Friday, December 31, 2010
Thursday, December 30, 2010
This is just so awesome. What a toy for insights into our history.
Hmm. Looks plausible.
God may not be dead, but He may have reached an equilibrium.
What's with rabbits and the 1950s? Maybe their use in scientific experiments.
Negro v. African American (No, I don't really know if it's searching "African American")
This baffles me.
The N-word -- fascinating. Just eyeballing, but look at the Civil War, the forties, and the sixties.
Have fun and report back.
When you mix your labor with a parking spot, you own it. Cities would do well to legally sanction this practice. I think. Or maybe it works better for being extra- or quasi-legal? You would think if it were sanctioned, then more people would be out clearing the streets.
I just got back from having been snowed in in Connecticut. It wasn't really an ordeal for us; it just felt that way to me. Watching local news, it was clear Mayor Bloomberg did not cover himself in glory. If he can't preside over getting the streets of the City cleared of snow, I don't see any reason to think he's the One in any other respect. Too bad our president was not first the mayor of a big city where it snowed. Then we might not be in the pickle we are now in.
Monday, December 27, 2010
Hugh Hewitt on last week's Obama press conference:
Wednesday's press conference may have starred President Obama fresh off his alleged big win on START and DADT, his losses on the Dream Act and the Omnibus spending bill, and the tie on the tax deal, but the big story was the eagerness of the White House Press Corp to revert to fawning treatment of their once-and-future leader.
Wednesday's press conference featured the return of the media we saw throughout campaign 2008 - a blocking front for a hard-left president they approve of, and to whose re-election they are resoundingly, and obviously, committed.
Read the whole thing.
Recently, I linked to this op ed by distinguished historian Pauline Meier. The piece defended Justice Breyer's comments on the Heller case that criticized the Heller majority and argued that the original intent of the Framers did not favor a right to bear arms for self defense.
The piece is a perfect example of why originalists are often frustrated by many historians who opine on originalist issues. They claim to have superior knowledge of the history, and they are certainly well versed in it. But they can't seem to wrap their minds around the idea that originalism is not simply about history. In the version that the Supreme Court employed in Heller, and that most originalists today follow, it is the original meaning of the Second Amendment that is the question at issue, not the original intent of the Framers. Originalism is about a certain type of law, not merely history.
Meier may or may not be right about the original intent (and I find her arguments not terribly strong), but she does not even address the original meaning. As a result, a well respected historian comes across as unsophisticated about the legal issue. And, sadly, Meier is not alone.
I recognize that the training of historians does not incline them towards original meaning analysis. But that is no excuse. Historians can complain all they want to about "law office history," but at least as big a problem in this area is "history office law."
Cross posted at The Originalism Blog.
Friday, December 24, 2010