I was tempted to write: Authenticity. If you can fake that, you've got it made...

... in the context of this morning's post, "Can Mommy Bloggers Still Make a Living?," about the troubles a mommy blogger has adapting to "native" advertising, that is, monetizing the blog by accepting money to promote products in what looks like regular blog posts. For a mommy blogger, that means integrating your writing about your children with praise for various foods, cleaning products, and what-all. The famous mommy blogger Heather Armstrong said: "The problem is I have to give my readers what they want, I have to give the brand what they want, and I have to be authentic to who I am. And combining all three of those needs is so so so exhausting that I was having panic attacks routinely."

The famous quote is, actually, "Sincerity. If you can fake that, you've got it made." Wait. Sidetrack: What's the difference between "authenticity" and "sincerity"? I ask the question out loud and then answer it before Meade takes a shot at it. I say, "'Sincerity' is when you believe your own bullshit," then add, "You know, sincerity is a big topic I teach about in Religion and the Constitution." That's a topic I've discussed here. It's my absolute favorite topic in law teaching. "Authenticity" is more objective: Are you really what you purport to be?

Anyway, the famous quote is attributed to George Burns. Interestingly, last night I watched an episode of the old Burns and Allen TV show — this one (the only one filmed in color):



The reason I watched that was that I was thinking about Gracie Allen because the new puppy — blogged just below this post — is named Gracie. "Was she named after the great comedienne?" I asked the kids, who didn't know, but said another possibility had been Lucy — strong evidence of yes.

The new puppy.

Note that the title of this post is "The new puppy" — not "The new puppy!"



What's going on?



The agenda:

"The Smashing Trumpkins."

"Billy Corgan applauds Trump for ‘f—ing’ up the political class."

"Can Mommy Bloggers Still Make a Living?"

A piece in The Atlantic — focusing on Heather Armstrong ("Dooce") and the problem of "native" advertising:

“My readers see sponsored content and they want to close the browser immediately,” she said. “The problem is I have to give my readers what they want, I have to give the brand what they want, and I have to be authentic to who I am. And combining all three of those needs is so so so exhausting that I was having panic attacks routinely.”

Over the years, advertisers increasingly wanted Armstrong to post photos of her family using their products. But if [her daughters] Leta and Marlo didn’t want to do that activity that particular day, Armstrong felt tempted to pressure them to do it anyway so she could fulfill her advertiser obligations...

“I wrote a blog because it was fun, and I loved doing it,” she said. “Then it became my job and I hated it. You never want to get to the point where you’re like ‘Ugh I have to go do that thing that I love? Ughhhh.’”

ADDED: There's a larger problem here, beyond making your money as a mommy blogger and beyond blogging and advertising, and that's making a living doing what you love. It seems obviously good to love your work, but that doesn't mean that if you love something that is not your source of income that you'll be happy if only you can generate income through it. You might do better getting your income from something else — which it would be nice to love to some extent — but to keep your truest loves disconnected from your need for income. The word "amateur" is built on "love" (amare). 

West Point pillow fight ends with 24 concussions, a broken leg, and dislocated shoulders.

"Colonel Kasker said the annual fight is organized by first-year students as a way to build camaraderie after the summer program that prepares them for the rigors of plebe year."

Photos posted later on Twitter show plebes, as freshmen are called, with bloody faces and bloody pillows, and at least one person being loaded into an ambulance.

“My plebe was knocked unconscious and immediately began fighting when he came to,” an unnamed upperclassman, who was apparently observing from the sidelines, wrote on the social media forum Yik Yak. “I was so proud I could cry.”

ADDED: "But this year the fight on the West Point, N.Y., campus turned bloody as some cadets swung pillowcases packed with hard objects, thought to be helmets...."

That made me think of the old Freakonomics episode, "The Dangers of Safety":

Modern [football] helmets do a good job of preventing skull fractures and on-field deaths: that’s why those numbers are way down historically. But getting lots of concussions isn’t very healthy either. To prevent them, Dr. Cantu could make a more cushioned helmet — but then you might be more worried about skull fractures again. And then there’s this problem: if you did give football players a more heavily cushioned helmet, what are they going to do with it? A lot of people think the biggest problem in the game today is that players use their helmets not so much as protection … but as a weapon.

"I was in a deli, and a man may have cut in front of me in line. When asked if he had, I said: 'I don’t argue over such things. He can go ahead.'"

"The man replied: 'You don’t argue over such things? That’s why you’re fat.' I said, 'You’ll end up in a courtroom.' He replied: 'Good! I’m a lawyer.' I said, 'Well, I am a judge.' The conversation devolved until he accused me of racism. Apparently, he was Hispanic; I hadn’t noticed. But when did it become O.K. to pick on someone’s physical imperfections but not sexual orientation or race?"

A question actually asked of the NYT etiquette columnist, who said:

Are you honestly suggesting that the takeaway from your idiotic spat is that racism trumps fat-shaming? From my perch, both of you acted like lunatics who need to work on impulse control.

The columnist assumes the letter-writer is not a judge. That never occurred to me, but I do think a judge shouldn't be using "I am a judge" to get the upper hand in a conversation with a stranger. I wish I had the confidence in judges that would cause me to read the statement "I am a judge" to mean the person is not a judge. 

"The fanny pack is not just useful; it’s a unifying force."

"Just look at the diversity of those who embrace it. Couture runways like Chanel and Gucci have been littered with them in recent years, Matthew McConaughey endorses them, quarterbacks rely on them, the wrestler Mick Foley hid chicken wings in them and tweaked-out E.D.M. festivalgoers would be lost (and less high) without them.... The fanny pack is utilitarian by design and aspirational in application, because a hands-free life is an engaged life — a life worth living...."

That's at the NYT, where one of the comments is: "I never did understand the objections. Who doesn't appreciate a sexy leather tool belt slung low on the hip? Why, they're mesmerizing! It's the same thing. Makes you sashay a bit...."

But: "Small cross-body bags are the only way to go. All the ease of a fanny pack and you don't look like a dork." I recommend something like this (unless you're out hiking or something).

To avoid performing same-sex weddings, a judge stopped performing all weddings, and now he's under investigation by a a judicial fitness commission.

Marion County Judge Vance Day "made a decision nearly a year ago to stop doing weddings altogether, and the principal factor that he weighed was the pressure that one would face to perform a same-sex wedding, which he had a conflict with his religious beliefs," a spokesman told AP.

The issue of same-sex weddings is "the weightiest" of several allegations against Day that are being investigated by the Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability, [the spokesman] said....

Last month, the Ohio Supreme Court's Board of Professional Conduct said judges can't refuse to marry same-sex couples on personal, moral or religious grounds. Judges who stop performing all marriages to avoid marrying same-sex couples may be interpreted as biased and could be disqualified from any case where sexual orientation is an issue, the Ohio board ruled.

There's an important line to be drawn here, and it's not clear from the article what the Board of Professional Conduct is doing. We're hearing from the judge's spokesperson about an investigation in which there are a number of allegations. What are they? And it's one thing to say that after a judge opts out of performing all weddings because of opposition to same-sex marriage, he should be disqualified from ruling in cases where sexual orientation is an issue. It's quite another to say that a judge is unfit because he's stopped performing weddings.

40 years ago today: Squeaky Fromme, 2 feet away from President Ford, points a .45-caliber semi-automatic pistol.

A Secret Service agent grabbed the gun, which contained bullets, but had no bullet in its chamber.

Last year, a tape of her interview with a mental health examiner was released. In the interview, done shortly after her arrest, Fromme explained the "X" mark that she and other followers of Charles Manson had on their foreheads:

"Well, it has different levels. On one level it is a cross that's a following cross. On another level it is an 'X' and the 'X' is we are marked out of the system as it stands. We don't go along with it."

She commented on her use of LSD:

"I became aware of the possibilities of different realities as seen through different eyes, as seen through the Chicanos for example. I traveled in my mind into their world, the east Los Angeles. And then I traveled into the ghetto and I traveled into high society."

Here's some video containing interviews with Ford and Fromme looking back on the incident. Notable quote from from: "Of course, I could have shot him, and to me, his life didn't mean more to the redwoods to me."



The comments there (at YouTube) don't take assassination too seriously: "She didn't kill anyone." "Fuck. We could have been rid of that dip-shit." Even those who seem to take it seriously can't be serious: "She remains unrepentant of her actions and her mullet."

Fromme is now 66 years old. She's been out of prison since 2009.

"​The one good thing to come out of DeflateGate? This killer navy suit."

"After Tom Brady's four-game suspension was nullified by a federal judge earlier today, the man took a victory lap in his finest outfit. Here's a play-by-play..."

"Why drivers in China intentionally kill the pedestrians they hit."

"Most people agree that the hit-to-kill phenomenon stems at least in part from perverse laws on victim compensation. In China the compensation for killing a victim in a traffic accident is relatively small—amounts typically range from $30,000 to $50,000—and once payment is made, the matter is over. By contrast, paying for lifetime care for a disabled survivor can run into the millions. The Chinese press recently described how one disabled man received about $400,000 for the first 23 years of his care. Drivers who decide to hit-and-kill do so because killing is far more economical. Indeed, Zhao Xiao Cheng—the man caught on a security camera video driving over a grandmother five times—ended up paying only about $70,000 in compensation...."

More at the link, including gruesome descriptions of drivers who, having hit a person by accident, proceed to drive over him repeatedly to get a dead victim.

"Trump Defeats Kanye" = Kanye wins in 2020 (and Trump wins in 2016).

A nice new New Yorker cover, by Barry Blitt:



Historical reference:

"Imagine what it takes to live your whole professional and personal life as a 'justice-in waiting.'"

Josh Blackman and Randy Barnett say in a Weekly Standard article titled "The Next Justices/A guide for GOP candidates on how to fill Court vacancies."

Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan was viewed by many on the left as a dream candidate for the Supreme Court. However, in light of her well-documented record of supporting various hot-button liberal causes, she was never even nominated for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Karlan was the antithesis of the “Little Supreme.” But did she regret it? Not at all: “Would I like to be on the Supreme Court?” she asked rhetorically. “You bet I would. But not enough to have trimmed my sails for half a lifetime.” We are not suggesting that Karlan should be a Supreme Court nominee, but she exposed the truth about SCOTUS-wannabes who “trim their sails” and limit their potential based on a fear of a future confirmation hearing: Such persons lack the character a justice needs.

Karlan explained this with her characteristic forcefulness: “Courage is a muscle. You develop courage by exercising it. Sitting on the fence is not practice for standing up.” Imagine what it takes to live your whole professional and personal life as a “justice-in waiting.” These SCOTUS-wannabes spend their careers seeking the approval of others, in the hopes that one day they will be nominated because of their friendships across the political spectrum....

What's happening in the anti-Kim-Davis comic genre?

Well, this is happening on Twitter:



It's funny... up to a point, but it leans on stereotyping non-affluent southern white women. And given the prominent photograph of an actual woman who sits next to Kim Davis, there's a problem of appropriating her identity and reputation. Yes, you have to be a fool to believe that's the person writing the Twitter feed, but it is still using her.

ADDED: Here's another use of that woman's image, from a collection at Queerty titled "The Best Kim Davis Memes (So Far)":

"I got nothing. The question was, what did I get for signing the pledge? Absolutely nothing..."

"... other than the assurance that I would be treated fairly. And I’ve seen that over the last two months, where they really have been very fair."

I think Trump gets something more than that, something quite significant. He's planning to get the nomination, and if and when he does, he will characterize his pledge as part of a bargain: Republicans support Republicans. They must support him. They can't peel off and say that at some point The Party's nominee is such a dangerous demagogue that support must be withheld.

Remember, Trump is all about "the deal."



He will hold you to your side of the bargain — your side, as interpreted by him, in the new context, that he foresaw better than you.

Rick Perry: "A broken clock is right once a day,"

Oh, Rick.