1. If you haven’t yet voted to name the robot in the First Pretty Fakes Cartoon Contest, hustle over to prettyfakes[at]gmail.com and throw in some ideas—there’s only a couple of days left!! Note: “Chauncey” has already been submitted numerous times, so hands off.
2. I am currently listening to three songs on repeat. The Helio Sequence are v. nice boys I met at Jaxxie Glam’s the other nite who opened up for zee Rog-you-way Wa-hay-vay. “Blood Bleeds” is a hypnotic and atmospheric handful of whispery pop, and I like it. Plus, it makes me laff and think of how no one makes me bleed my own blood!
3. The Cloud Room, “Hey Now Now.” This chunk of yearning pop hits me right where I like it: in the catchy chorus-bone, most often flexed when drunked. I mean, “ride the bus there, pay the bus fare . . . hey now now”?? That is thee catchy-ness. Um. There’s also terrible rumors that the drummer is an ex-local who . . . well, let’s just say he’s been around. I’m going to work on Jaysus to get them back down here, stat.
4. Annie, “My Heartbeat.” I know, I’m coming to this after all the hype, and perhaps a bit out of character. Gorjus, you say, you hate electronic music—at least, for the most part. So what’s changed yr mind?
Well, for one thing, the breathy girlbot vocals won me over almost immediately. At first I couldn’t find the hook, and then after accidentally leaving it on “repeat” for twenty minutes, I found it: it’s the entire song. Muy deliciosa, as we say in the Proper.
5. Van Orden v. Perry and McCreary County v. the A.C.L.U. are not that bad at all, although I haven’t read them through and through yet. I can’t believe Dobson had the umbrage to already come out and condemn them, especially when there was a clear “win” for the display of a religious artifact in the first case. As much as he and I would both love a hard and fast rule—me on the no display on public property ever side, this Court has made clear that the determination is highly fact-intensive and to be made on a case-by-case basis. And I? Am not convinced that’s a bad way of going about it. I tend to agree with the admirable and v. cool Dahlia Lithwick when she says that these two cases “aren’t groundbreaking, earth-shattering, or even all that newsworthy.” But don’t talk to her about Lemon!
Note: Kelo v. City of New London is not nearly as bad as you think it is, either. A very cursory comment I left over at Big Gray’s said:
Don’t forget that while this [case] ultimately gives a municipality or a state the “right” to take the property, multiple steps have to take place: first, the state/municipality must not have a law on the books prohibiting this (which would be legal; a state can restrict its own actions).Secondly, at least two criteria will have to be met: “fair market value” must be paid for the property, AND the taking must be for “the public good.”
Third, and perhaps the most important protection, is that in many places (Mississippi being one), a jury trial can be triggered to determine if #2 above is met.
Fourth, there are still your normal appeals within your state’s appellate system after that point.
So don’t fall for the idea that all of sudden a city can just swoop in and take your property. I actually don’t see this as much of a change in existing law as a clarification.
The good folks at Slate also have a level-headed perspective on it.
6. My Pop e-mailed me yesterday about the recent passage in the United States condemning lynching, and the refusal of Mississippi senators to sign it:
Been meaning to ask you about one of your illustrious Senators, Mr. Cochran. I would expect Lott not to sign an apology for 50 years of lynchings, but ol’ Thad missed the boat. If all you young guns are going to change things in Mississippi, it looks like you will have to clean house.
Right on, Pop. Have I mentioned how awesome my dad is? Because, he is.
7. Got some new furniture for the new office: Blu Dot’s Chicago desk and Paperclip bookcase. Am v. happy.
8. Lastly, Dave over at Dave’s Long Box weighs in on the content of his blog and the general gutter-mentality of the internets:
. . . just because I’m White Guy doesn’t mean that I have to use misogynist or homophobic language and turn my blog into Creepy White Guy’s Straight Guy Only Clubhouse. Fuck that. And if that means I’m being P.C., sue me. That’s right, have your lawyer send me a letter of representation and you can just sue my white ass.
Needless to say, I dig that cat.
Seacrest OUT.
1. Can’t think of anything better than “Chauncey”. sorry.
2. me? “Couldn’t Get it Right” by the Climax Blues Band.
3., 4. Zzzzzzzzzzz…
5. ...huh? I’m UP! I was TOTALLY resting my eyes…oh yeah. five: Man, you can’t be surprised with this. they want ALL the marbles or they’ll be smite-ed!! think about the 1990s. over and over they passed the ‘partial-birth abortion’ ban. each time clinton veto’d it. each time he said he’d sign it w/ an exception inserted for the protection of the mother’s life. each time they refused to. they’d rather take nothing (and retain clinton/the issue as a rallying cry and fund raiser) instead of take the measure as compromised. more to the point, if you are an anti-abortion person, why would you choose not to ‘save’ the babies you could with the compromise and then work to leverage the rest? because THAT wasn’t what it was all about.
6. i wrote 2 letters to the editor in the Clarion Ledger last week. one about this. i was informed that they ran. i had NO IDEA because they never called to confirm it was me, as per their normal protocol. i guess they just ‘know’ at this point.
7. Nice stuff. I’ve decided i must either have an Aeron or a Mirra chair as soon as possible. I’m leaning Mirra.
8. That guy was pretty mean to Alpha Flight tho. haw haw haw! EVERYONE should be mean to Alpha Flight!
so where were the spiders?
while the cloud room tried to break my bawalls?
Just a beer light to guide us
So we bitched about his fans and should we crush his sweet hands?
Um, Polly? You ok, man?
I thought maybe that electronic Tourette’s was acting up again.
Mooch gets a poke in the eye for typing the words “Couldn’t Get It Right.” I really didn’t need to have that one lodged in my brain all day.
sally: that’s the next line after the bowie lyric herman quoted.
Darren: who the HELL names themselves the Climax Blues Band? i used to not like that song until i got obsessed with finding who sang it. thinking it was called “in the middle of the night” deeply frustrated my efforts until one day i heard a DJ (a real one) SAY THE NAME OF THE SONG! oh god…how nice is that. a DJ that actually says stuff like that. radio now is often the BMG catalog podcast out to us with station ID’s put in there for a break in the ads so that we can have our listening properly branded.
I think the Slate folks are being “level-headed” because the liberals are the ones that made the TERRIBLE decision. Listen, the government comes in and offers working class people “fair market value” but don’t you think that the fair market value dramatically increases when it’s high class condos or Wal-Marts or whatever. There are eminent domain cases in local newspapers around the country every day for everything from schools to churches to big box stores and the people get screwed usually. Sure, a jury trial might be permitted, but Joe Homeowner doesn’t have a chance to take on city governments and developers with any sort of firepower. Depressing. I’m with Sandra Day on this one.
Trust me, Lady Dahlia is not so intellectually shallown as to support a decision simply because the “liberals” of the Court voted for it. Again, fair market value is often an offer made by the city/state entity that is seeking to condemn the land. The FMV can be contested by the landowner; in Mississippi a special court of eminent domain will be called.
Then, a jury of the landowner’s peers—just like in a civil trial—will make the determination if the FMV is “fair” or not, after evidence has been presented on both sides. If the FMV is good, AND the jury finds that there is a “public good” to be served, the land is taken via eminent doman. At that point, the landowner can pursue an appeal to an appellate court to review if the FMV is fair & the good is truly on behalf of the public.
As the Slate article acknowledges, it’s surprising that many people are shocked—SHOCKED, I tell you!!—to hear about these eminent domain whim-whams, since they’ve been around for thousands of years. The advancement the United States made over England was that we abolished the practice of unilateral condemnation—”I claim this land for the King.” Instead, we incorporate a policy of remuneration for the taking. This, methinks, is a GOOD thing, because cities and states need to grow and have things like highways.
I don’t have a very positive view on this decision. the Fair Market Value has a history of being notoriously unfair in most jurisdictions—most of which do not (as i recall) allow the jury review you mention.
This also side-steps the real problem this case gets wrong. it isn’t the FMV, it is the taking of the property. while i agree that the public is often unaware of and unhappy with eminent domnain, this decision goes beyond mere surprise and a lack of familiarity. the problem here is that this case wildly expands what constitutes a public good/interest. it is no longer a new highway or a public work to service the city/state/nation. This allows private entities to get the govenment to take land from you and give it to them at a discount, thereby avoiding pesky things like your property rights or…oh, say fair market value for your land. Stevens outlines the rather THIN requirement of what is ‘on behalf of the public’ as being met by saying they’d done lots of planning on the matter.
O’Connor puts it in a nutshell:
“all private property is now vulnerable to being taken and transferred to another private owner, so long as it might be upgraded.”—Justice Sandra Day O’Connor
this isn’t about public use. it is about private, for-profit use that gets called ‘public’ because ‘the public’ can use a mall.
oh really? Lots of planning? so if a private company wants my land for their mall and can’t buy it from me for the price they like, then they can just get their pals on the city council to snap it up for me.
...just as long as i did a lot of planning. well, there is that benefit, of course. providing investors a place to build and make money, regardless without a regard to a land owner’s rights. The problem with this case is just that it isn’t about letting the state build highways that were needed. its about letting folks who want to build a strip mall have the right to use the state to take your land and move you out of their damn way when you won’t sell. THAT is what this case is about and that is why i don’t like it.
I think anybody who writes for Slate could be that shallow! Have you read recent Hitchens articles? Anyway, Polly brings up my biggest problem with. It’s that what constitutes “public” use has become very wishy-washy…schools, highways, and stuff. Fine (and even that is abused…seen it here in Athens). But for condo development? Developers usually have tons of money, and here we have the government acting on their behalf against their own citizens offering them FMV (which is probably a low ball and doesn’t often take into account the future worth of the property after the development stops…they use old comps) and expecting them to jump through legal hoops to fight for their own property. Gorjus, do you think most homeowners in MS would even understand the process or have the funds to fight it? I mean, a jury trial? That shit costs $$$. Most people just submit to the Wal-Marts and Targets and condos.
It happened here in Oconee County and it was depressing. This guy had a sign in his yard that said “No Justice For the Poor”. He couldn’t afford a jury trial or anything. He had no legal recourse that he saw. And they paid him $30,000 or something for his half-acre lot and crummy house. That land is now a Bono’s BBQ or something and I am sure it was worth more than 30k.
And I’ve been pissed about this for a while. I have old blog entries about it. I see it as a case of the courts and local govts siding with huge corporate interests over the public’s property rights and you know how I feel about corporatism. Usually local govts just want a boost in tax revenue, forgetting the fact that the displacement of their citizens and ruining of their environment probably costs them more in the long run. Oh, and Wal-Marts et al. often kill jobs…rambling now. Bye!