the Federalist Society's Law and Morality conference.

14 comments:

Simon said...: And that's the condensed version!! LOL. After I got settled in my hotel room and ruminated on several near-death experiences on the drive out of Chicago over a salad, I started to flip through - in horror - 26 pages of scribbled notes and wondered how on earth this was ever going to be bloggable. Terse is the command, terse! And this is as terse as I could get it. ;)

Thanks for the link. :p; 2/26/07, 9:06 AM
The Pretentious Ignoramus said...: Simon seems like a good man, but he needs additional hobbies. I would suggest Krav Maga.

And I say this as one of the persons who formed (along with Ann Coulter)the University of Michigan Law School Federalist Society back in 1985.; 2/26/07, 10:12 AM
TMink said...: Wonderful article Simon. I wish I had enough law to follow it. One point you made I COULD understand: "conservatives are willing to tolerate people deviating from the script, but they resent being asked to endorse (which is, in this case, how they see gay marriage.)"

And as you say, liberals do not get that. It is incomprehensible. I think it is difficult to understand that which we do not practice. Tolerance without acceptance is a complex, mature psychological reaction that takes a good deal of thought to achieve. There is also a decent amount of self-control needed to muster up the divisions between what we feel and want and what we will tolerate.

Ideologues, conservative or liberal, are either not so equipped or not so inclined. Perhaps we conservatives have done a better job of marginalizing our lunatic fringe (the KKK etc) than our liberal friends and this accounts for the difference in practice.

Trey

Trey; 2/26/07, 10:34 AM
Simon said...: Ann - I added an update with my notes from Orin and Randy's "lawprof idol" seminar - I wondered if you had a perspective or any thoughts on Part IV(3)?

Bo - you mean there's more to life than law and blogs? Who knew! ;)

Seriously, though, I might be more willing to accept that as a criticism if I worked in law - y'know, if that was what I did all day and then came home and thought about at night. But I don't practise or teach law (the thought has obviously ocurred to me that I might like to some day), so for now, this is a hobby. It's a hugely enjoyable and frankly rewarding one, but at bottom, it's a hobby.

Trey - I'm not sure how coherent it is! LOL. A lot of it isn't fact-checked yet, hence that there are virtually no citations or stuff of that nature. Most of the material comes from my notes, but where I've digressed, I've digressed based on material as I remember it. Hopefully I've not misrepresented anything! :p; 2/26/07, 11:45 AM
Suave_Mandingo said...: I just wanted to point out the strength of the Federalist Society at Wisconsin Law School. For those unaware of the student dynamics at UWLS, the Fed-Soc has become one of the largest student orgs at the Law School. As a 1L, we took 4 students to the Symposium at Vanderbilt. As a 2L, I expanded that number to over 20 students at the Symposium at Harvard. And my final year, we took another 20 students to Columbia. Besides the host school, Wisconsin had either the largest group in attendance, or pretty close to it, at both Harvard and Columbia. I proudly remember solemnly singing "Varsity" with the other Wisconsin students, at the concluding dinner, after listening to John Fund. Before graduating, I was on a mission in attempt to get Wisconsin to host an upcoming symposium. Unfortunately, the host school's requisite monetary contribution was much greater than what the UW administration would pay, and the wealthy alumni/donor list was way too short. At least we were generous in spirit.; 2/26/07, 11:47 AM
Anonymous said...: Simon: Thank you for such a thorough and interesting effort. I only got through a third of it on my lunch break, so I know what I'll be doing tonight instead of a long-delayed programming project.

The Stubborn Facts template is very good and quite readable. I also like your pictures, especially the in-photo comments (hint to Althouse).; 2/26/07, 12:07 PM
Mortimer Brezny said...: After I got settled in my hotel room and ruminated on several near-death experiences on the drive out of Chicago over a salad

Yes, those salad roads sure are slippery!; 2/26/07, 2:25 PM
PatHMV said...: Theo,

As the sort of principle architect (with excellent input and feedback from my co-bloggers) of the Stubborn Facts design, thank you very much for your compliment on our look. We worked hard to make it visually appealing while also being very easy to read and follow. All of us are big fans of Edward Tufte, so usability and clarity of design are very important to us.; 2/26/07, 3:19 PM
Thorley Winston said...: Wax makes a great point - one generally true I think, not just in this arena: conservatives are willing to tolerate people deviating from the script, but they resent being asked to endorse (which is, in this case, how they see gay marriage). Liberals cannot cope with that kind of complexity - they demand a bipolar world where everything is either embraced or eradicated.

I think that’s quite true, I noticed the same thing while walking through a school this weekend where signs were posted crying “Celebrate Diversity!” That idea that someone might just think that diversity is a fact of life (much like the weather) but that it is neither inherently deserving of derision or celebration seems to escape some people.; 2/26/07, 3:22 PM
Freder Frederson said...: Perhaps we conservatives have done a better job of marginalizing our lunatic fringe (the KKK etc) than our liberal friends and this accounts for the difference in practice.

The Conservatives have marginalized their lunatic fringe? You have a whole network where they run amuck. Rush, O'Reilly, Coulter, Hannity aren't your lunatic fringe? Heck, Pat Robertson was a frequent guest at the White House just a couple years ago. Who in the "lunatic fringe" of the left has a nightly television show or the ear of the president (or practically calls the President a traitor like Cheney did Pelosi the other day)?

The best you will do is trot out, the tired old "Michael Moore sat in Jimmy Carter's box at the Democratic Convention".; 2/26/07, 3:41 PM
Simon said...: I should have said this morning -- the thought only just ocurred -- that this is our first annalanche. ;)

Theo - thanks. :) As Pat noted upthread, it's mostly the ringmaster's work, with some occasional input from the lions. ;) I've not actually seen any other detailed coverage of the conference, and this really was a fascinating series of discussions, so hopefully this is of use to people who couldn't attend.

Mort - LMAO!; 2/26/07, 4:11 PM
PatHMV said...: Freder... kindly quote the exact words by which you think Vice President Cheney "practically" called Speaker Pelosia a "traitor."

I believe you'll find that what he actually said was that the consequences of the actions proposed by Speaker Pelosi and her good friend and close ally Rep. Murtha would be a victory for our enemies. Speaker Pelosi and Rep. Murtha have been very vocal about what they believe to be the disastrous consequences of the President's policies. Is it your view that only your side is allowed to predict dire consequences if your preferred policies are not followed?; 2/26/07, 4:48 PM
TMink said...: Freder worried that we have not exercised our lunatic fringe and posted " Rush, O'Reilly, Coulter, Hannity aren't your lunatic fringe?"

No, they are not our lunatic fringe. Michael Savage is, the John Birch society is, the KKK is. Oh and that David Duke, nasty fellow who left the country and fled to Russia of all places!

Rush, O'Reilly, and Hannity are in the mainstream of conservative thought as far as their ideas go. They are all entertainers, and I disagree with their use of hyperbole, but their thought is pretty mainstream.

Coulter is a riot and makes me laugh. I do not take her as a serious thinker, but I do chuckle when I hear her. I think she is funnier live than when she writes.

Trey; 2/27/07, 3:03 PM
TMink said...: Freder, I am sorry, I missed your question about the left's nuts. Well, you know what I mean.

Marcotte is a good example. Then there is that feminist who said that all men should be considered defacto rapists. I always want to say McKinnon, but that is not the correct person. I would support the above mention of Al Franken and Keith Olberman. I don't agree that Wolf and Chris Matthews are beyond the edge.

And last, but certainly not least, Rosie O'Donnel. Then there is the Iman who opened the Democratic Convention with prayer. His recorded statements about coming for Sam next and praising suicide bombers was a real shock. Who invited him?????? Can we forget Ward Churchill? I better leave it at that, I am warming to the task!

Trey; 2/27/07, 3:11 PM