Go Rangers

I'm sorry Poseur. This is just unbelievable. The Rangers beat the Orioles . . . 30-3. Yes. Thirty runs to three. According to the article, that's the most runs in a major league game . . . in modern history. The last time somebody got that many was in 1897 between teams called the Chicago Colts and the Louisville Something-or-others. Wow. And--the Rangers have only scored 28 runs in their last nine games . . . total.

Mikearoni--you were right. Texas did need another catcher. Jarrod Saltalamacchia got 2 HR and 7 RBI. Rock on. Who'd have thought the Rangers GM could make a good call?

F Q, man.

The fall quarter is nigh upon us. It should be an interesting quarter for me. I'll find out if I have any business acumen. I think not--this quarter should confirm that. Here's my schedule for the interested:

• Basic Tax & Accounting--I have some background in this area. I wrote my bachelor's thesis on the flat tax. And my dad and wife are both accountants. You guys better watch out for me when we hit the flat tax chapter.
• Business Organizations I--I have some background in this area, too. I helped an old boss of mine set up an LLP owned by an LLC (or maybe it was the other way around) so she could rent property to the state. When I say "helped," I mean that I notarized her signature and drove the papers down to Austin. Watch out, J-Fish.
• Jurisprudence--Once again, my educational history helps me out. I once took Modern Political Theory from a guy who was simultaneously running for Congress. (Can I get a witness, Mr. Robertson?) You guys better watch out when we hit the chapter about the jurisprudential nuances of running for Congress in rural quasi-west Texas.
• Negotiable Instruments--Yet again: I have written countless checks. (Or is it cheques?) Dang, J-Fish. This'll be the quarter everybody hates Alico.
• Trusts & Estates (I?)--I know all about trust. I've done both trust walks and trust falls. And I can tell you the capitals of all 50 states if I think about it for a minute. (Don't believe me? Boise, Idaho. Bam. Betcha didn't even know Idaho had a capital.*)

I'm betting on a 4.0 this quarter. Any takers?

*Ed. Note--By far, the funniest thing in Napoleon Dynamite is the travel agency: "Idago Travels."

18 states, eh?

These are the states I've visited (even if just for a few hours or just driving through). New York looks weird, doesn't it? All separate like that . . . that's because I flew there, via Charlotte. And because of the weird "great circle" phenomenon, I have no idea what states I flew over, except that I always seem to fly over the Mighty Mississippi.

Where have you been?

They don't call him "King" for nothin'

Books don't usually make me cry. Not even The Notebook or A Walk to Remember. So why does Stephen King make me tear up in Taco Bueno? This is why:

Maybe he was as mad as he said he was, but she could see only a species of miserable fright. Suddenly, like the thud of a boxing glove on her mouth, she saw how close to the edge of everything he was. The agency was tottering, that was bad enough, and now, on top of that, like a grisly dessert following a putrid main course, his marriage was tottering too. She felt a rush of warmth for him, for this man she had sometimes hated and had, for the last three hours, at least, feared. A kind of epiphany filled her. Most of all, she hoped he would always think he had been as mad as hell, and not . . . not the way his face said he felt.

Stephen King, Cujo 88 (1981). It got me thinking: maybe the most beautiful images, the most spectacularly, stunningly, disarmingly awe-inspiring images, are hidden away in stories that seem to have nothing beautiful about them. Maybe it's the juxtaposition itself that draws out the beauty so richly.

Stephen King isn't the best-selling author since Jesus because of his backcover mugshot.

All because of you, I haven't slept for so long . . .

. . . and when I do, I dream I'm drowning in the ocean.

Not really, but I thought those were pretty neat lyrics. The kind of lyrics you build a song around.

The Missus is taking me to watch my beloved Rangers get trounced by the Mariners this weekend, so I'm getting a headstart on some of my homework. Today, I was reading for Tax and came across this little gem of psychology:

Every man is likely to overemphasize and treat as fundamental those aspects of life which are his peculiar daily concern.

Lawrence A. Cunningham, Sharing Accounting's Burden: Business Lawyers in Enron's Dark Shadows, 57 Bus. Lawyer 1421 (2002), quoting Jerome N. Frank, Accounting for Investors, The Fundamental Importance of Corporate Earning Power, 68 J. Accountancy 295, 295, 300-01 (1939).

Quoth I the former SEC chairman not because of the truth of his statement (tho it bears out in my experience) but because . . . who would have thought you'd find good psychological truth in tax homework?

This is why I love law . . .

Tax Free Weekend + New Content

I have two things I've been wanting to say for a few days. First, I hope you'll notice my new content over there on the right. I call it "The Metablog." Google Reader (my new aggregator) lets me share articles and posts them right there, easy as pie. I hope you enjoy it.

And number 2. Let me tell you what tax-free weekend means to me: running out of ice. The first tax-free weekend that I worked, I was the lead closer at the Subway in the Mall. We were so dadgum busy that we ran out of ice. I had to run to the store on 19th Street to get some (and they would only let me take two ice chests full). That was about 4 o'clock. Then we ran out again, but thankfully, it was closer to closing. I've heard of restaurants running out of ice because the machine was broken, but that's the only time I've ever heard of an operational and fully functionining ice machine running out just because the restaurant was so dang busy.

I made sure to ask that day off the next year.

Well that was unexpected

A few weeks ago, Ms. Avacado and I saw our first James Bond movie all the way through: Goldeneye. I enjoyed it enough that I decided to give Ian Fleming's books a chance. Let me tell you: at least in Casino Royale (the first in the series and the only one I've read so far), Mr. Bond is unexpectedly round. He does not always have the cool and calm demeanor he is known for, though there is enough that 007 is recognizable. In my opinion, the increased complexity makes him more believable and likeable. I recommend reading the book, even if you don't think you like James Bond. It's a fast reader and highly entertaining.

No adventures para mi

The sorting hat says that I belong in Ravenclaw!

<

Said Ravenclaw, "We'll teach those whose intelligence is surest."

Ravenclaw students tend to be clever, witty, intelligent, and knowledgeable.
Notable residents include Cho Chang and Padma Patil (objects of Harry and Ron's affections), and Luna Lovegood (daughter of The Quibbler magazine's editor).

Take the most scientific Harry Potter Quiz ever created.

Get Sorted Now!

Too much comfort?

Mrs. Avacado and I ate with my parents tonight at Logan's. I'm stuft. Miserably stuft. My parents have told me for years that life was so much better when they didn't have any money and you really were entertained with the fridge box somebody got you for Christmas. People are far more prosperous these days, but are they any happier? And if not, what's the point of all our prosperity? I'm not saying that I'm willing to give up all the blessings of middle class American life, but I just wonder about it. Would I be happier if I had to scrape by?

¿¿¿

Do the Rangers need another catcher?

Mas new content

On the sidebar, I've added two new features. The first feature is called "Bedside Table" and lists books that I'm currently reading. The second feature is called "Back on the Shelf" and lists the books I've read since I moved into my new house. I'm not sure if anybody cares about that kinda stuff, but it gives me the opportunity to look back in a few months and say "dadgum, I've read a buncha books. Maybe I should spend more time working on law school . . . "

. . . and yes, I really have just read Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone for the first time. I was highly impressed.

The Little Tramp

Did you know that Charlie Chaplin was an immigrant?

Happy for whom?

I can't believe it. Kenny Lofton for a class-A catcher? I know Kenny's old, but he's batting .300+ and has 20+ steals. This is why the Rangers are in last . . . again.

All 6 yo

In happy news, this site has finally been visited by someone on each of the six permanently populated continents. Woohoo! By far, I'm most popular in North America, with Europe a distant second. Asia, surprisingly, comes in third, followed by South America. It appears I have had two visitors from Africa and one from Australia.

I just thought you guys would like a non-immigration post. (:

Real criminals belong in a real jail

. . . and those we pretend are criminals belong in a pretend-jail. Kinda like in prison dodgeball. Anti-immigration rhetoric is rife with statements like, "I don't mind immigration, but they have to do it legally," which is really just a boringly polite way to say that you prefer law-abiding people to criminals. But the fact is--illegal presence in the United States is not the kind of crime that we think of when we label someone a criminal. The wrong done when you illegally enter the United States is that of disrespect, not the kind of moral wrong that underscores penal statutes regarding murder, robbery, assault, rape, and fraud. Those are bad things and have always been illegal. Crossing an imaginary line so you can feed your kids without getting the permission of the people on the other side of the line . . . well, I'm not advocating illegal immigration, I'm just saying it's not the same thing as rape. Let's keep rapists and illegal immigrants in separate categories.

Contrary to what you may have thought, the Bible speaks out against anti-immigration laws: Exodus 22:1 and 23:9, Leviticus 19:33-34*, Deuteronomy 24:17 and 27:19, and Zechariah 7:10 all command the people of God (at that time Israel, now the Christian catholic** Church) to love foreigners/aliens/strangers and treat them as if they were natives. Sure, there are verses that tell us that, as Christians, we are to obey the law of the land . . . but only when it does not conflict with God's commands. God clearly commands that his own due process clause (Matthew 22:39: Love your neighbor as yourself, without meaningless distinctions (cf. Romans 10:12)) applies to all persons, regardless of where they were born or who they are. Again, I'm not advocating illegal immigration, but let's at least be honest in the debate and not lump illegal immigrants in the same box as rapists and murderers (whom we should love as ourselves, anyway).

All this as preface so that I can say "amen" to this Slate article: The Pardon Pander, by Bruce Fein. If the guys obstructed justice, then they need to be punished appropriately.

I'm sad to report that I cannot determine how any of my Congresspeople voted. If anybody can find a vote list, please put a link in the comments.




*This verse is my favorite one of those listed, so I'll spell it out for you here, from the NASB: "The [immigrant] who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt."

**The little c in catholic was intentional. Look it up, you bum.

Well, if Al Sharpton can agree with Wal*Mart on something . . .

Then he must be right. Check it out.

Also--check out this article on nj.com explaining why the argument that "my ancestors came here legally" is probably wrong.

Los Inmigrantes del Día

About every day or so, one of the blogs I read has a post entitled "Immigrant of the Day." The posts serve two purposes for me: (1) They remind me that there is something about being American that doesn't come from where you're born; and (2) They surprise with me who all has migrated. Surprising immigrants (at least to me) include Felix Frankfurter, Madeleine Albright, and Andrew Carnegie. America has been built on the shoulders of immigrants. When I think that the immigrant of the day is particularly interesting, I'll go ahead and post a link here. I encourage you, of course, to read up on immigration. The more you know, the angrier you'll get at our system.

Enjoy!

Supreme Bears?

There's an interesting post at SCOTUSblog about potential nominees by a Republican president for the Supreme Court. I don't know much about politics and who's who among potential Supreme Court nominees, but I have this to say about that: out of 14 listed possibles, only 1 came from the greatest law school in America. Interesting numbers below.

Law schools represented:

• Baylor (1)
• U of Chicago (1)
• Hahvahd (6)
• South Texas College of Law** (1)
• St. Mary's** (1)
• Tulane (1)
• U of the Pacific (McGeorge School of Law)* (1)
• UVa (1)
• Yalie (1)

And the following undergrads represented:

• Baylor (1)
• Columbia (1)
• Florida State U (1)
• Georgetown (1)
• Michigan State (1)
• Northeast Louisiana State (1)
• Princeton (2)
• (Southwest) Texas State** (1)
• Stanford (1)
• U of Texas (1)
• Trinity in San Antonio (1)
• Washington & Lee (1)
• Yale (1)

Hmm. Out of 14 short-listed people, 6 are Hahvahd lawyers. Deep sociological question: are they nominated because they went to Hahvahd or did they go to Hahvahd because the kind of people who get nominated to the Supreme Court go to Hahvahd?

*Interestingly, this guy went to Stanford. Weird, huh?

**I know, I know. How did they get on the "short list"?

I always say: flip a coin . . .

. . . and if you don't like the answer you get, go with your gut. Turns out that's not a bad idea.

I've been running behind on my blog reading, so tonight while Mrs. Avacado does a take-home final, I'm reading all about psychology. Very interesting stuff, generally, but this article in particular struck me. In agreement with information overload theories, I've thought for awhile that we just can't consciously handle all the information we get, especially for big decisions. Example: My 18 months in family law were great, but there's a lot of emotional wear & tear from that, plus I really want to learn Spanish (which can apparently help you live longer: ¡Viva español!) and I work better in a rules-oriented environment than a personality-oriented environment, so maybe immigration law is my meal ticket, but I like to philosophize about the deeper issues and help people make really tough decisions plus I'm good with numbers, so maybe estate planning. Argh.

See? Too much information, too many factors to weigh. But apparently my subconscious doesn't care about all that. It makes a shortcut decision based on factors I may not realize I'm thinking about. Does that mean that it always gets the answer right? Not necessarily. But, as the author points out (and as some studies recently have shown*), it does about as well as thinking it through thoroughly.

So tonight, I'm going to bracketologize my life choices, flip coins, and go with my gut.



This just in: Slate published an article entitled: Should you trust your "gut feeling"? It's worth a read.




*The details are all fuzzy, but I seem to remember that they did a study recently comparing the results of an intentionally managed hedge fund with one managed based on the results of hockey games, and the hockey game fund did better. Weird, huh?

Gary Johnson: Fence border? You're joking

This editorial in the Trib is one of the best essays I've seen about why building a fence along the Mexican border is just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. I haven't been able to articulate why it's such a bad idea, but he takes some good swings at it. Let me know what you think. (It's not too long.)