Effective Panhandlers

Homelessness appears to be more of a problem here in New York than in other cities where I have lived. Many are homeless because of their poor choices; others are homeless because of horrible situations that are out of their control. While there is nothing funny about homelessness, I have found that some of the signs that panhandlers hold are hilarious.

Last week, I was walking out of the library and there was an older homeless gentleman with a sign that said, “NYU Tuition Fund.” That made me chuckle all the way home.

Wife and I were walking down Broadway, when we saw a fellow with a sign that read, “I am a veteran, and I have cancer, and I lost both legs in the war, AND my dog died.” I began to sympathize for this guy’s situation until I looked at him and realized the sign was a joke (earlier in the day we had seen each of those statements on different panhandlers’ signs).

This afternoon, wife and I saw a sign with “Sith lord killed my family. Need money for a new light saber.” Possibly, the fellow holding the sign was mentally deranged, but I’m guessing he just wanted a creative sign to grab attention – and, based upon the pile of cash, it appeared to be working.

Boxing Day Exploration

Today, Wife and I spent an afternoon exploring Manhattan. Here are some of the places we explored:

• Trump Towers (that’s a lot of gold to put in one place)
• Time Warner Center (I still can’t get over putting a grocery store in the basement, a mall on the 2^nd and 3^rd floors, and a Border’s Books in the building with some of the highest level executives in the world).
• Central Park (this is an amazing place where it feels like a wilderness experience, but looking up you still see the New York City skyline).
• St. Patrick’s Cathedral
• Chelsea Market (we resisted the temptation to eat, but we did enjoy the sights and smells of all the bakeries and little shops)
• Major League Baseball Headquarters
• Food Network Headquarters

Those who know me know if my unhealthy addiction to the Food Network. It was pretty awesome to be in the same building where many of the shows are taped, most impressively, we were right there at Kitchen Stadium, where Iron Chef competition takes place.

Keeping Busy at Christmas

Wife and I have kept surprisingly busy in the last few days. There is so much we have to blog about, but we haven’t found the time. Here is a list of our recent experiences, that we which will all, hopefully, receive their own post in the near future:

• Spent an evening walking around Times Square , taking in all of the holiday scenery with a cup of hot coffee.
• Enjoyed Macy’s beautiful window displays and all nine stories of Macy’s Christmas commercialism (I never realized Macy's was so enormous).
  
• Gawked at the Christmas window displays at Bloomingdale’s.
• Walked around Central Park, enjoying the holiday season and watching ice skaters.
• Explored world-famous Chelsea Market.
• Went to Brooklyn for the live finale of Clash of the Choirs (long story here, which will take a full post).
• Attended our first Broadway production, “The Farnsworth Invention” (post already written on this).
• Ate White Castle (neither of us had ever done that).
• Trekked to Brooklyn to shop at Costco (I need to write about the two-story Costco).
• Spent the evening at Rockefeller Plaza, where we saw the famous tree, watched ice skaters, coin pond, and visited the quaint little shops along with millions of others.
• Played with hundreds of unique and useless toys at the huge Sharper Image.
• Ate a huge lunch deep in China town (we ventured about three blocks past where all the other English-speakers dare to venture; I have no idea what we actually ate, but the main dish appeared to some sort of poultry - the huge meal totaled just $2.50).
• Worshiped at a Christmas Eve service at local Baptist church, where Laura did her best to save a soloist who forgot the lines to the 27^th verse of O Holy Night (the soloist was absolutely wonderful, but forgot the lines of a verse I had never heard before - I have no idea how wife knew it).
• Walked to Washington Square Park where we enjoyed Christmas evening under the huge Christmas tree beneath the famous arch.
• Learned that Postmaster’s in NYC can suddenly announce that the post office is closing on Christmas Eve so that the employees can spend time with their families.
• Discovered that there is not a single pizzeria open on Christmas Eve in Greenwich Village (the death of our tradition).
• Experienced a special Christmas worship service in the New Yorker Hotel, put on by the church we have been attending.
• Did our best “Friends” imitation, spending Christmas morning in a coffee shop chatting and watching New Yorkers bustle around.

Wife is still under the weather. If anyone has recommendations for a cold that just will not go away, feel free to pass along any advice.

Taxes and the Birth of Christ

Luke connects Christmas and taxes:

And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.) And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David), to be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

Luke 2:1-7, KJV

'Twas the Night Before Christmas, Legal Version

Author Unknown

Whereas, on or about the night prior to Christmas, there did occur at a certain improved piece of real property (hereinafter "the House") a general lack of stirring by all creatures therein, including, but not limited to a mouse.

A variety of foot apparel, e.g. stocking, socks, etc., had been affixed by and around the chimney in said House in the hope and/or belief that St. Nick a/k/a/ St. Nicholas a/k/a/ Santa Claus hereinafter "Claus") would arrive at sometime thereafter.

The minor residents, i.e. the children, of the aforementioned House, were located in their individual beds and were engaged in nocturnal hallucinations, i.e. dreams, wherein vision of confectionery treats, including, but not limited to, candies, nuts and/or sugar plums, did dance, cavort and otherwise appear in said dreams.

Whereupon the party of the first part (sometimes hereinafter referred to as "I"), being the joint-owner in fee simple of the House with the parts of the second part (hereinafter "Mamma"), and said Mamma had retired for a sustained period of sleep. (At such time, the parties were clad in various forms of headgear, e.g. kerchief and cap.)

Suddenly, and without prior notice or warning, there did occur upon the unimproved real property adjacent and appurtent to said House, i.e. the lawn, a certain disruption of unknown nature, cause and/or circumstance. The party of the first part did immediately rush to a window in the House to investigate the cause of such disturbance.

At that time, the party of the first part did observe, with some degree of wonder and/or disbelief, a miniature sleigh (hereinafter the "Vehicle") being pulled and/or drawn very rapidly through the air by approximately eight (8) reindeer. The driver of the Vehicle appeared to be and in fact was, the previously referenced Claus.

Said Claus was providing specific direction, instruction and guidance to the approximately eight (8) reindeer and specifically identified the animal co-conspirators by name: Dasher, Dancer, Prancer, Vixen, Comet, Cupid, Donder and Blitzen (hereinafter the "Deer"). (Upon information and belief, it is further asserted that an additional co-conspirator named Rudolph may have been involved.)

The party of the first part witnessed Claus, the Vehicle and the Deer intentionally and willfully trespass upon the roofs of several residences located adjacent to and in the vicinity of the House, and noted that the Vehicle was heavily laden with packages, toys and other items of unknown origin or nature. Suddenly, without prior invitation or permission, either express or implied, the Vehicle arrived at the House, and Claus entered said House via the chimney.

Said Claus was clad in a red fur suit, which was partially covered with residue from the chimney, and he carried a large sack containing a portion of the aforementioned packages, toys, and other unknown items. He was smoking what appeared to be tobacco in a small pipe in blatant violation of local ordinances and health regulations.

Claus did not speak, but immediately began to fill the stocking of the minor children, which hung adjacent to the chimney, with toys and other small gifts.(Said items did not, however, constitute "gifts" to said minor pursuant to the applicable provisions of the U.S. Tax Code.) Upon completion of such task, Claus touched the side of his nose and flew, rose and/or ascended up the chimney of the House to the roof where the Vehicle and Deer waited and/or served as "lookouts." Claus immediately departed for an unknown destination.

However, prior to the departure of the Vehicle, Deer and Claus from said House, the party of the first part did hear Claus state and/or exclaim: "Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night!" or words to that effect.

A Night Out on Broadway

Last Night, Wife and I attended our first Broadway show together. Wife chose “The Farnsworth Invention,” believing the subject and genre would be one I would choose: a thoughtful courtroom drama. As it turns out, courtroom scenes were minimal – which is probably best because I didn’t need to scream, “They can’t do that!” or “That’s not a valid objection!” or “You would never ask that during cross-examination!”

The Farnsworth Invention turned out to be an excellent show, telling the historical tale of Philo Farnsworth, a young bumpkin from Idaho who invented the television while NBC/RCA executive, David Sarnoff, who will stop at nothing to ensure he owns the patent.

The actors were very good, led by Jimmi Simpson (of Zodiac fame) and Hank Azaria (who has done a great number of projects, but is probably most famous for his voice-overs in The Simpsons). Personally, I found it difficult not to picture Moe whenever Azaria spoke.

I should probably add that while the show was great – Wife and I had a wonderful time – the historical accuracy leaves a little to be desired. Last night, I read up on the history and, starting with the beginning of the story, began to find little inaccuracies. As I continued to read, the errors began to grow. The culmination was reading that the court decision was, in reality, the exact opposite of what occurred in the play. Despite the fast and lose approach to the historical facts, it was still a great show.

The line of the movie I found most interesting: “Of course the ends justify the means. That’s what means are for.”

If you would like a glimpse of what we experienced, here is the trailer:

The Farnsworth Invention

One Down....

Today marks the completion of a semester at law school. It was hard, but it is done.

In celebration, we will be attending tonight’s live broadcast of NBC’s “Clash of the Choirs.” Tune in to try to catch a glimpse of us on national television. We should be easy to spot. Wife will be the one bouncing in the aisles trying to show the choir members how it’s done. Husband will be the one with his arms folded looking like he is waiting for a root canal. That’s just how we roll.

Hanukkah Hams?

Our neighborhood market is advertising "Hanukkah hams."

HERE is the story.

Does Free Speech Exist at a Private University? (Short Answer: No)

You may (or may not) have heard the news about the former student of Regent University’s law school for expelling him. If you are unaware, Regent the Christian university where Pat Robertson is president (yes, “that” Pat Robertson). Personally, I am NOT a fan of Pat Robertson, nor regent university; I respect his right to believe and speak what Robertson does – but I don’t care for him. I am a Christian who tries to distance himself from those types of characters.

Back to the story, the student, Adam Key, posted a picture on Facebook and also on Regent’s listserv which appeared to show Pat Robertson boldly giving the finger to the camera while broadcasting on the 700 show. Robertson was actually scratching the side of his face in a way that looked rather natural at the time, but the image looks as if Robertson is making an obscene gesture. Regent Law School did not see the humor of Key’s posting the image. Regent ordered him to take the photo down and either apologize or write a legal memo on his right to post the photo. Key took down the photo, refused to apologize, and wrote the legal memo. To make a long story short, Key was suspended, ordered to undergo a psychological evaluation, and then eventually dismissed from the school. As any reasonable law student would do, he is now suing the Virginia university.

I recently read an interesting legal analysis of the lawsuit by Professor Howard Wasserman that I thought would be worth sharing since it appears some educational legal analysis on the kind of issue I frequently get questions about (the link to his blog where this originally appeared is below):

"Last week, Key filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of Texas against Regent and Robertson, alleging violations of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights, a violation of a provision of the Higher Education Act, and various state tort claims, including defamation (Key alleges that Robertson told the media that Key had "manipulated" the video image of Robertson), breach of contract, and fraudulent inducement (he alleges that he was fraudulently lead to believe that Regent was an open intellectual environment that allowed for dissent in public debate, that it was not at the mercy of Pat Robertson, and that it would not punish a student for engaging in political expression).

"This all makes a fun story. as it always seems to when Robertson enters the public debate. The Complaint even quotes several of Robertson's more infamous remarks. And Key is a unique enough figure that he would make a fine addition to the rogue's gallery that forms the pantheon of First Amendment heroes. Unfortunately for Key, this lawsuit has no chance.

"First, I am not sure the Southern District of Texas is the proper venue for this case. Key lives in Texas and his venue argument appears to be that Regent sent recruiting letters to him in Texas that convinced him to apply and attend the school and that his dissenting views would be welcomed and tolerated. I suppose this might work for the fraudulent inducement claim, because the letters sent to Texas are the inducements. But venue looks to where "a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred." And for all his other claims, the key events or omissions occurred in Virginia. At the very least, venue seems more appropriate in Virginia and this could be a candidate for a discretionary transfer.

"Second, the constitutional claims fail because there is no allegation (or event mention) anywhere in the complaint about state action. In fact, in ¶ 10, Key expressly describes Regent as a "private college." Clearly neither Regent nor Robertson is a state actor (Regent is a religious entity, so it being a state actor would be troubling), so it is not subject to constitutional restrictions.

"Third, Key attempts a claim under the Higher Education Act fails because the provision under which he sues cannot be enforced through a private right of action. Section 1011a reflects an effort by Congress to get private universities to conduct themselves in accordance with the First Amendment (and as public universities must) in punishing students for protected on-campus expression and assembly. But I doubt this section is enforceable by private lawsuit. The provision explicitly describes itself as reflecting "the sense of Congress" that students at private universities should not be sanctioned for protected speech; that is not the type of rights-creating language the Court looks for in deciding whether to find an implied right of action. A Westlaw search in the ALLFEDS database found no cases even mentioning § 1011a. That should be a pretty good hint that this provision does not provide a basis for a private civil action.

"Interestingly, Key's best argument may be that Regent is acting in violation of its ABA-imposed obligations to comport its rules to ordinary First Amendment standards, in terms of punishing students. So he might be better served by making arguments to the ABA the next time Regent is up for re-accredidation. But he is not likely to get very far with this lawsuit."

You can find the original post HERE.

NOTE: If you care to comment on this post, please try to keep the beliefs and politics of Pat Robertson and Regent University out of it. I know that there are divergent opinions about Robertson with the regular readers.

It's Snowing

We are having our first snow of the season right now. Wife is very, very excited.

Back at Home

We are back in our apartment, and everything - from our perspective - is back to normal. Last night a temporary external generator was completed which will power our building for a few weeks until the power plant running again. Fortunately, Husband's relatives here in New York graciously offered us a place to stay until the situation was resolved. Though we ended up not needing to accept the offer, it was wonderful to know that we would not be two of the hundreds of people sleeping on a gym floor.