A Grand Illusion

This story in the Times is something right out of The Wire (I suppose it would be the other way around). Paul Bergrin, a New Jersey lawyer, is being accused of “orchestrating the murder of a confidential witness by leaking his name to drug dealers who shot him in broad daylight on a Newark street corner; of traveling to Chicago to hire a murderer to kill a witness in another case; of coaching some eyewitnesses to lie; and of paying others to change their stories or leave town on the day they were to testify”.

It’s not just the brashness of the crime that makes it seem like it was made for TV. Some of the names of the people involved are unbelievable as well; Kemo and Junior the Panamanian are two of the unfortunate witnesses he targeted.

The guy sounds like a real scumbag. Mr. Lev – er Mr. Bergrin was caught on tape giving instructions on murdering a witness, saying: “Make it look like a robbery; this can’t look like a hit”.

Ross Douthat has written an op-ed piece that explains and analyzes Dan Brown’s world view (finally!). It also takes the opportunity to tell us:

“The “secret” history of Christendom that unspools in “The Da Vinci Code” is false from start to finish. The lost gospels are real enough, but they neither confirm the portrait of Christ that Brown is peddling — they’re far, far weirder than that — nor provide a persuasive alternative to the New Testament account. The Jesus of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John — jealous, demanding, apocalyptic — may not be congenial to contemporary sensibilities, but he’s the only historically-plausible Jesus there is.”

Exactly. I’ve been saying this for years. Any sane person can see that “The Da Vinci Code” is not historically plausible like, you know, the gospels of Jesus are. And the only reason for being skeptical about what they say is that they sometimes offend modern sensibilities.

He ends the article on this strange and slightly accusatory note:

“For millions of readers, Brown’s novels have helped smooth over the tension between ancient Christianity and modern American faith. But the tension endures. You can have Jesus or Dan Brown. But you can’t have both.”

Again dead on the money. We can’t be content to sit on the fence any more. This issue that has been debated for literally ever since he wrote this article must be decided. Do we believe in Jesus or do we believe in Dan Brown?

But A.O. Scott’s review of “Angels and Demons” over at the New York Times is a lot of fun to read.

They’re trying so hard.

I really dislike Paul Krugman’s writing. However, lately he’s been flying under the radar for me because the economic situation has kept him writing about Economics. When he does this, I think he’s on much sturdier ground then when he tries to venture out of that to, say, humor or politics. I know nothing about Economics or, you know, math so I might just be getting blinded by the glare of his Nobel.

His latest column, however, reminded me what irks me so much about his style. Namely, decrying all powerful yet nebulous groups. The column relates to some companies who previously opposed health care reform but are now seemingly willing to lend support by figuring out ways of cutting health care costs.

“What’s presumably going on here is that key interest groups have realized that health care reform is going to happen no matter what they do, and that aligning themselves with the Party of No will just deny them a seat at the table. (Republicans, after all, still denounce research into which medical procedures are effective and which are not as a dastardly plot to deprive Americans of their freedom to choose.)”

Krugman, I think condescendingly because he probably knows better, always seems to frame his arguments in this played out dichotomy of the hard working American against the evil Republicans (they’re always an entity – he never seems to have beef with just one).

The “presumably” in that sentence clues you in to the fact that we should just trust him and no he won’t provide any evidence. He mentions their past lobbying and ties to Republicans but if they’re not lobbying against it anymore and they’re breaking their ties to Republicans then that’s a good thing, no? I mean if you wanted to interest us why not write about the concessions Obama might have to make to them if he accepts their help knowing that in the past they lobbied against health care reform. I don’t know why, but he doesn’t and instead we get a column that seems to me mostly about some vague distrust of these companies and Republicans (which Krugman imagines as all powerful, inefficient, dumb and tactful all at the same time).

Finally, I would like to take this time invite you all to join me in trying to figure out a way stop the op-ed writers at the New York Times from using cutesy dismissive names for things they don’t like (see Maureen Dowd, Thomas Friedman).

“The Old Grey Lady dude. Not the innovative chick with a nice rack.”

On the Media, which is easily my favorite public radio program, had a very segment on the Senate committee hearings on the state of journalism. You should be able to hear the audio below.

I still love Magnetic Fields after all these years: “I could listen to my therapist, pretend you don’t exist  and not have to dream of what I dream of; I could listen to all my friends and go out again and pretend it’s enough, or I could make a career of being blue–I could dress in black and read Camus, smoke clove cigarettes and drink vermouth like I was 17 that would be a scream but I don’t want to get over you.”

Should be back to regular blogging tomorrow.

I don’t usually post newspaper interoffice emails. They’re mostly boring inside baseball, and there is a guy who’s apparently won 50 journalism awards, including several national biggies, with that niche cornered. But a friend and former coworker at the Sun-Sentinel forwarded me one of those emails last night, and I thought the first line was kind of funny.

This is Sun-Sentinel Editor in Chief Earl Maucker on the exciting times ahead:

Today we are announcing a reorganization of the Sun Sentinel newsroom to further integrate and align our operations for the digital age.

Looks like the Sun-Sentinel is ready to catch that digital wave that’s about to break like 10 years ago.

One down, and two more to go. I wrote about 2,500 words for my Mergers & Acquisitions final today, and I would estimate less than 30 percent of them made any sense.

Light blogging again tomorrow. I have a Federal Courts final at 6:30 p.m., and I need to spend the whole day studying.

In the meantime, vote for Giancarlo’s blog.

So I’m fairly certain today I may become the first person to get an F in his last semester of law school strictly because of academic shortcomings. All I know about Mergers and Acquisitions at this point is how to tell the difference between a merger and an acquisition. Sadly, that feels like an accomplishment. Ah, the soft bigotry of lowered expectations. I’ve done the math, and my grades are above mediocre enough that if I get a D in each of my three classes this semester I’d still be above the 2.0 required to graduate. Please pray for my soul, and for munificent professors.

In the meantime, I’m sad to say it’ll be hard for me to produce quality content over the next two days, dear reader–all six of you. So I’ll just leave you with the story of Georgia Republican gubernatorial candidate Neal Horsely–please pay attention to his last name because it’ll make his story all the more hilarious.

According to Gawker:

Neal Horsely is running for governor of Georgia! Who is he? He is a dangerous anti-abortion nut, but the real important thing about him is that he once admitted to mule-fucking.

Somehow the prospect of flunking out of law school suddenly doesn’t seem so bad.

A couple of big, fat casebooks on Mergers and Acquisitions, and Federal Courts. Or that’s what I should be reading. You see I’m in my last semester of law school, and finding the inspiration to study for this last round of finals exams has been, let’s say, not the easiest thing in the world. But still, I would like to close my law school career with something better than a bunch of C’s. So, in lieu of a proper post, here are a couple of things being talked about in the blogosphere that caught my eye.

Bernanke says the worst is over, or at least we’re getting there:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) – Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Tuesday that the U.S. economy is stabilizing and will begin to rebound later this year, but the recovery will be slow and cautious.

At a hearing of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress, Bernanke said consumer sentiment, the housing market and spending have begun to show signs of life.

But he expects the economy will continue to shed jobs and credit will remain tight for some time. He said the recent frugality trend will continue due to deflated household wealth, and business spending will be slow to bounce back as well.

“We continue to expect economic activity to bottom out, then to turn up later this year,” said Bernanke in prepared testimony. “Even after a recovery gets under way … we expect that the recovery will only gradually gain
momentum and that economic slack will diminish slowly.”

Republicans are at one another’s throats:

Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) blasted Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) today, accusing his fellow Kentuckian of poor leadership and blaming him for GOP losses.

“Do you realize that under our dynamic leadership of our leader, we have gone from 55 and probably to 40 (Senate seats) in two election cycles, and if the tea leaves that I read are correct, we will wind up with about 36 after this election cycle,” Bunning told reporters on a conference call, according to the Courier-Journal. “So if leadership means anything, it means you don’t lose…approximately 19 seats in three election cycles with good leadership.”

A reporter asked Bunning if he was talking about McConnell.

“Obviously,” Bunning replied. “Do you want me to spell it out for you?”

Bunning also criticized McConnell for not fully supporting his re-election bid, comparing his vigor to that of Arlen Specter, who Republican leaders had supported until he switched parties.

The worst is apparently not over for them.

And, South Florida Lawyers has a lesson for Glenn Garvin on truthiness.

Okay, back to the grind.