Profile

outlier_lynn: (Default)
outlier_lynn

January 2015

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
181920 21222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

March 24th, 2014

outlier_lynn: (Default)
Monday, March 24th, 2014 07:44 am
Nebraska.

I don't know what movie the cast and crew were trying to make, but I think that movie is monumentally depressing. From my point of view it dots the "i" of impossible in the sentence, "The survival of the human species is impossible given its inability to think its way out of a brown paper bag."

The best character in the movie? Mom. She is a mean old bitty in many respects (not unlike my own mother), but she is also a no-nonsense, straight shooter. I rather liked that.

This was a Netflix disc movie which Stacey rates without me. I don't know what she is going to give it, but I would give it a solid 3 nudging its way to 4. It was nominated for a boat load of awards and won none of them. Should have won a few.
outlier_lynn: (Default)
Monday, March 24th, 2014 07:51 am
I wish I was a young man. I would so be in a law school somewhere. I would dearly love to work someplace in the appellate system. Michigan's anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment was struck down. I just finished reading the decision. (Walker's prop 8 decision was more fun to read).

In this decision, though, the judge made strong statements against the notion that a voter approved measure has higher standing that something simply passed by a legislature. I have always hated this argument and so has the SCOTUS. Yet, the blindingly ignorant American People can't seem to grasp the founding principle that the American Constitution was designed from the beginning to avoid the tyranny of the majority.

The judge quoted Justice Robert H.Jackson who once wrote,
[t]he very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.