palin
smilingly explaining that obama’s move made his
black man could have had strong woman on his side
instead chose white man
all-in with palin
straight talk express back on the rails
mccain the maverick fighter
strong woman at his side
choo choo who do you choose

obama seen and raised
action now to him

shall he attack this new palin paladin of womanhood
i think knot

shall he ignore her hoping her charisma will somehow fade
i think knot

shall he expect his white man somehow to defeat
i think knot

is obama capable of embracing sarah palin in all she stands for women
how would he go about it to take strength of mccain’s play away

how to raise with an even more stunning play

CHARLES NESSON: I start from a presumption of liberty. Think of the founders of our nation. They assembled as people who had the liberty to create a government. They knew that historically all governments reflect their own self-interest and come over time to limit, if not destroy the collective power of the people. They believed that a government built of checks and balances would ensure protection of their (and our) liberty into the future.

One method for doing this was to provide that the government must present its case for taking away a citizen’s liberty to a jury of peers, and that the jury must unanimously agree to a general verdict of guilt as warrant for the State to take his liberty. The jury will endure as a bulwark so long as it decides the whole case — the law and the fact. When all other balances fail, the jury will remain as the last protection of liberty.

In a criminal prosecution the legislature must first pass a statute that defines a crime. The executive must then choose to enforce the statute by formally charging and proving a statutory violation. Finally the judiciary must oversee the trial of the charge to make sure the statute is constitutional and the process of proof completely legal. Thus the state”s claim to take the liberty of a citizen is presented to a jury of the people. WE the PEOPLE. The jury is us, so that our values of liberty and justice will be preserved into the future against the state.

I want to make a doctrinal point exposing the flaw in the legal argument used by the judiciary to take away the jury’s power to decide “the whole case, the law and the fact,” thereby reducing the jury’s role to that merely of factfinder. “Law” used in describing the jury’s role means justice in the sense of connection with the conscience of community. The judges who created the current doctrine of jury nullification read “law” to mean the formal law created by the State, e.g., legislation, common law, judicial precedent. In claiming for themselves in a dichotomy between judge and jury of “law” and “fact” the prerogative of authoritatively articulating such matters of legality they left the jury only with “fact” and took the jury’s justice function away.

The judges did this in the 19th century in dispute as to whether lawyers could continue the established practice of arguing unconstitutionality of statutes to the jury despite the trial judge’s ruling that the statute was constitutional. Judges decided that lawyers may not re-argue their legal rulings to the jury because it is the judge’s business, not the jury’s, to decide matters of law. But in every case, the ruling was based upon the judges power to decide constitutionality and other legal matters. It resolved the question insofar as it applied to constitutional matters, statutory interpretations and evidentiary rulings — matters of legality. But it did not address, nor did it justify, the claim that juries had no business deciding “law” in the more fundamental sense.

Even after the “legalities” have been articulated by the judge to the jury, the jury hears and must accept the interpretation of the law of the state that the judge puts upon it, the jury nonetheless retains the essential independent function and responsibility of deciding whether to apply the state’s law to the defendant before them. That is the jury’s constitutional function. That is its protective check and balance versus the state’s power to deprove a citizen of liberty. To take this funtion away diminishes, even obviates, the jury’s function as the last bulwark of liberty.

All right, that’s my ten minutes. I’d be delighted with any and all comments.

dershowitz

unknown1

marthafield

fried

noahfeldman

empiricalquestion

sandel

michelman

randy_kennedy

carol_steiker

palfrey1

unknown3-equality

jim-403

i want to thank everybody for coming here today and especially the people who were here from the beginning

eric wiseman
tom smuts
dave marglin
jon zittrain
john perry barlow
larry lessig
alex and wendy
myles berkman
fern and eric saltzman

we are here to talk about the future of the net.

my vision of the future of the net is the same as the vision i enunciated ten years ago.

cyberspace is an integrated media realm of stories told and shared by digitally connected and enabled hearts and minds.
WE are the Future of the Internet. We have good stories to live and to tell.
let us make our stories represent our values of
open code
open access
open talk
open education
let’s bridge the digital divide
let’s build the commons of the net

OK OBAMA – Now You Have a GAME!

Feb 18
From CyberOne Wiki

colvin is right, and brilliant, schools train the kids to beat the cops to get out of an authority structure that makes them feel bored and stupid.

i want presbelewski and colvin to be teachers in my school.

i want kids to watch the wire with me and then come back and go over and say where the mistake was made and what was the other choice.

i want to convey how much i want to teach

google hypothetical: future of university
mission of university
position of the assn of internet university service providers
bye bye to copyright on transactional base
open the university with a presidential poker game, all proceeds for running the open school

strategic thinking expressed in action
make your play according to assessment of position and strength of other players in your game

for an inmate in prison there are two laws, authority law and inmate law, authority imposed from the force outside that makes the prison, authority from the force within that rules the force of resistance. the stronger the compression the deeper the evil. how to teach and how to learn how to lighten up.

in baltimore two laws. colvin and prez offer strategy to change the valence of the game

think in media terms. hollywood, listen up. let me use your product in open education. me and prez teach math. a new kind of school. embrace parents and love their children. follow colvin down the path of enlightenment to the point of hope in kids. catch the light and keep it burning.

i want to show the wire in kingston prison, and talk about it. i want to show it in juvenile.

==feb 24==
ready for a rush
larry gives me great idea and contact with lauren
palfrey for berkman and perhaps for harvard law
juan carlos for nexa
larry and lauren for stanford

internet & society
can we have your support

first question at google gathering
identity of avatars
behind each a student expressing truth