Friday, July 30, 2004
I am Very Famous. I have many leather-bound books.
As I noted here
, lots of people are looking at my blog, from all over the world. I know this because I use Extreme Tracking
. This product is like regular tracking, but extreme. As you know, I am quite grateful for foreigners taking an interest in American appellate litigation. Remember: Please come to Harvard
next month to see my lecture entitled: Technology: It is the Future!
However, do not expect me to cite to foreign law
, even if it provides the rule of decision in your cases because I intend to recruit clients by telling them how "conservative" I am despite the fact that American courts have cited to foreign law from the beginning
, my clients don’t like to be told this, nor do they like to be told that I am a "lousy oral advocate
." PS: Sex Toy Reference.
Monday, July 19, 2004
There is no bad press
. I have decided that it takes a big man to have detractors. I have therefore decided to link in my blogroll
to Greedy Clerks
, the other How Appalling
and to this How Appalling
, although I have taken care to make sure that this site is sidled with the denigrating title of "How Appalling II." Of course, longtime readers of How Appalling know just what a big move this is for me. My former position was that I would delete blogroll links to people who criticize me (like Greedy Clerks
) and while I would link to an article
about How Appalling, I wouldn't link to this site itself.
Of course, I had to change my policy of de-linking those who insult me. Otherwise, I would be forced to remove my link to the Wall Street Journal
, which today dissed me by publishing an article
about Sentencing Law and Policy
blog without mentioning me
Thursday, July 15, 2004
The Daily Dispatch
that “Local lawyer D. Randall Cloninger
has been accepted to the Bar of the U.S. Supreme Court
.” As you all my readers know, I predicted that this would happen here
using my superior powers of court-watching which has allowed me to predict with 100% accuracy which applications for admission to practice
would be accepted by the Supreme Court
Tuesday, July 13, 2004
Blawg cited in appellate decision.
I am pleased to inform my readers that a blawg I linked to
was cited in this
Second Circuit opinion. Much like Bill Gates
, who have made people millionaires, I too enjoy using my power to make other blawgs
successful. All roads lead to Bashman, after all.
My record before the Supreme Court.
Tony Mauro, who yesterday recognized my journalistic prowess, has an article entitled "High Court's Penchant for Familar Voices
." Most people do not know that I have two victories and one defeat
before the United States Supreme Court. Mere mortals might wonder how this is possible since I have never actually argued before the Supreme Court. Those who wonder out loud shall share the fate of the Greedy Clerks Board
. Now you see
Monday, July 12, 2004
I have great logistical abilities
. As many people know
, Joseph Stalin
earned the admiration of the Prussian brass for "shifting [the] unscorched Soviet economy to East of the Urals, out of reach of Nazi panzers." Indeed, as we all know, for a top-notch appellate litigator
, the “gold ring” of appellate litigation is to be favorably compared by the Ninth Circuit
to Joe. It happened today here
Finally, a reminder to all of you who read my blog: do not read “Underneath their Robes
.” This blog is not written by me
, and it does not involve me
or my robes. Therefore, there is no reason that you need to read it. If you read this blog you put yourself at risk of catching an STD.
Green with envy.
How come Underneath Their Robes
gets a mention
and I don't
? Silly question, of course it was because I mentioned the website
, which is also why the clerks at the Supreme Court were talking about it on Thursday.
Or maybe, just maybe the clerks at the Court don't have time to wade through thousands of posts that aren't about appellate litigation
, and instead were talking about Underneath Their Robes
because of the post
on Greedy Clerks
that day. While Article III Groupie
on Greedy Clerks
appears to have been posted before I mentioned the website
, that will soon be remedied.
Friday, July 09, 2004
Cry for attention.
Maybe some people out there think it's rather pompous of me to declare (here
), on the one hand, how popular and informative my 20 questions for the appellate judge
feature is, while on the other hand obstinately delcare that I will discontinue the feature if I don't get a judge to volunteer every month. Some might also find it bizarre that I would violate my own rule by declaring that if I don't get a judge for August, I will still interview the judges I have lined up for September
, and November
. These observations, however, fall into the category of things about which I don't give a damn
Sunday, July 04, 2004
I am posting this at 3:30 in the morning. At this hour of the night the only stories involve, random losers provide their thoughts on the constitution here
Friday, July 02, 2004
: Sometime in the morning
of Tuesday, July 6, 2004, I will post the July 2004 installment of "20 questions for the appellate judge
." No matter what time I post it, however, I will make sure to backdate it to appear that I posted it at exactly midnight.
: If I don't hear from an appellate judge to be interviewed for August, then this feature will cease. I mean it, I'll do it. I really will. Appellate judges should come to me, preferably on bended knee, and beg for the opportunity to be interviewed. But make sure to do it before July 9. I won't give any extensions! I really will stop doing 20 questions. Wouldn't that be terrible? So all you judges who read me, and I know you read me because you love me and you write me e-mail, if you love 20 questions, and I know you do because it was my idea and how could anyone not love my idea? If you love it and you don't want me to stop, which I really will do, by the way, then you better volunteer.
I'm just saying that I really will stop doing it.