Add RSS RSS

Morning Docket 4.06.09

small baby.jpg* The recession has turned 21st century America in to Victorian England with the reinstatement of debtor’s prisons. You’ve got to love a good recession trend story. [The New York Times]

* Emboldened by the recent coup in Iowa, activists push for the expansion of gay marriage rights in New England. [The New York Times]

* Between Guantanamo, Senator Stevens, and the mysterious 2006 dismissal of 9 US attorneys, Attorney General Eric Holder has been busy cleaning up after the last administration. [USA Today]

* Madonna returned home this weekend after her request to adopt a second child from a Malawi orphanage was denied. [Los Angeles Times]

* Watch this wicked, hilarious SNL skit about Madonna and Angelina and their love of adopting “exotic babies.” [Morninpaper.com]

* The lawyers arguing the criminal case over Brooke Astor’s fortune just can’t seem to get along. [The New York Times]

Comments

avatar
1 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 8:54 AM

FIRST!!!!!!

avatar
2 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 8:56 AM

Congratulations, 1.

avatar
3 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 8:57 AM

"INTO" IS ONE WORD.

THE PLURAL OF "ATTORNEY" IS "ATTORNEYS," WITHOUT AN APOSTROPHE.

Today is going to be a bad day.

avatar
4 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:08 AM

every Monday is a bad day, except on holidays.

avatar
5 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:08 AM

Sure, Holder is great public servant without an ideological agenda. I'm sure this is why he asked his OLC to examine the constitutionality of DC voting rights, then when his OLC agreed with the conclusion of the Bush OLC (hint: not the answer Holder wanted), he went behind the back of his own OLC and got the SG's office to give him the answer he wanted. Amazing how USA Today didn't find this little nugget worth mentioning.

avatar
6 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:14 AM

5, all stories in USA Today are limited to 500 words. Any more than that and the articles interfere with all the purty color pictures and popular opinion pie graphs.

avatar
7 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:19 AM

Be more accurate with the "debtor's prison" story. They refer to the non-payment of CRIMINAL fines and penalties, not civil debts.

avatar
8 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:22 AM

Can we please get a new morning docket person? Lat, Kash, even Elie -- please, PLEASE start taking notice of how horrible a writer Eliza is and make a move to stanch the daily typewritten diarrhea.

avatar
9 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:23 AM

Can we please get a new morning docket person? Lat, Kash, even Elie -- please, PLEASE start taking notice of how horrible a writer Eliza is and make a move to stanch the daily typewritten diarrhea.

avatar
10 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:23 AM

Can we please get a new morning docket person? Lat, Kash, even Elie -- please, PLEASE start taking notice of how horrible a writer Eliza is and make a move to stanch the daily typewritten diarrhea.

avatar
11 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:23 AM

Can we please get a new morning docket person? Lat, Kash, even Elie -- please, PLEASE start taking notice of how horrible a writer Eliza is and make a move to stanch the daily typewritten diarrhea.

avatar
12 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:25 AM

WTF does Madonna and her aborted adoption attempt have to do with "news, gossip, and colorful commentary and law firms and the legal profession?"

avatar
13 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:32 AM

I thought Eliza Gray was a pseudonym for Elie! Really, two separate people who don't bother to proofread? Astonishing.

avatar
14 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:35 AM

exotic babies = picture of a white kid?

avatar
15 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:36 AM

Obviously, no reasonable person really thinks that debtor's prison is a good solution for fee defaults. But now that failing to pay debts has lost much of its moral stigma, the frustration over the lack of recourse for default is understandable.

avatar
16 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:37 AM

NOOOO!
We go....
We Kill!
No more talk ... we Kill!!!

avatar
17 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:42 AM

White babies are racist, just like #3's comment. Please moderate with extreme prejudice.

avatar
18 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:51 AM

From the USA Today story: "While the lawyers involved in the disputed Stevens case were career prosecutors, whose work and tenure are not traditionally subject to political influence, Hebert says the Bush administration must assume some blame for not properly supervising their work."

Bush is to blame for rogue prosecutors who had every reason to hide their behavior from people supervising them? Don't you think Bush and the Republicans, if the Stevens prosecution was really politically motivated, would have done everything in their power to make the Stevens trial go away?

avatar
19 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 9:51 AM

The last administration kept us safe and gave us years of economic growth. The current administration is corrupt and run by socialists who want to see the United States diminished in the short term and dismantled in the long term.

avatar
20 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 10:03 AM

I didn't think someone could actually be more partisan than USA today... but characterizing the US Atty dismissals as "mysterious" (there was no mystery, it was the president doing what the Constitution allowed, perhaps with political motives, but no "mystery"), and how is the Ted Stevens prosecution related at all to the previous administration? Many of the improprieties came to light after Obama entered office, and besides, they were the improprieties of teh career AUSA running the case (not of any political appointee). Whoever writes the morning docket should actually be able to write cogently and without such obvious bias....

avatar
21 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 10:06 AM

LOL @ "years of economic growth." The DJIA has been essentially flat since the last year of the Clinton administration, and the consumption bubble of the past few years was funded with bad loans made to people who couldn't afford all the shit they were buying. Oh, and "socialist" has replaced "judicial activist" as the meaningless pejorative du jour.

avatar
22 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 10:06 AM

These comments suck.

YOU ARE ALL IDIOTS.

Skadden Secure

avatar
23 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 10:06 AM

It seems that 19 has taken the usual conservative tack of stating the exact opposite of the truth in support of his ideological conclusions. The last administration, at least partly through incompetence, witnessed the largest ever attack on continental American soil in the history of this country (at least in terms of death and property destruction). The last administration also provided a completely incompetent response to one of the largest discrete national disasters to befall America. I would argue this does not constitute "keeping us safe." The years of economic growth point, while facially true (except for 2008), falls beneath the level of argument that deserves any response.

avatar
24 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 10:08 AM

"natural" for national

avatar
25 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 10:28 AM

If I want to read about Angelina Jolie and Madonna I'll go on TMZ...which is where this site seems to be going lately. Get your act together people.

avatar
26 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 10:34 AM

Kudos to 25.

avatar
27 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 10:41 AM

22 = racist

avatar
28 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 10:44 AM

AND YOU ALL REMAIN IDIOTS!

Lord Humongous

avatar
29 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 10:49 AM

Don't worry guys, legal layoffs will be over as soon as Obama raises taxes on law firm partners. You see, when partners take home less money, they have their law firms spend more on salaries and hire more people. It makes perfect sense.

Yes We Can!

avatar
30 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 10:51 AM

I nailed it!

avatar
31 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 11:27 AM

23 is as dumb as a stump. The last administration was dealt a horrendous hand by the craven cowardice of the previous Democrat regime--which repeatedly ignored Al Qaeda attacks on our overseas positions and who made it politically untenable to take action until 9/11 occured. At that point, the Bush Administration had the political capital to do what was necessary to protect the country and they did a magnificent job on that account. As the Affirmative Action POTUS stumbles around the globe apologizing to our enemies and ignoring dire military threats to our country and our allies, one can only hope that the results of his incompetence, when that bill inevitably comes due, will be visited on the liberal pockets that elected him.

And Holder is just a hack. Plain and simple. Another Affirmative Action selection by an Administration that operates on a quota system.

avatar
32 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 11:39 AM

31 (Nutshell version):

Everything that happened while W was POTUS was Clinton's fault, and it was W's misfortune to inherit it. Everything that has happened in the first 4 months of Obama's presidency is entirely his own fault, and the past 8 years had nothing to do with it. Stock AA drive-by blast.

avatar
33 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 11:41 AM

31, you are spot on. 23 is a freakin moron. The people that voted for and believe in this thing in the White House are nothing but assholes.

avatar
34 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 11:41 AM

"wicked, hilarious"

Why the comma?

avatar
35 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 11:54 AM

33, you're a freakin moron. 31 isn't saying everything that happened during W's administration was Clinton's fault. 31 was addressing the asshole (23) blaming Bush for the 9/11 attacks. Yeah, moron, read the freakin post you freakin Obamatard. Typical liberal asshole mentality.

avatar
36 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 11:57 AM

4--Sounds like someone has a case of the Mondays.

avatar
37 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 11:58 AM

I like how Bush can't fire federal attorneys that serve at the pleasure of the president, but Obama can fire the CEO of GM. Go figure.

avatar
38 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 12:31 PM

CORRECTION 35 was addressing 32

avatar
39 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 1:43 PM

Gold stars to 16 and 28 for their awesome Road Warrior references.

avatar
40 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 1:52 PM

23 here. I am endorsing neither the previous Democratic regime nor the current one. Indeed, Clinton's policies, though more considered than W's, also lead to unilateral acts of violence that could not be justified on the grounds of benefiting America directly. If you wish to call this cowardice, I am inclined to agree with you -- on the grounds that all violence against civilians is cowardice (whether in Serbia, NYC, or Iraq). Indeed, I believe through a combination of the American people's own ineptness as to what is in their best interest, and severe structural problems in American-style government and politics, most problems facing this country are probably intractable from a political standpoint. However, the unique combination of indecisiveness (Katrina), ideological bias (e.g. the nonexistent connection between Iraq and international terrorism; nonexistence of WMDs), and misfortune (charitably, 9/11) means the Bush administration did an especially poor job at keeping the country safe. As to the economic issue, I leave the proof to the reader.

As a footnote, the suggestion that Obama's success is more a product of inappropriate affirmative action than Bush's is somewhat curious. Certainly, Bush was a more than competent governor of Texas and at least plausibly competent with the Rangers. But this was after he was given far more chances at life than the vast majority of African Americans will ever receive in this country, due to wealth and connections. If affirmative action is taken to mean people receiving benefits and position regardless of merit (which is how I take the AA-hater's meaning), Bush is a classic case.
Furthermore, Bush's presidential election only achieved complete legitimacy through the intercession of a politically-friendly supreme court -- one supposes that if Bush were a black Democrat, and there were 5 liberals who had sided with him, we would still be hearing cries of affirmative action from Limbaugh, Coulter, and their spawn.

avatar
41 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 2:35 PM

CORRECTION 35's offer has been rescinded.

avatar
42 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 2:41 PM

Clinton also gave us the dot com bubble, which peaked in 2000 and was already well into collapse by 2001. It's certainly arguable that Bush was dealt a worse hand than Obama.

43 Posted by BHO | Permalink Monday, April 6, 2009 3:23 PM

29: Right on, brother! You are the Change you've been waiting for.

Post Your Comment