Thursday, December 15, 2011
Adele's 21. Duh.
Worst Album I Bought This Year
Lady Antebellum's We Owned the Night. Don't judge me.
Best Book I Read This Year
The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins
Worst Book I Read This Year
Just Give In by Kathleen O'Reilly. STOP JUDGING ME.
Best Movie I Saw In A Theatre This Year
Take Me Home Tonight. I liked it, okay?
Worst Movie I Saw In A Theatre This Year
Breaking Dawn. I still liked it. You can judge me for this one, I guess.
Best Purchase Of The Year
Worst Purchase Of The Year
Just kidding!!! I love my little turd.
Best News Of The Year
Finding out I was getting a $5,000 tax refund.
Worst News Of The Year
Finding out Jordan was gone.
Monday, December 12, 2011
I of course immediately digressed and began telling her all about the South Park episode* with sea monkeys. I'm sure it was a very professional moment in our office as I started talking about Mrs. Choksondik and semen/seamen while giggling like a little kid. Luckily the boss had the door to his office closed.
*I described the episode as "like the Simpson's episode with the little colony that develops into a civilization," etc. Turns out, the South Park episode is called "Simpsons Already Did It." Huh.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Monday, November 14, 2011
Yesterday we went for a walk to the park, and on the way there we saw an old man walking his dog. I don't know what kind of dog it was, but it was medium-sized. Anyway, the old man said to me, "My dog is bigger than yours," just out of the blue. Okay...? All I said in response was "She's going to get a lot bigger."
Tonight Scarlet went to the vet for the first time since I got her, and she weighed in at 25 pounds.
At 14 weeks old.
So go on and bask in the glory of having a bigger dog than me, old man. While it lasts.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Friday, October 21, 2011
I bought this old window at an antiques store, sanded the wood, painted it, and painted some of the glass panes with chalkboard paint.
This old dresser was left in my garage when I bought my house. I finally decided to do something with it, so I sanded it down. I was originally going to paint the whole thing, but I liked the distressed look once I took off the first layer of paint, so I left it as it was and just painted the drawer fronts.
I bought these fun knobs on sale from Anthropologie.
I also got this peacock pillow from Anthropologie. It was ridiculously expensive, and I'm embarrassed at how much I paid for it, but I love it. I made the blue pillow.
The technique is called smocking AND IT TOOK FOREVER.
I made this burlap wreath tonight. Isn't it cute?! I got the idea from this website. I love it! I think I'll switch out the leaves for holly and berries for Christmas.
Saturday, October 1, 2011
I'm sure there are people who think my obsessive love of a 91 year-old retired judge is a little strange, so maybe I had better explain it. When I decided to go to law school, I knew nothing about the law other than what I had seen from watching Law and Order and Matlock over the years. No one in my family was a lawyer, and I didn't have any close family friends who were lawyers. Everything was new to me when I showed up as a 1L.
Not only that, but I was a biochemistry major in college, not a political science major, so I wasn't even in the same realm of study. My friends who were political science majors thought Constitutional Law was so boring because they'd already studied it in undergrad, and they already knew where they stood on the issues. I didn't. Part of the reason I enjoyed law school so much was because it was a time in my life when I shaped a lot of my views on law and politics.
Reading court opinions helped me do that. Now, most subjects that you study in law school are based on state law. Torts, contracts, property, criminal law, business associations, etc. As a result, the textbooks borrow cases from all over the country that span decades. You don't have the opportunity to read a collective body of work from any particular court. Federal-based subjects, however, are a different story, and I took a lot of federal law-based classes. Constitutional Law was a requirement, but I also took Criminal Procedure, Federal Courts, and Federal Indian Law. Those classes, Crim Pro and Fed Courts especially, were my favorites, and the cases we read were almost exclusively United States Supreme Court cases.
As a result of reading so many cases from the same court, I was able to get a feel for the individual justices. As I read all those SCOTUS cases, it became very clear to me that not only did I agree with John Paul Stevens at least 80% of the time, I also loved his writing style. Nothing delighted my inner nerd more than reading a case where the majority opinion made a long, unpersuasive argument to reach the result it wanted, and then turning to Stevens' dissent where would he essentially say "You're wrong, and here's why." I'm sure that the reason I ended up agreeing with him so often was due to the fact that he was able to convincing express his views in a clear and concise fashion.
This same writing style is evident in his book. I enjoy that this book gives him the opportunity to expand on his views in a way that would not have been appropriate while he was a justice. For example, Stevens makes it abundantly clear in Five Chiefs that his constitutional judicial philosophy is to look at the text of the Constitutional, coupled with the intent and purpose of the law. He explicitly rejects using the history of the particular provision as the primary interpretive tool, because he recognizes that society changes over the years. As he says in his book,
[I]f our construction of the government's duty to rule impartially enshrined in the equal protection clause had been based on contemporary understandings at the time the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, Thurgood Marshall would have been on the losing side in Brown v. Board of Education.
For a 91 year-old privileged white guy, he is remarkably in tune with reality. I have always loved that about him.
In his book Stevens also expounds on his views on the death penalty. He states that in his view, in an era when all states have sentences of life without parole, the only possible justification for the death penalty is retribution, i.e., the desire to see the offender suffer as his victims suffered. But as he points out, the Eighth Amendment does not permit the government to inflict suffering, thus there is no longer any acceptable reason for the death penalty. Interesting, no? Stevens also dishes about how he views the opinions written by his colleagues. When speaking of William Rehnquist's death penalty jurisprudence, he says, "I hope that some of his opinions for the Court will one day be well described by Lincoln's modest phrase [the 'world will little note, nor long remember' his words.]" In regards to Payne v. Tennessee, written by Rehnquist, Stevens' says, "My reaction to that abysmal Payne decision remains every bit as hostile today as Thurgood's was when it was announced." (Something else that Stevens did not like about Rehnquist? The gold stripes Rehnquist added to his robe after becoming chief justice.)
I also love how it is clear from this book that Stevens really, really admired Thurgood Marshall. As much as I love Stevens, no one could hold a candle to Marshall's opinions in criminal procedure cases. His dissent in Schneckloth v. Bustamonte is a personal favorite. Stevens says in his book that he is convinced that Marshall would have voted differently than his replacement, Clarence Thomas, in most if not all cases. I've always thought that Marshall must have rolled over in his grave on account of some of Thomas's votes.
I did find it interesting that in discussing Justice Thomas, Stevens focuses mainly on Thomas's opinion in United States v. Lopez. That's interesting to me because it was the only instance in my three years of law school that I remember siding with Thomas over Stevens when reading a case. I even blogged about it on my old blog (that I've since deleted) and joked that the universe might be imploding.
Anyway, to make a long story short, I loved this book. I miss reading Stevens' opinions. This held me over.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Monday, September 19, 2011
It is this need to "unlearn" that causes me so much frustration when I get into discussions with my non-feminist friends (or rather my friends who do not openly proclaim to be feminist). I think a lot, if not most, of feminism is the result of people who have worked hard to unlearn what society teaches us about gender roles. While my friends may think it's just a fact of life that women are more dramatic than men, I think that it's a derogatory label society (perhaps primarily men) gives to women who express emotions that cause other people discomfort. In other words, it's a form of gaslighting that leaves many women hesitant to express themselves for fear that they're being overly dramatic, emotional, or irrational.
Friday, August 26, 2011
My legal assistant has two sons and no daughters. Today she said something about how people with daughters are always telling her how much easier boys are to raise than girls. I was kind of surprised to hear that, but another legal assistant in the office chimed in and agreed that girls are much more difficult to deal with.
I GET SO ANNOYED BY THIS. First of all, I just flat-out disagree that boys are easier. The vast majority of criminals and juvenile delinquents are boys. Boys are statistically much more likely to have autism. Girls are more likely to do well in school and go to college. So why do my co-workers think girls are so much harder to deal with?
Because "girls have more drama. They're dramatic."
Seriously? I happen to think that's a stereotype. I have a lot of female friends, and I would categorize very few of them as the "dramatic" type. You know, there are stereotypes we could apply to boys, too, like they're violent, prone-to-temper, etc. But noooooo, we'd never stereotype boys like that.
The issues of stereotypes aside, even if someone does think all girls are drama queens, maybe there's a reason for that. Maybe it's because our society loves to dress little girls in clothes that label them as "princess," "diva," "shop-a-holic," or yes even "drama queen." Hmm, could it be that girls act like dramatic little divas BECAUSE THEIR PARENTS ARE ENCOURAGING THEM TO ACT THAT WAY BY THINKING THAT IS JUST WHAT EVERY LITTLE GIRL SHOULD BE LIKE? So we condition little girls to think that their clothes, shoes, boyfriends, etc, are the most important things in their lives, and then we put them down for being "dramatic"? It's so annoying. There are plenty of little girls, and women, in the world who are not drama queens, likely because they were raised in a way that didn't reward or praise that kind of behavior.
But not only that, what are we really saying when we say that girls are harder to raise than boys because they're dramatic? Is it because they get upset over their relationships? It seems to me that we're really saying we don't like to deal with the emotions THAT GIRLS DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM EXPRESSING. Seriously, I guarantee you little boys feel every bit as many emotions as little girls do, but maybe they just express them ins different ways. Frankly I think it's healthy for kids to learn how to talk through their issues. I have heard so many of my married women friends bemoan how they have to "train" their husbands (gross) and teach them how to be in a relationship. Hmm, I wonder why their husbands don't know how to communicate. Could it be that because anyone who talks about their feelings gets derogatorily labeled a "drama queen"? Could it be that we praise how "easy" boys are to raise because they DON'T express their feelings? Ugh. I hate society.
It's a "foot detox" room. You stick your feet in the water and they run some sort of current from some sort of machine (I don't know where). According to the lady giving the tour, this draws the toxins out of your body and into the water.
I tried to keep a straight face, but as soon as I was alone with my friend, I told her that was a huge crock of shit. She disagreed.
"Don't you think it could pull everything down?" She asked.
"No," I said. "'Toxins can't permeate through your dermis and epidermis. There's even an extra layer of epidermis on the bottom of your feet."
"Then how does your body get rid of toxins? Just through poop?"
"Your liver detoxes you," I said.
People actually pay money for that "foot detox" crap because they don't know enough about biology, chemistry, and anatomy and physiology to know that there's no way that could work. PAY ATTENTION IN SCIENCE CLASS, PEOPLE.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
On Thursday I went to a great concert put on by a great artist. I went with four of my friends, one of whom had never heard the artist's music before. On the way home, she commented that she was going to go buy the artist's album, and all my other friends told her not to because they'd burn it for her. Actually, they whispered it so I wouldn't hear, because the last time we saw this artist I told another friend she couldn't burn my CD.
Am I the only one who is annoyed by this? If you like an artist, PAY FOR HIS FUCKING MUSIC. It's so rude to act like you're a huge fan and love his work, and then steal his music. Yes, copyright infringement is against the law, but aside from that, it's a matter of respect. Have some respect for the artist and support his livelihood. ESPECIALLY when it's a non-mainstream artist with local roots. It makes me so mad.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Monday, July 25, 2011
I don't know about the rest of you, but I use my debit card all the time, so it is pretty easy to rack up some substantial money. I wasn't really sure what I was going to do with the money until a few weeks after I started the program. In late May some friends of a friend lost their 18 month-old daughter very suddenly to an undetected anatomical abnormality. I heard about it through Facebook, and our mutual friend started up a collection to help the couple with the hospital bills. It was just such a sad story that I decided I wanted to help, and it dawned on me that I had $50 sitting in this savings account. So I donated the $50. And THEN it dawned on me that this was something that I could do every month—pick a charity and donate whatever I had saved during the month. Remembering Ryann was June's donation, and UNICEF, specifically UNICEF's relief efforts for the famine in the Horn of Africa, was July's donation. I also donated to Doctors Without Borders (MSF) this month since my June donation was early in the month and I had quite a bit saved up by late July. MSF has been my go-to charity for disasters; I donated to them for both the Haitian and Japanese earthquakes.
Anyway, I thought I'd share that in case anyone else was interested in doing something similar. It is so easy to do and since you put away just a little at a time you don't really notice that the money is gone. What I especially like about it is that when you hear about some awful thing that's happened and you want to help, you don't have to think "Oh, can I really spare $50/$100?" because you've already got it set aside.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
It kind of pissed me off. The book wasn't in the Classics section and it wasn't in the Fiction section, apparently because it was written by a black woman. We went to Borders afterwards, and it was the same thing there!
Maybe bookstores have done some polling and found out that people really do want books by black writers to be shelved separately so they're easier to find, I don't know. But that is the only possible justification for doing this, in my opinion. I just don't understand why these great works of literature, CLASSICS, have to be qualified like this.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Saturday, April 30, 2011
I unfriended the first person the morning that President Obama released his birth certificate. This person essentially implied that Obama had falsified the birth certificate. I am so over that shit and anyone who in any way believes it. And it's not even partisan politics—I get so freakin' annoyed by the idiots who think George W. Bush masterminded September 11, too. It is one thing to dislike a president who is a member of the opposing political party, but it is another to buy into crazy conspiracy theories. There were plenty of reasons for me to dislike Bush apart from thinking he orchestrated the murder of thousands of Americans. And I would imagine that there are plenty of valid reasons for a Republican to dislike Obama apart from thinking he AND HIS PARENTS orchestrated a nearly 50 year-old fraud. Anyway, it just made me realize that I didn't want to associate with someone who doesn't feel the same. Unfriended.
I unfriended the other two people over an admittedly stupid issue, but it just annoyed me so much. I watched Prince William's wedding live. I went to bed at eight o'clock that night so I could get six hours of sleep before I woke up at two a.m. to watch. It's certainly not something I would expect everyone to do, but I wanted to do it. What's the big deal?
Well, apparently it's not enough for some people to just not watch it. They have to let the entire world know that they are just too busy or too important to care about something like that. One person, who is a physician and a mom, posted that she only gets up at two a.m. if her pager goes off or her baby cries. WELL WHOOP DE DO, AREN'T YOU SMUG? Then to be extra smug, she posts last night (sarcastically) that she has to go to bed early so she can get up to watch someone else's wedding in the middle of the night. Bitch, what is your problem? Are you THAT insecure that you have to shit all over someone else's harmless choices to make yourself feel important? Unfriended.
The other idiot I unfriended made similar disparaging comments about royal wedding watchers, but the kicker was how he insisted that Fox News was the only trustworthy news because they weren't covering the royal wedding as much as the others. Anyone who will publicly proclaim his love and devotion to Fox News is just someone I don't need know on Facebook. His justification for not watching the wedding was that we beat the redcoats. Unfriended.
So yes, unfriending two people over the royal wedding is pretty dumb and lame, but it pisses me off. I just hate it when people feel the need to disparage something that other people CLEARLY enjoy and act like they are better because of it. Don't even get me started on the Facebook moms who said that there were just way too many other important things going on in OUR country to care about royal wedding, like tornados and debt. This mom LITERALLY NEVER POSTS ABOUT ANYTHING BUT HER BABY AND HER HOUSE. Since when does she care so deeply about current events? I've certainly never seen any indication of that. It's all so false. She didn't watch, didn't want to watch, and instead of just owning that, she feels the need to justify her PERFECTLY VALID CHOICE because she feels left out. Well, if feeling left out sits so poor with you, then WATCH. Jesus.
And why do people seem to think that we can't simultaneously care about the royal wedding AND those things? So annoying. Finally, I am going to present my defense of the royal wedding:
Why WOULDN'T I watch it? Seriously. I spent half a year of my life studying the history of England in college, and I loved it. It was one of my favorite classes. I've read biographies of and books about Katherine Swynford, Henry VI, Edward IV, Edward V, Richard III, Henry VII, Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary I, Elizabeth I, George IV and Queen Caroline. I've watched movies about Charles II, Victoria, George V and Queen Mary. The first place outside of North America I ever visited was London because I wanted to see all the sights that were shown during the royal wedding. I've stood at the gates of Buckingham Palace, I've sat on the Victoria Memorial, I've walked through the arch at the Horse Guards where all the cars and carriages went, I've been in Westminster Abbey and walked down the same aisle Kate Middleton walked down. So why should I have defend why I want to spend a mere three hours of my life watching more British history be made?
Sometimes I just really hate people.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Monday, April 11, 2011
I got these little photo frames at Bed Bath and Beyond last week. I wasn't sure what I'd do with them, but they were too cute not to pass up. You can even write on them with a dry erase pen! I love them. I put my Paris vacation pictures in them since I kind of have a Paris theme in my room.
Now if only I could figure out what to put on these damn shelves I hung this weekend. Nothing seems to fit.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
I never would have done that before I lived in Seattle. I mean, I did my best with recycling before that, but I never felt weird about throwing something in the garbage. But Seattle changed that.
You see, in Seattle, you don't just sort your trash at home. Everywhere you go forces you to think about that you use and how it can be reused. At the law school I went to, you didn't see a trash can. You saw at least three trash cans: one for plastics, one for mixed papers, and one for glass. Sometimes there was a fourth for electronic media (which always seemed unnecessary—how many old flash drives can people really have?) At Starbucks you saw two trash cans: one for trash and one for compostables. And don't even get me started at Whole Foods. They have four separate trash cans, illustrative posters, and employees that sort through them to make sure people get it right. The posters and employees are necessary because it's hard to figure it out sometimes. Is a napkin trash, paper, or compost?
I'm sure that Seattle implemented that system in part because it makes it easier for sanitation workers to sort through the trash and makes recycling more efficient. But I also think that someone figured out that there are psychological benefits, too. If everywhere you go in public forces you to think about what you're throwing away, then that carries with you when you go home. I still get lazy about stuff, but I make a much bigger effort now to be careful about what I put into the garbage can.
I wish more cities and towns did what Seattle does. I think that recycling in America would be implemented by more people if they did.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
I was so bothered by what she had written that I debated leaving a comment for the first time just to challenge her and let her know how off-base she was with her observations. I debated writing my own blog post here about my perceived motivations for why she would write such a thing. In the end, however, I decided that showing up to our ten year high school reunion in two weeks and proving her wrong would be the best response.
Should be interesting.
I'll keep you posted.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Please pray for my parents!! They just have 2 more days in Honolulu, Hawaii, and after an 8.9 earthquake in Japan there is a tsunami warning estimated to hit Waikiki. God is good and hears our prayers!
I just couldn't believe that after all the death and destruction that in Japan where the death toll is estimated to be almost 10,000, someone could actually be so short-sighted that all they're worried about are their parents in Hawaii. Hawaii, which received sufficient advance warning to ensure that everyone was safe.
It could be that I'm being too harsh. After all, when these kinds of natural disasters occur, it can be hard to conceptualize it unless it directly affects someone you know. I know a lot of Japanese people because the majority of my LL.M. classmates were from Japan, so my immediate concern was them and their families. (So far I think everyone is okay.)
But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that it wasn't this person's concern for their parents that irked me so much, it was the invocation of prayer and God, etc, that didn't sit well with me. "God is good and hears our prayers." Thousands of people are dead in Japan, but your parents are safe because God is good and hears your prayers? I don't know when I first realized how self-centered a lot of Christianity is, but I do know that it's a big part of why I don't like to go to church. Christianity is not about you. It's about Jesus. Get over yourself.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
I have been listening to it exclusively for a week now, and I'm still not tired of it. Why? Because it's shifty that way. You buy the album because you heard "Rolling in the Deep" on the radio or in the commercials for that movie starring Quinn from Glee, and you listen to it over and over again. But at the same time, once you have the whole album, "Set Fire to the Rain" just knocks you off your feet. And once the obsession and newness on those two songs eases a bit, the amazingness of the slow songs creep up on you, like "Turning Tables," "Don't You Remember," and "Someone Like You." AND THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHER SONGS TO KEEP MOVING ON TO, like "Rumour Has It" and "He Won't Go."
Is it any wonder I love this album? It is a break-up album and I LOVE SAD SONGS. Seriously, I do not like happy love songs. I love rip-your-heart-out-and-shit-all-over-it sad songs.
Monday, February 14, 2011
Well, after graduation I moved away, but when I moved back to this area in July, suddenly the woman was anchoring the evening news and the man was still anchoring the morning news. Not only that, but the man was recently divorced!
Dun dun dun!
They were totally banging each other, right? And when things went south and his wife left him, the woman bolted for another job at the station. IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Not great, but not too terrible, either. I wish I had made the kitchen curtains wider so that they would bunch a bit. I made sure to fix that with the laundry center curtains.
Once I mastered (hah!) the art of simple hemming, I got brave and decided to try a project from a book I bought. It's a travel jewelry roll.
Isn't the fabric cute? I used the wrong interface, so it's not as flexible as it should be, but it's not a big deal. The most difficult part of the entire project was just trying to figure out how to put the zipper foot on the sewing machine. It took me about forty-five minutes! I only figured it out after resorting to Google Images. Obviously sewing is not intuitive for me.
Other sewing discoveries: the ladies at JoAnn Fabrics are way nicer than the ladies at Hancock Fabrics.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
I've made a few other resolutions, too. Mainly just to get some hobbies, because I'm pretty boring. I told my mom that I wanted to learn how to sew, so she and my sister gave me some birthday money to put towards a sewing machine. I bought the Singer Simple 2263.
It is pretty simple, but the price was right ($89.00 at WalMart) and it's basic enough that I feel like I am learning the basics without getting lost in the technology. (The computerized sewing machines scare me.) Besides, if this hobby fizzles out, I prefer to have sunk as little money into it as possible.
My first project was a hobo bag. I also got this at WalMart. It came in a kit with all the materials, so all I had to do was cut and sew. Needless to say... I won't be on Project Runway anytime soon:
BUT, it was great practice, and now that I know how to use the machine I feel comfortable venturing out into my own projects/designs. Next up are curtains for my kitchen window and laundry center. I used to have wood doors that covered the laundry center, but these new-fangled machines are so big that we had to take the doors off just to get them to fit inside. So as much as I love having all my storage displayed for everyone to see, I'm going to try to make some curtains just to go on a tension rod. I think I should be able to handle this. But we shall see.