watercolors
strung across the art room–
winter rain
driving from the beach
in winter twilight
…the sky today
wind chimes
sharper, clearer
after snow
credits: “watercolors” & “driving” – simply haiku (Oct. 2003)
new snowman —
the scarecrow
hatless
[Dec. 30, 2004]
to describe his approach to constitutional interpretation. Do he and Justice Scalia really think
the Founders wanted a “dead” document? Does the phrase sound especially catchy? Give me
a living constitution any day — with the original DNA, it will still live and grow.
conjures up deposed monarchists hoping to return someday in glory.
As I noted over at Evan‘s place this morning, discussing Anonymous Lawyer, the satirist is
(by definition) not condoning the actions of the subject institition or people. It’s kind of scary that
young lawyers and law students seem to need emoticons to get an author’s gist.
to need captions explaining the topic being covered. Apparently, I should have said
(slowly, with tiny words): “I am not talking about whether AL is funny or likeable
or good at what he’s doing. The topic of this blurb is whether a satirist agrees with
the conduct described.” [Midnight]: E. Spats is learning!
With all due respect to Eugene Volokh and Mark Twain, Twain’s quip “History doesn’t repeat itself,
won’t be identical to yesterday’s; but they may be similar enough.” Rhyming has no necessary connection
at all to the meaning of “rhymed” lines or events. History may not repeat itself, but it does get paraphrased.
There’s lots of historic homonyms, too.
Last night, Charlie Rose interviewed William A. Sahlman of the Harvard Business School. Charlie’s
very first question was whether the students are at HBS for reasons other than wanting to become
rich. Sahlman’s answer began, “I have never known a student who came to HBS to become rich per
se” — they come because they want to do something that interests them. Consider your Editor’s
eyebrow raised. I wonder if Sahlman ever gets over to the Law School
