As long as we have an undeclared Open Thread*: has everyone checked out this humorous article posted on Volockh?
--
*I am interpreting the Authorization for Use of Commenting Force against Iraq in the broadest possible sense, as enabling me to act in my Commenter in Chief capacity, unrestrained by blogospheric statute.
That has got to be one embarrassed judge. All I can think is that he figured it would make her happy and get her out of his courtroom, and wouldn't have any real-world effects.
Are we closing at 2:30 today, just like we do on the Friday before every single holiday (or Wednesday, if it's Thanksgiving)? And if so, why are you waiting to send out the e-mail? Is it to make us feel like grateful little Crachits when you finally make the announcement at the last moment? As though you're giving us some extra special Christmas bonus, even though it's the same thing we get before goddamn President's Day weekend?
Reckon it's just the 4 of us...all those "academics" (as they like to call themselves) are probably off on their multiple-week Christmas vacation breaks, damn them.
I'm actually here entering my time before starting a week of vacation -- Monday through Saturday I am in Vermont, making a fool of myself on the bunny-slopes. Woohoo!
(Of course, entering my December time will be a misery, it always is. I want a job without timesheets so desperately....)
BTW, any outrage at the ObWi post I linked above? There's an opinion from a federal judge saying that the detention of two of the Gitmo detainees is entirely without justification in law, but that he doesn't have the power to order their release.
Killington (and Pico, I suppose). I always seem to end up there -- I guess they have more rooms than anyplace else in Vermont, so last-minute plans tend to find everyplace full.
I'm formed a policy of interacting with other human beings only on the Internet, so I emailed mine. (and my Rep., Charlie Rangel, who I'm very fond of. I was very pleased about moving up to Inwood nine years ago because of getting to vote for him.)
I also got late word that I can close up my office early. For a little added suspense.
I was just asked to perform a major task about an hour ago. But luckily the group I need to contact in order to do it is, sensibly, closed for the day.
LizardBreath, what specifically did you ask about in your e-mails? Did you request that an investigation should be opened into the administration's actions? They are not in violation of any court order, since the court did not order them to do anything. It seems like properly the court that should be investigated but I don't know if that's in Congress's power to do. Or is it an investigation into "why are you still holding innocent prisoners Qassim and al-Hakim in Guantanamo"?
LizardBreath, what specifically did you ask about in your e-mails?
Who needs an investigation? The investigation has been done. The military has decided that these men are no threat to us. I asked that Clinton, Schumer, and Rangel do everything they can to get these men released.
Ok, that makes sense. More immediate. I was over-thinking, trying to phrase a complaint according to the template of political language floating around my prain from the newspapers and the blogs.
Guantanamo was for a detention center chosen specifically because some thought that American law did not apply there, since it is not American territory, but leased or occupied by the US.
I'm outraged all the time, LB, but I try to control it with self-medication.
This story just made it through my background outrage level -- a Federal Judge saying, "Yes, what's been done to you is entirely unlawful, but I have no power to help -- the administration is above the law in this regard," stunned me.
Some questions for the lawyerly: in light of this ruling, would it be wrong of me to say that I can forego, indefinitely, learning about Alito's opinions on abortion, and regard as much more critical his opinions on habeas corpus? Would it be further wrong of me to say that if, in his regard for the black-letter law, he sounds like Scalia, then that would be no bad thing?
BTW, any outrage at the ObWi post I linked above? There's an opinion from a federal judge saying that the detention of two of the Gitmo detainees is entirely without justification in law, but that he doesn't have the power to order their release.
This story just made it through my background outrage level -- a Federal Judge saying, "Yes, what's been done to you is entirely unlawful, but I have no power to help -- the administration is above the law in this regard," stunned me.
I hate to say it, but I think he is correct. To get them into the US, he has to order aliens be brought physically into the United States, and in effect be granted visas. This would be approximately the same thing as the judge saying 'Go get dsquared, bring him into this country, give him a visa and let him go free.' It would be overturned instantly. If he brings them physically into the country and puts them into a holding cell (in effect, a transfer), he's jailing them unlawfully.
Going by all that he said, he's putting out a decision that's reasonably appealable only by the petitioners and effectively punting the ball straight to the Supremes.
I think he's being about as nice to those poor sods as he can be.
I especially liked:
"Qassim and Al-Hakim petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus on March 10, 2005. The government (which knew about the CSRT determination but advised nobody) moved for a stay of proceedings pending the Court of Appeals' decision in the consolidated appeals of Khalid v. Bush, 355 F. Supp. 2d 311 (D.D.C. 2005), and In re Guantanamo Detainee Cases, 355 F. Supp. 2d. 443 (D.D.C. 2005). Petitioners (whose counsel were ignorant of the CSRT determination) moved for a preliminary injunction. On April 13, 2005, I (also ignorant of the CSRT determination) denied the motion for preliminary injunction and granted a stay of all proceedings concerning these petitioners, including "their release, repatriation, or rendition.""
I hate to say it, but I think he is correct. To get them into the US, he has to order aliens be brought physically into the United States, and in effect be granted visas. This would be approximately the same thing as the judge saying 'Go get dsquared, bring him into this country, give him a visa and let him go free.' It would be overturned instantly. If he brings them physically into the country and puts them into a holding cell (in effect, a transfer), he's jailing them unlawfully.
But he doesn't have to order that they be released within the US. He could, quite reasonably, have ordered that the gov't develop a plan for release of the prisoners somewhere within, say, two weeks, and start piling on the contempt fines if not obeyed. The gov't created the situation in which these men were unlawfully detained -- it can be ordered to "Fix it -- you figure out how."
It's becoming clear that the powers-that-be have no intention of letting us out early. Word is, they're "retaliating" against those employees who didn't make it into work because of the strike. I don't know what that has to do with those of us who walked for a goddamn hour each way to get here, though.
It's also clear that the item I ordered from Amazon last Friday, and paid extra for "expedited shipping" for, is not going to be here before Christmas.
I like it that about eight commenters rake Kopel over the coals for the cheap shot at feminists at the end, and then Clayton Cramer defends him. That's as far as I read in the comments.
hmm. my employer is nicer than Joe's. They let me leave early Thursday. On the other hand, it took me three and a half hours to get home on Wednesday, so I think they took pity on me.
But he doesn't have to order that they be released within the US. He could, quite reasonably, have ordered that the gov't develop a plan for release of the prisoners somewhere within, say, two weeks, and start piling on the contempt fines if not obeyed. The gov't created the situation in which these men were unlawfully detained -- it can be ordered to "Fix it -- you figure out how."
In normal circumstances (such as - if these guys were British) that might be sensible. But if he does that, the Bushies have a place to send them - China. Then the ChiComs torture them for being Uighers.
I think he's trying to help get them out of Guantanamo and into the US or other country that is not China.
Matt -- wow -- I had not seen the follow-up post. Yeah, that's pretty whacky. David Letterman's 2nd Amendment rights are being abridged and it's all teh feminists' fault!
Joe -- sorry you are not getting out early. Neither am I if it's any comfort. This is why I think you should invite us over to trash your rich friends' place.
Blackstone states.... ``every right, when withheld, must have a remedy, and every injury its proper redress.'' The government of the United States has been emphatically termed a government of laws, and not of men. It will certainly cease to deserve this high appellation, if the laws furnish no remedy for the violation of a vested legal right.
John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison
One would thunder these things from the rooftops, or the op-ed pages, but it has done no good so far.
But if he does that, the Bushies have a place to send them - China.
Possibly, but the gov't could have sent them back to China at any time. Unless continued detention at Gitmo or repatriation to China are literally the only solutions they can come up with, such a court order shouldn't affect that risk much. (I think, off the top of my head. I could be wrong.)
Now, when I get locked out, I just go down to the office, and am assessed a truly ridiculous fee ($80 or some such, it's highway robbery) and am let back in, after the incompetent security guard figures out how to work things, in a transaction that takes on the order of 90 minutes.
That's a thoroughly ridiculous series of comments on Ben's post.
And lockout fees? Seriously? You can actually get charged for forgetting your key? Losing your key, I can understand. But forgetting it? Oy. I am naive as to the ways of the renting world, apparently.
I don't know about the real world; that's what it was like at a university housing complex I was in. And the charges only applied when the office was closed. My neighbor had the misfortune of locking himself out on a weekend night.
Ok, not *in* your car, but *on* your car, in one of those magnetic key-holder things. Nyah nyah.
Although to be fair, being as I never lock my car (no one is going to steal something that looks as junky as my Subaru, believe me), I simply didn't think of the whole "locked car" problem.
What, no post on your comic humilation at the hands of the furnace repair guys?
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 8:28 AM
(Also posted in the other thread, where I accidentally linked to my comment on the post, rather than the post I'm talking about)
Completely off-topic, but everyone should go to Obsidian Wings and read this. And then, I don't know, write your Senators? Cry? I'm working on both.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 9:03 AM
As long as we have an undeclared Open Thread*: has everyone checked out this humorous article posted on Volockh?
--
*I am interpreting the Authorization for Use of Commenting Force against Iraq in the broadest possible sense, as enabling me to act in my Commenter in Chief capacity, unrestrained by blogospheric statute.
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 9:35 AM
That's odd. I have heard of someone else who thought David Letterman was talking to him through the tv, sending him secret messages.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 9:45 AM
I believe I have heard of similar things. Getting a judge to sign on was a bit of a new spin though.
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 9:53 AM
That has got to be one embarrassed judge. All I can think is that he figured it would make her happy and get her out of his courtroom, and wouldn't have any real-world effects.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 9:56 AM
Question for the people who run my office:
Are we closing at 2:30 today, just like we do on the Friday before every single holiday (or Wednesday, if it's Thanksgiving)? And if so, why are you waiting to send out the e-mail? Is it to make us feel like grateful little Crachits when you finally make the announcement at the last moment? As though you're giving us some extra special Christmas bonus, even though it's the same thing we get before goddamn President's Day weekend?
Posted by Joe Drymala | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:12 AM
Reckon it's just the 4 of us...all those "academics" (as they like to call themselves) are probably off on their multiple-week Christmas vacation breaks, damn them.
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:23 AM
I'm actually here entering my time before starting a week of vacation -- Monday through Saturday I am in Vermont, making a fool of myself on the bunny-slopes. Woohoo!
(Of course, entering my December time will be a misery, it always is. I want a job without timesheets so desperately....)
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:29 AM
I get ten days of vaction too. Hooray for closed schools!
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:31 AM
Jeremy, their priorities are fucked. That's the explanation.
For them, unfogged is but something to trifle with on company time.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:31 AM
LB, what mountain?
Posted by Joe Drymala | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:33 AM
BTW, any outrage at the ObWi post I linked above? There's an opinion from a federal judge saying that the detention of two of the Gitmo detainees is entirely without justification in law, but that he doesn't have the power to order their release.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:35 AM
I'm outraged! But I'm outraged about so much this morning.
Posted by Joe Drymala | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:37 AM
Killington (and Pico, I suppose). I always seem to end up there -- I guess they have more rooms than anyplace else in Vermont, so last-minute plans tend to find everyplace full.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:37 AM
Yes, outrage. I was working on a plan to call both my senators next week.
Re: vacation time, Damn you, all of you!
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:38 AM
I'm formed a policy of interacting with other human beings only on the Internet, so I emailed mine. (and my Rep., Charlie Rangel, who I'm very fond of. I was very pleased about moving up to Inwood nine years ago because of getting to vote for him.)
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:40 AM
I also got late word that I can close up my office early. For a little added suspense.
I was just asked to perform a major task about an hour ago. But luckily the group I need to contact in order to do it is, sensibly, closed for the day.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:40 AM
LizardBreath, what specifically did you ask about in your e-mails? Did you request that an investigation should be opened into the administration's actions? They are not in violation of any court order, since the court did not order them to do anything. It seems like properly the court that should be investigated but I don't know if that's in Congress's power to do. Or is it an investigation into "why are you still holding innocent prisoners Qassim and al-Hakim in Guantanamo"?
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:44 AM
Killington's big, is why. Check out Sugar Bush sometime, if you're looking for one off the beaten path.
I'm housesitting right now for people who are in Jackson Hole for Christmas. Lousy rich folks.
Posted by Joe Drymala | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:45 AM
I'm housesitting right now for people who are in Jackson Hole for Christmas.
Unfogged meet-up at the rich people's house! Break out the champagne and caviar!
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:47 AM
LizardBreath, what specifically did you ask about in your e-mails?
Who needs an investigation? The investigation has been done. The military has decided that these men are no threat to us. I asked that Clinton, Schumer, and Rangel do everything they can to get these men released.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:51 AM
For what it's worth, this particular academic is working today. Though the administrative staff are not.
Posted by slolernr | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:53 AM
Ok, that makes sense. More immediate. I was over-thinking, trying to phrase a complaint according to the template of political language floating around my prain from the newspapers and the blogs.
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:54 AM
Guantanamo was for a detention center chosen specifically because some thought that American law did not apply there, since it is not American territory, but leased or occupied by the US.
I'm outraged all the time, LB, but I try to control it with self-medication.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 10:56 AM
self-medication
Where I grew up, we called it "whiskey".
Posted by slolernr | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 11:00 AM
This story just made it through my background outrage level -- a Federal Judge saying, "Yes, what's been done to you is entirely unlawful, but I have no power to help -- the administration is above the law in this regard," stunned me.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 11:16 AM
I was just asked to perform another major task. I think I should stop answering the phone.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 11:34 AM
I was just asked to perform another major task.
Clearly you should consider a second career in performance art.
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 11:50 AM
Some questions for the lawyerly: in light of this ruling, would it be wrong of me to say that I can forego, indefinitely, learning about Alito's opinions on abortion, and regard as much more critical his opinions on habeas corpus? Would it be further wrong of me to say that if, in his regard for the black-letter law, he sounds like Scalia, then that would be no bad thing?
Posted by slolernr | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 11:59 AM
This is a link to a metafilter post about Ohio.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:07 PM
BTW, any outrage at the ObWi post I linked above? There's an opinion from a federal judge saying that the detention of two of the Gitmo detainees is entirely without justification in law, but that he doesn't have the power to order their release.
This story just made it through my background outrage level -- a Federal Judge saying, "Yes, what's been done to you is entirely unlawful, but I have no power to help -- the administration is above the law in this regard," stunned me.
I hate to say it, but I think he is correct. To get them into the US, he has to order aliens be brought physically into the United States, and in effect be granted visas. This would be approximately the same thing as the judge saying 'Go get dsquared, bring him into this country, give him a visa and let him go free.' It would be overturned instantly. If he brings them physically into the country and puts them into a holding cell (in effect, a transfer), he's jailing them unlawfully.
Going by all that he said, he's putting out a decision that's reasonably appealable only by the petitioners and effectively punting the ball straight to the Supremes.
I think he's being about as nice to those poor sods as he can be.
I especially liked:
"Qassim and Al-Hakim petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus on March 10, 2005. The government (which knew about the CSRT determination but advised nobody) moved for a stay of proceedings pending the Court of Appeals' decision in the consolidated appeals of Khalid v. Bush, 355 F. Supp. 2d 311 (D.D.C. 2005), and In re Guantanamo Detainee Cases, 355 F. Supp. 2d. 443 (D.D.C. 2005). Petitioners (whose counsel were ignorant of the CSRT determination) moved for a preliminary injunction. On April 13, 2005, I (also ignorant of the CSRT determination) denied the motion for preliminary injunction and granted a stay of all proceedings concerning these petitioners, including "their release, repatriation, or rendition.""
ash
['I hate the fucking DOJ.']
Posted by ash | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:20 PM
I hate to say it, but I think he is correct. To get them into the US, he has to order aliens be brought physically into the United States, and in effect be granted visas. This would be approximately the same thing as the judge saying 'Go get dsquared, bring him into this country, give him a visa and let him go free.' It would be overturned instantly. If he brings them physically into the country and puts them into a holding cell (in effect, a transfer), he's jailing them unlawfully.
But he doesn't have to order that they be released within the US. He could, quite reasonably, have ordered that the gov't develop a plan for release of the prisoners somewhere within, say, two weeks, and start piling on the contempt fines if not obeyed. The gov't created the situation in which these men were unlawfully detained -- it can be ordered to "Fix it -- you figure out how."
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:29 PM
Not that the judge did anything wrong, I just think that his opinion was more despairing and less effective than it might have been.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:30 PM
It's becoming clear that the powers-that-be have no intention of letting us out early. Word is, they're "retaliating" against those employees who didn't make it into work because of the strike. I don't know what that has to do with those of us who walked for a goddamn hour each way to get here, though.
It's also clear that the item I ordered from Amazon last Friday, and paid extra for "expedited shipping" for, is not going to be here before Christmas.
Posted by Joe Drymala | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:36 PM
this humorous article posted on Volockh
I like it that about eight commenters rake Kopel over the coals for the cheap shot at feminists at the end, and then Clayton Cramer defends him. That's as far as I read in the comments.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:37 PM
It's becoming clear that the powers-that-be have no intention of letting us out early.
Very distressing to read after the two posts before.
(OK, that was inappropriate humor. Sorry. I think this sucks.)
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:39 PM
hmm. my employer is nicer than Joe's. They let me leave early Thursday. On the other hand, it took me three and a half hours to get home on Wednesday, so I think they took pity on me.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:43 PM
But he doesn't have to order that they be released within the US. He could, quite reasonably, have ordered that the gov't develop a plan for release of the prisoners somewhere within, say, two weeks, and start piling on the contempt fines if not obeyed. The gov't created the situation in which these men were unlawfully detained -- it can be ordered to "Fix it -- you figure out how."
In normal circumstances (such as - if these guys were British) that might be sensible. But if he does that, the Bushies have a place to send them - China. Then the ChiComs torture them for being Uighers.
I think he's trying to help get them out of Guantanamo and into the US or other country that is not China.
ash
['But I might be over-reading.']
Posted by ash | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:48 PM
Matt -- wow -- I had not seen the follow-up post. Yeah, that's pretty whacky. David Letterman's 2nd Amendment rights are being abridged and it's all teh feminists' fault!
Joe -- sorry you are not getting out early. Neither am I if it's any comfort. This is why I think you should invite us over to trash your rich friends' place.
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:49 PM
John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison
One would thunder these things from the rooftops, or the op-ed pages, but it has done no good so far.
Posted by slolernr | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:51 PM
I think it's high time we overturned Marbury.
Posted by Joe Drymala | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:52 PM
overturned Marbury
This would be a lovely euphemism. Perhaps for trashing a fabulous house while sitting it?
Posted by slolernr | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:56 PM
People, people. I like the family I'm housesitting for. Even though they are undeniably of Teh Rich.
Posted by Joe Drymala | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 12:58 PM
But if he does that, the Bushies have a place to send them - China.
Possibly, but the gov't could have sent them back to China at any time. Unless continued detention at Gitmo or repatriation to China are literally the only solutions they can come up with, such a court order shouldn't affect that risk much. (I think, off the top of my head. I could be wrong.)
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:00 PM
Do they maybe have some neighbors whose house we could trash?
Posted by slolernr | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:02 PM
People who trash houses should throw stones.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:03 PM
I would settle for raiding the liquor cabinet and watching premium channels on tv.
Posted by slolernr | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:04 PM
You can trash my apartment.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:06 PM
Do you have cranky neighbors?
Posted by slolernr | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:08 PM
I will soon!
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:22 PM
Better than your previous neighbors?
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:32 PM
Now, when I get locked out, I just go down to the office, and am assessed a truly ridiculous fee ($80 or some such, it's highway robbery) and am let back in, after the incompetent security guard figures out how to work things, in a transaction that takes on the order of 90 minutes.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:34 PM
In truth I think people should just read the comments to that link.
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:35 PM
I will soon!
Will the cranky neighbors you will soon have be the same individuals as your current, non-cranky neighbors?
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:35 PM
(54 written before 53's posting; read sequentially 54 sounds rude of me.)
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:38 PM
A neighbor of mine once slept in the hallway overnight in order to pay the much cheaper daytime lockout fee after locking himself out around midnight.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:41 PM
No, you're right, 'smasher.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:42 PM
That's a thoroughly ridiculous series of comments on Ben's post.
And lockout fees? Seriously? You can actually get charged for forgetting your key? Losing your key, I can understand. But forgetting it? Oy. I am naive as to the ways of the renting world, apparently.
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 1:57 PM
Those comments are outstanding.
Posted by Joe Drymala | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 2:02 PM
I don't know about the real world; that's what it was like at a university housing complex I was in. And the charges only applied when the office was closed. My neighbor had the misfortune of locking himself out on a weekend night.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 2:03 PM
that's what it was like at a university housing complex I was in
In my dorm, we would just crawl through one of the windows in the back. They were never locked.
Ah, rural colleges.
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 2:20 PM
That comment thread did actually make me laugh out loud.
What ever happened to keeping a spare key someplace accessible, like your car?
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 2:50 PM
And how are you supposed to get into your car, without your keys?
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 2:54 PM
With the spare car key you left in your apartment. Duh.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 3:04 PM
It's very gratifying when you see a possible checkmate on the second or third move of a game, and realize it on the sixth.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 3:05 PM
I also like finding $100 bills on the ground.
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 3:09 PM
I've never done that, more's the pity.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 3:10 PM
[redacted]
Posted by [redacted] | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 6:13 PM
Ok, not *in* your car, but *on* your car, in one of those magnetic key-holder things. Nyah nyah.
Although to be fair, being as I never lock my car (no one is going to steal something that looks as junky as my Subaru, believe me), I simply didn't think of the whole "locked car" problem.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 6:25 PM
a surprisingly unmerciful Christmas curve.
Awesome. I think more professors should grade brutally.
Posted by silvana | Link to this comment | 12-23-05 8:28 PM
It's very gratifying when you see a possible checkmate on the second or third move of a game, and realize it on the sixth.
My third victory in a row over my chessy nemesis! Only somewhat less gratifying since it was his mistakes and not my overpowering strategies.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 12-24-05 3:11 PM
Ha! Four in a row! The best chess-related two days of my life! And this game didn't depend on any egregiously bad moves!
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 12-24-05 7:07 PM
It's very gratifying when you see a possible checkmate on the second or third move of a game, and realize it on the sixth.
Here are some quick checkmates in the opening, almost all of them contributed by me under my Wikipedia handle "Krakatoa."
Posted by Frederick | Link to this comment | 12-26-05 11:02 AM