f/k/a archives . . . real opinions & real haiku

February 15, 2005

sorry, pardner . . .

Filed under: pre-06-2006 — David Giacalone @ 7:59 pm

tiny check . . . but, maybe we’re not both covered.  The fight over Medicare covering “lifestyle drugs”

(A/P, Feb. 2. 2005) is quite complicated.  See “Lifestyle drugs: Issues for Debate,” by Joel

Lexchin, M.D., CMAJ, May 16, 2001).  Whether private insureds or taxpayers should help

oldtimers and Baby Boomers to extend their youth, by underwriting treatments for “ailments”

like male pattern baldness or erectile dysfunction is a very big financial and social issue. 

Dr. Lexchin broaches many of the issues in his CMAJ article and states:

“If we as a society decide that lifestyle drugs should be covered through the  aspirin

health care system, then other treatments may not get funded or at least will

not get as much funding as they otherwise would have. Decisions will also be

needed about who will get the drugs (since almost everyone will want one or

more of them) and whether they will be available in unlimited supply.


“. . . We need to find mechanisms whereby all elements of society — government,

industry, health care professionals, patients and consumers — can participate in

the decisions.”

aspirin f  On Feb. 13, as the Sunday talking heads wrung their hands over this, and conservative

Republicans said they must “revisit” the Medicare drug coverage of lifestyle drugs (despite a

Presidential veto threat for any attempts to decrease coverage),  I could not help but note —

speaking of lifestyle choices — that by next Valentine’s Day Medicare could be paying for two

[or more?] Cialis prescriptions for the aging partners in one household.  Can you say “unintended

consequences,” Mr. President? (or extended side effects?)

  • Perhaps, you’ll have to have a Designated Consort or a Marriage

    License to get ED drugs.

  • Maybe Evan Schaeffer, the web’s favorite ED-J.D. and our Cialis

    Counselor-in-Chief, has a solution.

tiny check . . . but, maybe this weblog income ain’t worth the trouble.  Prof.

Bainbridge explains, in detail and persuasively, why group weblogs that bring

in income are probably partnerships under Section 202(a) of the Uniform

Partnership Act (1997).  Seems to me, that if the basic tackiness of using ads

and begging-jars on your site is not enough to stop such practices, the

added aggravation of partnership issues for group weblogs should tip the

balance toward keeping them lucre-free.  If you still won’t give up group 

advertising and mendicity, Prof. B has a book for you, of course.   I’m willing

to bet that Steve will stay solo in the blogiverse.

tiny check . . . but, I gotta rat on ya.  In its February edition, the ABA Journal  lawyer cellphone small

reports on a new ABA ethics opinion [Formal Opinion 04-433 (2004)] under

Model Rule 8.3.  Here’s the synopsis:

Obligation of a Lawyer to Report Professional Misconduct by

a Lawyer Not Engaged in the Practice of Law

A lawyer having knowledge of the professional misconduct of

another licensed lawyer, including a non-practicing lawyer, is

obligated under Model Rule 8.3 to report such misconduct if it

raises a substantial question as to that lawyer’s honesty, trust-

worthiness, or fitness as a lawyer. The professional misconduct

 must be reported even if it involves activity completely removed

from the practice of law. If the report would require revealing the

confidential information of a client, the lawyer must obtain the

client’s informed consent before making the report.

The f/k/a gang agrees.  Having asserted that lawyers “need to remember

that ethics rules apply even when it takes courage to comply,” we applaud

the Ethics Committee.  The Journal article concludes as follows:

The ethics committee acknowledges in its opinion that reporting

a colleague’s misconduct, particularly if that lawyer is a supervisor,

can be awkward and uncomfortable, and it even may put the reporting

lawyer’s career in jeopardy. But, the committee emphasizes, “Because

the legal profession enjoys the privilege of regulating itself, it is

critically important that its members fulfill their responsibility to stand

guard over the profession’s integrity and high standards.”

On the other hand, lots of very good ABA Formal Ethics Opinions are consistenly

ignored by bar Counsel and lawyers across the land.



“tinyredcheck”  . . . but, I won that Valentine’s Day divorce.   

Someone named Heidi won the WKRL-FM contest, and the overvalued legal services of  handcuffs

Brad S. Margolis.   I sent an email to attorney Margolis and the radio station on Sunday,

asking whether I got the facts straight in my post the valentine-divorce lawyer.   Neither

has responded.  Our expose didn’t even make it into the list compiled by the station under

the heading “Not EVERYONE Liked the Idea of That Damn Morning Show giving away a

divorce”  We didn’t garner any media attention either (but got some agita at Carolyn’s place). 

However, I’m pleased to say that the posting is the #3 result at Google for the search inquiry



update II (Feb. 16, midnite): Lawyer Brad S. Margolis contacted me twice this

vening. In his first email, he noted “I am not getting anything for this promotion, 

In fact I am even paying 100 percent of the filing fees out of my own pocket.” 

On the issue of his flat fee for uncontested divorces, Margolis stated:

“Yes my online fees are less than my in office fees, that is to make legal

fees affordable to people who are lucky to have money for food. . . .


“As and for what the cost of an uncontested Divorce is I believe that

the figure quoted is not incorrect and online prices which you should

know are far less than in office cases.  Just a matter of common sense,

which apparently you lacked in your biased appraisal of my actions.

When I responded with more questions, he wrote back and clarified that “in

many cases I do charge that fee for an uncontested divorce.  [Y]es I do discount

my web services as I find the overhead of the web office much lower than the

high priced rent I must factor in to some of my offices.” 


I wrote back to say I can’t imagine how the cost of clients attracted online can

be so significantly lower as to warrant the difference between $1000 and $375. 

I also noted that I continue to believe that $1000 is too much for what Margolis

himself called the “paper-pushing” of an uncontested divorce.   Readers will

have to decide for themselves whether “The approximate retail value of

Uncontested Divorce is $1,000.00.” 



the tea smoke
and the willow
dance partners

ISSA, translated by David G. Lanoue



by dagosan:  

where two boys

ice-fished yesterday —

two ducks swim

                                 [Feb.15, 2005]

Sister Rose’s Faith

Filed under: pre-06-2006 — David Giacalone @ 1:19 pm

Whether or not it wins an Oscar for best short documentary this month, and before I’ve even

seen it, I want to declare the film “Sister Rose’s Passion” a rousing success — because it is the

proximate cause of my learning the story of Sister Rose Thering.  Charlie Rose’s [no relation]

interview with film producer/director Oren Jacoby last night (Feb. 14, 2005) filled me with awe

and gratitude for a spunky woman who almost single-handedly made the Catholic Church

reconsider and change its policy toward the Jewish people. 


As a girl in Wisconsin, Rose Thering could not understand how a just and loving God   sisterRose 

could condemn an entire race for the death of Jesus — even two millennia later.  Her interest resulted

in doctoral research which “played a significant role in the 1965 Vatican document Nostra Aetate

(Our Time), which formally declared that Jews were not responsible for the death of Jesus.”

(Seton Hall Univ. News, Sister Rose’s Passion nominated for Academy Award,” by Catherine



There are many lessons to learn from Sister Rose, including: (1) that one person with passion for a

cause can make a very big  difference, even starting from the bottom of a powerful hierarchy that

would like to silence the dissenting view; and  (2) that knowledge and reason can at times get even an

“infallible” Church, a self-proclaimed final interpreter of God’s Will, to admit a major historic mistake .


nunF But there is another very important lesson — that bigotry often can regrow (as it seems to be doing  

in France against Jews), and we need constant vigilance.  The issue is raised in the SHU announcement:

“While the film’s title refers to Sister Rose’s intense focus upon her life’s work, it also p

rovides a timely foil to Mel Gibson’s major motion picture, The Passion of the Christ.

A final segment of the documentary shows Sister Rose shaking her head and looking

unhappy while viewing an Internet trailer for Gibson’s film, which some Jews and

Christians have said blames Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus.”

Director Jacoby says that Mel Gibson has not commented on Sister Rose’s story.  While Jacoby told  torah

Charlie Rose that Pope John Paul II has been the “best Pope yet” with regards to the Catholic Church’s

relationship with Israel and the Jews, it is clear that many conservative Catholics see the 1965 Vatican II

Council as the root of much of what went wrong in the Catholic Church over the past few decades and

have been trying to undo its reforms.  I’d be very interested in hearing from my “experts” Steve Bainbridge

and Martin Grace on whether the teachings about the Jewish people that are enshrined in Nostra Aetate

are controversial.   Meanwhile, I give thanks for Sister’s Rose’s passion and achievements.  (Check out

her Endowment for Jewish Studies at Seton Hall.)



traffic jam

my small son asks

who made God




clay on the wheel I confess my faith




chasing butterflies . . .

the girl with Wednesday’s ashes

on her brow




from To Hear the Rain (Brooks Books, 2002)



from dagosan

valentine for

an apostate son —

novena card from mom

                                      [Feb. 15, 2005]                                                          

Powered by WordPress