I keep reading and hearing different things that people did to study for exams. It worries me immensly because it makes me think I am going to fail. I really don't want to fail. I have never failed before. But this is the first time I really think I stand a chance. Then again, I didn't know anything else to do to study for exams. You see, I didn't make tons of flash cards. I found increasingly they were a waste of time. And I didn't look at every old outline that was out there; that wasn't nearly as effective and trying to construct my own. The more I think about it, the more things I could have done so differently. There is always next semester, provided that my grades aren't so low that I get a letter from the Dean saying, "Don't bother to try again." There are things that I did do. I read all of the can briefs available! And I said lots of prayers. And I talked to people who weren't doing as much as me to make myself feel better. I made sure I had all of the black letter rules of law down. And I looked ahead to next semester to decide the things I would do differently. Like, reading all the cases and not just most of them. And, focusing on the big picture all the time rather than worry about the tiny little facts of the case the professor might catch me and make me look stupid for all of 6 seconds. Yes, my life as a first semester One L was difficult...mostly because I had no clue what I needed to be doing. But now that I have a clue...well...I'm hoping that I make it to next semester to implement my new found clueness.
Sunday, December 19, 2004
Saturday, December 11, 2004
War
As evil as it may seem, often necessary and perhaps indispensable, war is a part of life. Never in history has there been a period of world peace. There is always an aggressor and a need to defend. I think it naive that liberals seem to think the world would be a "better" place without Bush. Not to say it is better with him, but really, does it matter what leadership commands?
I would argue that such answers lay in history. Notorious, almost, for our individualism, America has long been the home of cowboys and movie stars; big business and arrogance. Yet, for all the symbolism and pretense, I think that America's role in history is undercut by, in a sense, "macrohistoric" factors. Not to digress, but only to name a few: Hitler, Vietnam, the League of Nations and the United Nations, China, and the Soviet Union.
So what does that mean? It means that our relation to the history is defined by our relationships and actions, not by our essential purpose or meaning. Today, for example, America is known as an aggressive hegemon; a dictator of democracy. That makes to no sense. I would argue that America is a great counter balance to world powers such as Europe, now the EU, China and the nations and factions that comprise the Muslim world. Our decidedly Christian, moral, individualistic, "arrogant", powerful, a proactive existence makes the world better because without it, the void would be filled...and filled by something most likely much worse.
I say worse because the balance is rather clear. This is not Huntington's Clash of Civilizations. This is bigger than that. The world is going to be divided in the future, and that divide will be more than politics of war and peace. It will be a divide of existence, and the US's existence is only one half of that. The existence of the other side, the "pro-peace", pro-apathy, pro-state, pro-appeasement, pro-elite is clear. It was through appeasement and pro-peace efforts that WWII started. No one was willing to stand up to Hitler and say no. And today, but for America standing up and saying No to the Muslim terrorist, where would we be? Many argue the Muslim terrorist is a reaction to the US, but that holds no water, as the saying goes. The Muslim terrorist would exist regardless, because his purpose, his mission is not to get rid of America but to seek world power. That is what it is all about. Power. And power is exactly what man has never, and will never, have. Secular power is worthless anyway since the secular is incontrollable.
The power of war to change things is undeniable. The loss that America is willing to sustain to win that war is honorable, but the cost is great. The sad thing is, we will loose this war with the terrorists; it cannot be won. But the noble thing to do is to stand up and try anyway. The "other" side can only whine; but the existence of the American "hegemon" is balance and is powerful in and of itself. Notwithstanding the many sad and tragic stories of its founding, this nation began its formation in the 17th century, was founded in the 18th century, and continues to be in the 21st century something different from what was; something else. Something that history would one day see as a nation that stood up when others wouldn't and didn't back down from what should be done.
I would argue that such answers lay in history. Notorious, almost, for our individualism, America has long been the home of cowboys and movie stars; big business and arrogance. Yet, for all the symbolism and pretense, I think that America's role in history is undercut by, in a sense, "macrohistoric" factors. Not to digress, but only to name a few: Hitler, Vietnam, the League of Nations and the United Nations, China, and the Soviet Union.
So what does that mean? It means that our relation to the history is defined by our relationships and actions, not by our essential purpose or meaning. Today, for example, America is known as an aggressive hegemon; a dictator of democracy. That makes to no sense. I would argue that America is a great counter balance to world powers such as Europe, now the EU, China and the nations and factions that comprise the Muslim world. Our decidedly Christian, moral, individualistic, "arrogant", powerful, a proactive existence makes the world better because without it, the void would be filled...and filled by something most likely much worse.
I say worse because the balance is rather clear. This is not Huntington's Clash of Civilizations. This is bigger than that. The world is going to be divided in the future, and that divide will be more than politics of war and peace. It will be a divide of existence, and the US's existence is only one half of that. The existence of the other side, the "pro-peace", pro-apathy, pro-state, pro-appeasement, pro-elite is clear. It was through appeasement and pro-peace efforts that WWII started. No one was willing to stand up to Hitler and say no. And today, but for America standing up and saying No to the Muslim terrorist, where would we be? Many argue the Muslim terrorist is a reaction to the US, but that holds no water, as the saying goes. The Muslim terrorist would exist regardless, because his purpose, his mission is not to get rid of America but to seek world power. That is what it is all about. Power. And power is exactly what man has never, and will never, have. Secular power is worthless anyway since the secular is incontrollable.
The power of war to change things is undeniable. The loss that America is willing to sustain to win that war is honorable, but the cost is great. The sad thing is, we will loose this war with the terrorists; it cannot be won. But the noble thing to do is to stand up and try anyway. The "other" side can only whine; but the existence of the American "hegemon" is balance and is powerful in and of itself. Notwithstanding the many sad and tragic stories of its founding, this nation began its formation in the 17th century, was founded in the 18th century, and continues to be in the 21st century something different from what was; something else. Something that history would one day see as a nation that stood up when others wouldn't and didn't back down from what should be done.
Exam Poem
I Study For This Exam: A Meditation
I study for this exam.
I study for this exam knowing that it will be arbitrarily graded, that 125 papers is too much for any man to stay awake through (let alone care about), that my professor’s four-year old will be given free reign with a gigantic red crayon, and that a slight hitch in the wrist of the blindfolded chimpanzee throwing my particular dart could mean the difference between an A+ and a C+. But still, I study for this exam.
I study even though there are important football games to be watched, real books to be read, terrible wrongs to be righted, flowers to be smelled, babies to be kissed, animals to be petted. I study knowing that all over the world there are people who wake up each morning thinking “My God, it is great to be alive!” instead of “My God, there are only two days left until the exam and I haven’t done a single practice question yet I am totally fucked and should probably quit right now to save myself the pain and humiliation of being the ballast at the ass-end of the curve and flunking out after only one semester please someone, anyone, HELP ME!” I know this. And I know it is wrong. But still, I study for this exam.
I study for this exam in the hopes that it might impress someone, that the girl from my section in the coffee shop will think "My, isn't he dedicated," so that my professor might, upon reading my exam, declare that I should immediately be given not only an A+, but a JD, an LLM, and a tenured professorship. I study because I believe, on some deep, visceral level, that my studying will yield an exam so perfect, so sublime, so deserving of the highest imaginable praise that Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. himself will show up on my doorstep and ask to shake my hand. And I study because I have not yet let go of the delusion that I might be the one who breaks the cycle, who ends up pleased with his grades, who makes it to February still liking law school. Irrational? Yes. Delusional? Certainly. Will that stop me? Not likely.
Because as the hours continue to melt away, each one taking with it another ounce of self respect, another shred of dignity, I am certain of very little. I'm not sure why I came here, I don't know where I'm going, and as of this moment I'm only marginally confident that I can remember my own name. But, when this is all over, let it not be denied that, if nothing else, I did indeed, study for this exam.
Credit for this Poem goes to Mike @: http://wingsandvodka.blogs.com/blog/exams/index.html
Federalism through Kahan
Interstate competition: quieted by Federalism as the structure does not allow for differences between the states. There must be minimum contacts such that exercise of PJ would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice for a state to exercise personal jurisdiction. Therefore, when states do not have PJ over an actor, there can be no competition in the treatment of that actor.
- securities law? (parties other than the issuer are regulated by traditional Sec Law)
- divorce (not unless consensual)
- (in marriage it is effective because no PJ required)
- corporate law
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
