NEW ORLEANS, Oct. 18 — Two days of rain here, or rather, two overnights into early mornings, and our newpapers weren't readable. Fortuneately, NYT does us the great favor of letting us report when we our papers are wet. Supposedly Sulzberger and company will credit our account for the lost reading pleasure. We'll find out.
We like two days of rain much less than two days of snow. Snow we can brush off of our papers and continue reading, while rain makes them sog-a-log-dog-hog and fragile.
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Friday, October 13, 2006
Blogging NYT: Baghdad Garbage Man = Deadly Job
NEW ORLEANS, Oct. 13 — In an enlightening article, "Even Picking Up Trash Is a High Risk in Baghdad," A1 in today's New York Times, Michael Luo and his reporting partners spotlight the harrowing job of being a Baghdad sanitation worker. From roadside bombings to killings by militants trying to protect their roadside bombs, hundreds (probably — the story isn't totally precise on the figure) of sanitation workers in Baghdad have died from the violence since the war began.
It's an important look at the untold and unforeseen consequences of the American takedown of Saddam Hussein and the following occupation and insurgency. Basic municipal services are all-but nonexistent, Luo's piece suggests. The reality is a stark commentary on the fragile nature of cities and how easily they can fall to pieces in the midst of what many would call a good thing, the toppling of Saddam.
It's an important look at the untold and unforeseen consequences of the American takedown of Saddam Hussein and the following occupation and insurgency. Basic municipal services are all-but nonexistent, Luo's piece suggests. The reality is a stark commentary on the fragile nature of cities and how easily they can fall to pieces in the midst of what many would call a good thing, the toppling of Saddam.
Monday, October 09, 2006
Bollards aren't boring.
NEW ORLEANS, Oct. 9 — Since 9/11, physical security barriers have sprung up around the United States, multiplying like rabbits.
In New York City, particularly in Manhattan, "setback" from the street and "target hardening" were already buzzwords by the time I started working for the NYC Department of Transportation two years ago last week.
Now, knock on wood, the City has decided many targets are sufficiently hard without adding unsightly barricades ringing their perimeters, as you can note in Cara Buckley's piece in Saturday's New York Times, "Security Barriers of New York Are Removed."
While I was at DOT, I worked with the developers of the Time Warner Center — the mall at Columbus Circle whose bollards are pictured in the Times piece — to ensure their scheme (or any changes to it, really — still none made, as far as I know) were sufficient to "harden" the building and that they were easy enough on the eyes to appease the Art Commission.
I'm glad to see the City and my former colleagues at DOT are making progress in keeping Manhattan secure while making it useable for the peds — that's transportation speak for pedestrians.
From NOLA, the land of few bollards and many potholes,
B.S. out.
In New York City, particularly in Manhattan, "setback" from the street and "target hardening" were already buzzwords by the time I started working for the NYC Department of Transportation two years ago last week.
Now, knock on wood, the City has decided many targets are sufficiently hard without adding unsightly barricades ringing their perimeters, as you can note in Cara Buckley's piece in Saturday's New York Times, "Security Barriers of New York Are Removed."
While I was at DOT, I worked with the developers of the Time Warner Center — the mall at Columbus Circle whose bollards are pictured in the Times piece — to ensure their scheme (or any changes to it, really — still none made, as far as I know) were sufficient to "harden" the building and that they were easy enough on the eyes to appease the Art Commission.
I'm glad to see the City and my former colleagues at DOT are making progress in keeping Manhattan secure while making it useable for the peds — that's transportation speak for pedestrians.
From NOLA, the land of few bollards and many potholes,
B.S. out.
I enjoy writing, legal or illegal. It's satisfying.
NEW ORLEANS, Oct. 8 — So, continuing on the law school kick because I spent 12 hours today doing law school stuff — reading, copying and pasting (a.k.a sloppy, first-draft outlining), study grouping, briefing, and freaking out, a brief comment on the most important, yet so more least useful, class of the first year of law school: Legal Research and Writing, LRW for short.
Legal research and legal writing are admittedly different than academic, journalistic, governmental, or goof-ball-ish research and writing, all of which I've done. That said, once you learn the distinguishing charactertistics of legal research and writing, they become one of the crowd. The unique characteristics are somewhat boring: an obsession with citation, in frequency and form; a dearth of creativity, in structure and style; and an unhealthy obsession with page limits.
Once I know the confines within which I'm writing, I'm usually set (*knock on wood* or tomorrow I'll get writer's block that sticks for the rest of the semester). Now, last week in LRW, we turned in our first assignment, a "closed" memo about something (I dare not divulge any more for fear of violating the somewhat sensible, somewhat Draconian and impractical honor code — more on that another time). It was more interesting than expected, given the topic, and it was a satisfying experience to bring the project to fruition. Not as satisfying as this post or even writing reports for Mayor Bloomberg in the Big Apple or articles for publication, but satisfying in the meaningless, pathetic, irrelevant way many aspects of the first year of law school are satisfying.
So, given that satisfaction (cue the Stones, cue civil procedure professor singing this hit in class, forever attaching it to the search for "satisfaction," or execution leading to payment, of a court judgment), you might imagine how disappointed (relieved?) I was when I opened my LRW text book (the only class for which we have a "text book" with largely meaningless reading) to read the following:
Legal research and legal writing are admittedly different than academic, journalistic, governmental, or goof-ball-ish research and writing, all of which I've done. That said, once you learn the distinguishing charactertistics of legal research and writing, they become one of the crowd. The unique characteristics are somewhat boring: an obsession with citation, in frequency and form; a dearth of creativity, in structure and style; and an unhealthy obsession with page limits.
Once I know the confines within which I'm writing, I'm usually set (*knock on wood* or tomorrow I'll get writer's block that sticks for the rest of the semester). Now, last week in LRW, we turned in our first assignment, a "closed" memo about something (I dare not divulge any more for fear of violating the somewhat sensible, somewhat Draconian and impractical honor code — more on that another time). It was more interesting than expected, given the topic, and it was a satisfying experience to bring the project to fruition. Not as satisfying as this post or even writing reports for Mayor Bloomberg in the Big Apple or articles for publication, but satisfying in the meaningless, pathetic, irrelevant way many aspects of the first year of law school are satisfying.
So, given that satisfaction (cue the Stones, cue civil procedure professor singing this hit in class, forever attaching it to the search for "satisfaction," or execution leading to payment, of a court judgment), you might imagine how disappointed (relieved?) I was when I opened my LRW text book (the only class for which we have a "text book" with largely meaningless reading) to read the following:
A fair number of lawyers and judges profess to like writing and even say that they find the process satisfying. If you are in this fortunate group, this chapter is not addressed to you. (p.555 The Legal Writing Handbook: Analysis, Research, and Writing, 4th Ed. Oates, Laurel Currie and Anne Enquist. Aspen: New York, 2006.)I promptly put the book down and started writing this post, seeking satisfaction, as the Stones sing you to sleep.
Sunday, October 08, 2006
A Late Show List: Top 10 Things I Learned in My First Semester of Law School, Part 2
NEW ORLEANS, Oct. 8 — In reviewing my torts notes while preparing my torts outline (more on that painful process later), I found this gem from my German torts professor (no, not German Torts, just American ones, taught by a German), from 01-September-2006.
He referred (I would say refers, but I don't think he's said it again yet) to American football, the game for which tailgaters live, “the land acquisition game.” Go figure.
More on figuring when I get to his comment about the metric system, which I know is much closer to the present in my notes, so at the rate I'm going on this outline, it could be a little while, but I can guarantee it will be before my practice exam on Tuesday 17-October-2006.
Back to Civil Procedure. Let me know if you have questions on personal jurisdiction, because that's eesentially all I know about procedure so far. After this reading I should be able to tell you something about service of process. (Can I get a "I'll serve your process!" joke? Anyone?).
B.S. out.
He referred (I would say refers, but I don't think he's said it again yet) to American football, the game for which tailgaters live, “the land acquisition game.” Go figure.
More on figuring when I get to his comment about the metric system, which I know is much closer to the present in my notes, so at the rate I'm going on this outline, it could be a little while, but I can guarantee it will be before my practice exam on Tuesday 17-October-2006.
Back to Civil Procedure. Let me know if you have questions on personal jurisdiction, because that's eesentially all I know about procedure so far. After this reading I should be able to tell you something about service of process. (Can I get a "I'll serve your process!" joke? Anyone?).
B.S. out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)