Danzig sues bassist.
Must want or need his skulls (back).
And attorney fees.
No one is buying
Pop music. Because it sucks.
Need more Foo Fighters.
Silly Beyonce!
Don't you know that only men
Can ejaculate?
No more dirty songs.
Now what will I listen to
When I want 2 grind?
The Republicans
Are owned by corporations!
Derp. Derp Derp. Derp. Derp.
A free service with
Few revenue streams. What a
Surprise. Twitter sucks.
Either he's now just
Making shit up, or he has
Gay crush on the Kochs.
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Monday, May 5, 2014
Concurrences, Dissents and Dubitantes: Part 1.
Due in no small part to the popular news media (conflict sells!) I think most of the public get the impression that the Supreme Court operates something like this.
In the SUPREME COURT of the United States
Roman MARONE, petitioner
v.
The UNITED STATES, respondent
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR SEVENTH CIRCUIT.
JUSTICE SCALIA delivered the opinion of the Court in which the CHIEF JUSTICE, JUSTICE THOMAS, AND JUSTICE ALITO joined (presumably while holding hands).
Roman Marone (Morone) was convicted of multiple counts of racketeering, money laundering, murder, and conspiracy. Upon conviction, the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois sentenced Marone to be deported to Sweden. Marone petitioned for a writ of Habeas Corpus claiming, inter alia, that he "wasn't from there," and also that deportation to Sweden constituted cruel and unusual punishment. The writ was denied and the Court of Appeals affirmed. We granted cert because it seemed like a good idea at the time.
Normally, this is the part where we cite a bunch of moldy cases and apply it to the facts at hand. But, frankly, I am Antonin-Effing-Scalia. I've forgotten more about jurisprudence and Habeas procedure than pretty much everybody in the universe knows. Combined. (And certainly more than that creepy Neugent guy who keeps emailing me asking for an autographed picture.) So trust me when I say that the Original Intent of the Constitution was to deport this jagoff to to some god-forsaken glacier.
The court certainly sympathizes with petitioner's contention that nobody should be deported to Sweden. This Italian knows all too well that, on the Continent, the further you get from the Mediterranean Sea, the worse the cuisine gets. That would put Scandinavian cuisine somewhere between low grade dog food and low grade dog poop. On the other hand, in its brief, petitioner called this Court "a bunch of farging bastages." Therefore we are not disposed to mercy.
****
In the SUPREME COURT of the United States
Roman MARONE, petitioner
v.
The UNITED STATES, respondent
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR SEVENTH CIRCUIT.
JUSTICE SCALIA delivered the opinion of the Court in which the CHIEF JUSTICE, JUSTICE THOMAS, AND JUSTICE ALITO joined (presumably while holding hands).
I.
Roman Marone (Morone) was convicted of multiple counts of racketeering, money laundering, murder, and conspiracy. Upon conviction, the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois sentenced Marone to be deported to Sweden. Marone petitioned for a writ of Habeas Corpus claiming, inter alia, that he "wasn't from there," and also that deportation to Sweden constituted cruel and unusual punishment. The writ was denied and the Court of Appeals affirmed. We granted cert because it seemed like a good idea at the time.
II.
Normally, this is the part where we cite a bunch of moldy cases and apply it to the facts at hand. But, frankly, I am Antonin-Effing-Scalia. I've forgotten more about jurisprudence and Habeas procedure than pretty much everybody in the universe knows. Combined. (And certainly more than that creepy Neugent guy who keeps emailing me asking for an autographed picture.) So trust me when I say that the Original Intent of the Constitution was to deport this jagoff to to some god-forsaken glacier.
The court certainly sympathizes with petitioner's contention that nobody should be deported to Sweden. This Italian knows all too well that, on the Continent, the further you get from the Mediterranean Sea, the worse the cuisine gets. That would put Scandinavian cuisine somewhere between low grade dog food and low grade dog poop. On the other hand, in its brief, petitioner called this Court "a bunch of farging bastages." Therefore we are not disposed to mercy.
III.
The dissent argues that I am full of it. Well, they're dumb. And ugly. And if they don't shut up, I'm going to send Alito over there to teach them a lesson on the proper level of respect for my jurisprudential genius.
The ruling of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED.
JUSTICE KENNEDY concurring in the judgment and joined by JUSTICE BREYER for some damn reason.
I write separately to note that the laws of the Lesser Antilles, Guam and Mongolia might have been instructive in deciding this case. Derp.
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, dissenting.
First things first. Breyer: WHAT THE HELL?
Now that that's off my chest, I dissent from this judgement as a strong and wise Latina. Us strong and wise Latinas can recognize a blowhard when we see one. Unfortunately, today we see 6 of them (seriously, Breyer - we gotta talk, bro). With all due respect, Scalia can shove his opinion up his oily dago butt. All Latinas - wise and, er, otherwise - recognize that the majority has just sentenced not only the petitioner, but future generations to the possibility of having to eat those gross meatballs for the rest of their lives as punishment for something as banal as quintuple murder. Accordingly, I dissent. As all wise Latinas should.
JUSTICE KAGAN, dissenting.
RAAAAAWWWWRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
I. Will. Cut. You.
****
This, I think (with some minor embellishments; ok, major), is the way many view the ideological divide on the Court. The truth is a little more nuanced. Ok, a lot more.
More in part 2, later.
Early Accolades
I've already been noticed by Mitch. Back atcha big guy! Hope your servers can handle the crush of traffic coming from that link.
I suppose I should start posting content or something. Excelsior.
I suppose I should start posting content or something. Excelsior.
Friday, May 2, 2014
BaC FAQ
Even though Bar Chords has existed for mere hours, we've already received reader questions. To the mailbag!
Q: "Bar Chords"? What kind of stupid name is that for a blog?
A: You want to try asking that again?
Sigh. Fine. Bar Chords: explain.
The word "bar" carries a triple meaning: 1) the legal profession, of which I am a member; 2) a public establishment where booze is consumed; and 3) a certain type of chord on a guitar. Together the make up a large chunk of what interests me: law, booze and carousing, and Rock and Roll. As such, I expect those topics to be the main thrust of this blog.
"Chords" obviously refers to the aforementiond guitar technique, and also the harmonious noise of notes ringing out together. As for the other things, it's - um - a metaphor. Or something.
You stupid moron. It's spelled "barre" when referring to chords. You're dumb.
Two posts and already my readers are hostile. Sheesh.
Saaaaaaaayyyyyy. Aren't you that guy from -
Yes.
Really? Wow. I thought you were done.
So did I.
So are you also going to blog at the K-
No. It's dead.
Dead?
Dead.
Learned - ?
Dead. And buried in situ.
The Notorious B-I-L?
Bill is still chasing his dream of being a professional pie decorator.
Enough of these silly inside jokes that I don't get. What, exactly is this blog about?
Whatever I want it to be about. Those topics in the header provide a clue, but it's not exhaustive. And it's going to be funny, I hope. Above all, this is a humor blog for long-form humor. One-liners, bon mots and general brief stupidity will continue go on Facebook.
What about Twitter?
Fuck twitter.
I'm not friends with you Facebook. How will I ever get access your awesome short-form humor and brief stupidity?
Do I know you?
No.
Then you can't.
So, will you cover politics?
Maybe a little -
WOOHOOO! Homey come back to tear those moonbats a new one!!!!
Assuming for the moment that the above gibberish was English, no.
No? What do you mean 'no'?
I'm done with polemics.
Wow. That's a big word!
Here. The fact that stupid dicks like Ed Schultz and Michael Savage can draw national audiences is depressing enough without me and thousands of others imitating their schtick.
(Actually, Savage isn't really stupid - he's just a dick. Ed Schultz, however, rates high in both categories).
Isn't calling people "stupid dicks" exactly the thing you're railing against? How can anybody take you seriously?
You mean take seriously the guy who once used the word "boner" seven times in a single sentence? How indeed.
I resolve to be a better person going forward. To that end I have a fascinating post about the Supreme Court-
ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Trust me. It is interesting and will challenge your preconceived notions of division on the court and of this country.
So if you're not going to engage in poetics -
*Polemics.
Right, whatever. What are you going to write about?
Everything else.
Will there be haikus?
How can one subsist
Sans the magic of haiku?
Not me. Syllables.
Boxers or briefs?
What are those?
This FAQ is over!
Q: "Bar Chords"? What kind of stupid name is that for a blog?
A: You want to try asking that again?
Sigh. Fine. Bar Chords: explain.
The word "bar" carries a triple meaning: 1) the legal profession, of which I am a member; 2) a public establishment where booze is consumed; and 3) a certain type of chord on a guitar. Together the make up a large chunk of what interests me: law, booze and carousing, and Rock and Roll. As such, I expect those topics to be the main thrust of this blog.
"Chords" obviously refers to the aforementiond guitar technique, and also the harmonious noise of notes ringing out together. As for the other things, it's - um - a metaphor. Or something.
You stupid moron. It's spelled "barre" when referring to chords. You're dumb.
Two posts and already my readers are hostile. Sheesh.
Saaaaaaaayyyyyy. Aren't you that guy from -
Yes.
Really? Wow. I thought you were done.
So did I.
So are you also going to blog at the K-
No. It's dead.
Dead?
Dead.
Learned - ?
Dead. And buried in situ.
The Notorious B-I-L?
Bill is still chasing his dream of being a professional pie decorator.
Enough of these silly inside jokes that I don't get. What, exactly is this blog about?
Whatever I want it to be about. Those topics in the header provide a clue, but it's not exhaustive. And it's going to be funny, I hope. Above all, this is a humor blog for long-form humor. One-liners, bon mots and general brief stupidity will continue go on Facebook.
What about Twitter?
Fuck twitter.
I'm not friends with you Facebook. How will I ever get access your awesome short-form humor and brief stupidity?
Do I know you?
No.
Then you can't.
So, will you cover politics?
Maybe a little -
WOOHOOO! Homey come back to tear those moonbats a new one!!!!
Assuming for the moment that the above gibberish was English, no.
No? What do you mean 'no'?
I'm done with polemics.
Wow. That's a big word!
Here. The fact that stupid dicks like Ed Schultz and Michael Savage can draw national audiences is depressing enough without me and thousands of others imitating their schtick.
(Actually, Savage isn't really stupid - he's just a dick. Ed Schultz, however, rates high in both categories).
Isn't calling people "stupid dicks" exactly the thing you're railing against? How can anybody take you seriously?
You mean take seriously the guy who once used the word "boner" seven times in a single sentence? How indeed.
I resolve to be a better person going forward. To that end I have a fascinating post about the Supreme Court-
ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Trust me. It is interesting and will challenge your preconceived notions of division on the court and of this country.
So if you're not going to engage in poetics -
*Polemics.
Right, whatever. What are you going to write about?
Everything else.
Will there be haikus?
How can one subsist
Sans the magic of haiku?
Not me. Syllables.
Boxers or briefs?
What are those?
This FAQ is over!
Thursday, May 1, 2014
Wednesday, April 30, 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)