CIT and the Return to Sanity

It has been a while since I have posted, but I felt the need to discuss the situation at CIT.

This company appears to be a lender to midsize and small businesses that made some bad bets in the last few years and is now essentially broke. They had been pushing for a government bailout (what bank isn't?) and it seems that a bailout will not be forthcoming. This makes sense, and it is about time that there has been a return to sanity in regard to the banks. In the fall, the banks and their minions in government convinced everyone that bailing out the banks was necessary to save the world. Little was explained and little was gained. The economy went south anyway, some banks have now made spectacular profits and some haven't and many creditors and many shareholders are better off than they would have been had the banks gone under.

No one explained why the government couldn't use the vast sums of money spent on bailing out hedge fund counterparties to replicating the desired functions of the banks while allowing their creditors to lose. That was not done, but it appears that it finally will be done in regard to CIT. In no sense, despite CIT's claims to the contrary, is CIT fundamental to the economy, who had ever even heard of CIT.

More importantly, the political winds have turned against additional bailouts, and properly so. There is the sense that we were bamboozled and it is hard to argue with that. We were promised transparency and accountability, we got none. We were assured that the economy would falter if the banks weren't bailed out and the economy failed anyway. We were told the banks would fail without TARP, and the banks worth saving would have survived anyway. It is time to end the bailouts, end the handouts and possibly end some banks. CIT is a good first start.

Franken

It appears that Al Franken will finally win the election. Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled for him and Governor Pawlenty had indicated that he would declare Franken the winner. About time.

Strip Searching for Advil

The Supreme Court at least recognizes the ridiculousness of searching a girl for Advil in her underwear. For some reason, the intrusiveness of a strip search for over the counter drugs was not sufficiently obvious to allow the individuals involved to be subject to suit. Full decision is here (Warning: PDF).

Update - 12:37 P.M.: I just got to Thomas' dissent, apparently no search is ever unreasonable in his eyes, no matter how intrusive and for what minor purpose. Oh Thomas, will there ever be an authority figure who ass you don't want to kiss?

Does Jose Canseco have a case?

Probably not. I write more on the subject over at New Jersey Newsroom.

Iran

Apparently, Twitter has a purpose, since all the reports on Iran are coming out of there. Search for #iranelection. Otherwise, I have to say that I used to think that maybe Ahmadinejad wasn't quite as crazy and evil as we assumed, but now I see that I am wrong about him.

Avi Frisch's article in today's New Jersey Newsroom

Avi is the “paper”’s legal writer. Please send him any ideas for articles that you may have.

http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/commentary/can-the-port-authority-legally-finance-silversteins-white-elephants

Newjerseynewsroom

I have signed on to be a legal journalist for www.newjerseynewsroom.com. This is an excellent site for New Jersey news, and I am proud to be taking part in this exciting project. Most of the writers and contributors are experienced New Jersey reporters from the Star-Ledger, and I feel lucky to be involved. My first article is not up yet (I need to start writing it), but I hope you will check the site out.

Second Amendment

It comes as no surprise to those who know me that I do not believe in an individual right to bear arms, and that I think the recent Supreme Court decision to the contrary is plain wrong. One thing that is clear to me and still unclear from the Court is whether the 2^nd Amendment applies to the states and localities that impose gun control. This concept, known as incorporation, is that the 14^th Amendment guarantees of due process and equal protection incorporate provisions of the Bill of Rights and apply them to the states.

In the middle of the 20^th century, there was a major debate on whether the 14^th Amendment incorporated all of the Bill of Rights, some of the Bill of Rights or none. This has largely been settled, and it is now generally acknowledged that the 14^th Amendment applies most but not all of the Bill of Rights to the states. The basic standard that the Supreme Court has applied is to consider whether a Right is "fundamental to the concept of ordered liberty" as Justice Cardozo put it in 1937. Among the rights not incorporated are the right to a jury in civil trials (7^th Amendment) and the right to be indicted by a grand jury (5^thAmendment). These rights, while of debatable worth do seem to at least speak to values of due process that this country holds dear. The right to hold a weapon, on the other hand, does not seem to be fundamental in any way, despite the protestations to the contrary by the NRA.

It would seem that the Second Amendment is also a right of the states against the Federal Government, in that it is about guaranteeing a right to a state militia (essentially the equivalent of today's National Guard). So even if the Court is uncomfortable with state gun regulation (though I am not sure why anyone is against gun control), how do they read in a limitation on state gun regulation into an amendment? The states have the right to a well regulated militia, so even if a personal right exists to guns, it is not applicable when a state chooses to limit the right. This seems to be very obvious, so I would appreciate comments that explain why I am wrong.

Wang

To change subjects, why the hell isn't Chien Mien Wang in tonight's game?

More on Sotomayor

Republicans will clearly claim that Sotomayor is merely the beneficiary of affirmative action and is therefore not qualified. This is their general take on liberal appointees who benefit from affirmative action, but not on conservatives.
Leaving aside the fact that there is no evidence that Judge Sotomayor benefitted from affirmative action at all, by all accounts (including my own) she is a highly intelligent and accomplished woman, why is it that conservatives only view liberal women and minorities as tainted by affirmative action. Clarence Thomas was a beneficiary of affirmative action and hates the world for it now. George W. Bush was a huge beneficiary of affirmative action as a member of the Bush clan and no Republican will ever admit that he was unfit for low office, let alone high office. That brings me to Sam Alito and John Roberts. If you are choosing judges for the Supreme Court because of how white and reassuring they are to the conservative base, it is also affirmative action.
Contrary to what conservatives claim about their heroes on the court, not a single one of them is all that impressive. Roberts climbed the republican ladder through the Reagan and Bush administrations, and then got a job as a partner at a conservative leaning law firm. His career was impressive, but no better than hundreds of other prominent lawyers. He then went on to deceive the senate and the citizenry of the United States about his radical right wing views. As Chief Justice, he has not been particularly successful, mostly complaining that he and his colleagues are underpaid ($179,000 a year, with life tenure and a full pension at retirement; I am sure many others are crying their eyes out for you John). Alito was not a particularly distinguished judge, and nothing about him justifies the praise the conservatives heaped on him. He did not have a record on the appeals court that anyone would have said – this is a Justice in the making! I haven't discussed Scalia and Thomas, both of whom have been terrible judges. Thomas is an ideologue who refuses to acknowledge any fact that disturbs his conservative agenda. Scalia is a bullying jerk, who regularly writes opinions attempting to embarrass his colleagues and others. Scalia is among the worst judges anywhere (other than those guys in PA sending kids to jail for money).

Sotomayor

A few years ago, while at Columbia Law School, I interned for Judge Sotomayor. This was part of a Columbia sponsored internship program and it was a good learning experience. I liked the judge a lot, and she is really tough and really smart. She can definitely hold her own among the conservative jerks on the Supreme Court, which I think is important.

My Website

I haven't posted in a while so I thought I would get back to it with a couple of posts. First off, check out my new website, http://www.avifrischlaw.com. I am attempting to start a law practice, so please check it out.

Souter’s Replacement

Justice Souter has been a perfectly decent justice, but of course no one can really say anything he has written or accomplished in nearly 20 years on the court. As has been noted by others, this is probably due to his being appointed as a closet conservative who turned out to be more of a closet liberal. So who should Obama appoint as his replacement? Many of the intelligentsia are pushing for people similar to those Bill Clinton appointed, reliable incrementalist moderate liberals who can be relied upon to vote as expected on the major issues that determine confirmation. Similarly, this post in the New Republic argues against a "liberal Scalia." This post is totally wrong, however. The need for a liberal Scalia type if for a new theorist to take the terms of legal debates away from the conservatives. For many years now, conservatives have pushed the debate by claiming that activist judges were distorting the original meaning of the constitution. This is and cannot be the correct meaning of the constitution, but liberals have ceded the intellectual debate and have been attempting to hold onto the advances of the Warren Court while conceding that they might not have the proper constitutional foundation. We need new liberal justices who can perform the intellectual heavy lifting that Scalia has been doing for years. The specific nature of Scalia's personality, however, his being a total ass, should not be copied.

Chrysler Holdouts

The Times Dealbook Blog has a post here in regard to the issues raised by government involvement with some of the creditors of Chrysler. Unfortunately, it does not appear to be correct in almost any of its points. Sure, the secured creditors are entitled to the full value of their security. It is clear that these claims are not fully secured, so they aren't entitled to the full value of their claims. If they wanted to foreclose they could have started to already. Do they want factory land in Michigan? Only if they can sell it for more than they were offered in the negotiations, which I think in this case is clearly not going to result in a hefty recovery. Also, these people are vultures, speculators or whatever negative term you want to use to describe them. Those pejoratives have no impact on their rights under the law. They purchased their claims fairly on the market and have a right to collect them, the morality of it is irrelevant.

That point, however, brings us to the reason why the commenter was so wrongheaded in his comments. They also bought the debt of a highly political situation, and the court has no reason to void the voting rights of other creditors just because they are taking a position influenced by the government, which of course is also a creditor. No aspect of the Bankruptcy Code requires creditors to act to directly maximize recovery of the other creditors, rather they are taking their best interest to heart and not fighting the government, seems rational to me (and if not, so what? Maybe bank shareholders will disagree, but that would be handled in a Delaware court not this forum). Finally, since when do courts not handle politically charged issues? Many cases are politically charged and the courts need to handle them fairly despite the politics, which is the meaning of an independent judiciary, not one that rules against the government just to avoid serving the public interest.

Solo Lawyering

Anyone who has any advice in regard to hanging my own shingle, please let me know.

CitiField Review

Yesterday I made it out to CitiField (not sure on whether it should be two words or one, will go with one for now). First off the disclosure: I hate the Mets. I do not claim to be unbiased here, I am sure some of that bias is coming through, but I do feel like I would have said the same things if the Yankees had built Citifield. Overall, Citifield is a vast improvement over Shea, but how could it not be? Other good things were the proximity to the Subway, ease in getting out through the copious stairways, the nice beer selection in the outfield food court and the slightly better concession prices than in Yankee Stadium. Kosher food options seemed somewhat limited with three types of sausage, pretzels and knishes at all 3 kosher stands that I encountered, but not that surprising.

Overall, HOK Sport/Populous – Official Architects of Major League Baseball – built a similar stadium here to all of the many others they have been building. Unfortunately, their postmodern style (most likely born of the 1980's when postmodernism was still a current trend) really doesn't work well at all in the wastelands of Flushing Meadows. Literally, you can look out from the building onto the junkyards of Willets Point, the Bridges of Pittsburgh or the Bay of San Francisco this view is not. I think this led to some major problems for the HOK formula, which is meant to incorporate landmarks from the skyline into the stadium experience (other examples include the capital building in Washington DC, the incorporation of old buildings into the structure in Baltimore and San Diego and downtown skylines in several other cities). So instead Citifield has to be closed in to avoid the view of the junk of the Willets Point. This leads to a confusing architectural formula, where the architects attempt to create something by varying every part of the park from another. This becomes distracting rather than beautiful, cute rather than intelligent. It feels like one of the great aspects of the newer stadiums, and HOK's design concept, is the open concourses that run continuously through the building, creating the ability to walk seamlessly everywhere. At Citi though, you will feel hemmed in at many points, most likely because you found a members only bar blocking your path. Also, the elements they add in seem to be counterproductive for effective viewing of the game. The out of town scoreboard blocks seats in several grandstand section. Light fixtures to illuminate advertising cast noticeable shadows on the videoboards and the extremely odd indentation in right field is just hard to explain. Worse still, the primary food court is actually behind the huge scoreboard and thus cut off from any view of the game whatsoever (I hope the line for Shack Shack ain't too long there or you could miss two innings).

In terms of the aforementioned club levels, I think they are more conspicuous here than at Yankee Stadium, because I found myself encountering them at so many points in my stroll through the building, blocking my path. Made it feel even more exclusive. In terms of the seats, I had a ticket for Section 511, and it felt quite high. Climbing the stairs to that level is pretty tiring, as it's the equivalent of 6 stories up. Part of the problem is that even the field level requires a hike up two stories. This explains the need for a huge rotunda with its hokey dedication to Jackie Robinson. Its just a way to filter fans upward. Other seats also left something to be desired. The outfield seats at field level were high enough off the ground to give a good view, but the long distance to the plate was noticeable. Most of these seats are covered by the next level up so it felt a little like being in a cave. I think in general the seats should not have been green in color, they just don't work all that well.

Finally, the worst thing about Citifield (other than the unfortunate sponsorship) is that it could have been so much more. The Mets should have hired someone to create the next generation of new ballpark, the one that will next make teams jealous. Now that there are 22 HOK Sport stadiums, doesn't someone need to come up with the next big thing? That should have been the Mets, because HOK's formula is so poor for the area they were building in anyway. This is a sports complex/wasteland, it would be like building a replica of a Fenway Park in the meadowlands, just would not fit. Ultimately, the Mets will regret this stadium because it could have been an opportunity to be leaders in design and fan comfort and instead the Mets took the relatively cheap and objectively safe route: They continued to chase the Phillies.

Punishment for Bush and Cheney

DEATH – TEXAS STYLE

18 U.S.C. 2340A

  (a) Offense. - Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life. (b) Jurisdiction. - There is jurisdiction over the activity prohibited in subsection (a) if - (1) the alleged offender is a national of the United States; or (2) the alleged offender is present in the United States, irrespective of the nationality of the victim or alleged offender. (c) Conspiracy. - A person who conspires to commit an offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties (other than the penalty of death) as the penalties prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.

 

In Treatment

I love this year's season of In Treatment so far. The episodes are much snappier than last year, having been reduced to under a half hour in actual time, which prevents any of the sessions from getting too tedious as they did last year on occasion. This show is just too smart to be ignored (unfortunately, this fact hasn't helped Friday Night Lights). The show does raise some interesting questions for those of us not initiated into the world of psychotherapy. I suppose expecting a distinct phase of diagnosis and then treatment might be unfairly importing a medical paradigm that is not relevant or effective here, but it does seem that Dr. Weston has no structure to his therapy, and I wonder if this is typical. Another issue, do therapists have trouble staying sane and grounded listening to all these crazies every day. Either way, it seems hard to believe that these sorts of conversations are helpful. Luckily, Paul and Gina seem to know the whole thing is a crock, which makes their sessions particularly interesting.

Why I Joined Twitter and Became a Twit

A few people who know me, know that I think Twitter is for twits who cannot write posts longer than 140 characters. I haven't been disabused of this notion, but was also informed that I can possibly aid my job search by using twitter, though God knows how. So any readers, here or through Twitter, feel free to let me know. My twitter name is frischa. My resume is below.

Resume

Just in case anyone out there knows a job for me, I am embedding my resume here.

Discover Simple, Private Sharing at Drop.io

Some pictures from the first day at the new Yankee Stadium

New Yankee Stadium

To disagree somewhat with my dad, here is my take on the New Yankee Stadium. I agree that it will be a great place to watch a game and that they did a great job mimicking the old stadium while updating it with modern amenities, I can't help but feel that something was missing.

The fact that the Yankees can even pretend that the Stadium is not new is in a sense its great success and failure. Colonel Rupert's Yankee Stadium was a grand innovation that essentially dropped from the sky in a few short months in the winter of 1923. It was everything a stadium should be and something no other stadium was. It was huge, reflective of its city and the aspirations of the team that played there. Rupert wanted a stadium that overshadowed the polo grounds across the river and to house his larger than life star, Babe Ruth. He got such a stadium. This was a massive structure, the first baseball stadium with 3 decks, but also one with aspirations of being a modern coliseum. The Yankee Stadium of 1923 was an innovative and grand palace for baseball and the Yankees, it reflected a New York City just then becoming the center of the world.

Little needs to be said of how little of this 1923 structure actually remained after the misguided 1970's renovation, but the feeling of stepping out of the tunnels and into the stands to see the great field at Yankee Stadium was always there.

This new stadium is excellent at replicating the feeling of sitting in the old stadium. You feel like you are sitting in the same old place in many ways, until you realize that certain things are just different. Like the lack of the pennants indicating the divisional standings, the return of the frieze (often incorrectly called a façade) to the grandstand and of course the huge HD videoboard. The new stadium fixes the problems with the 1970's botch job of the old stadium, it has an exterior similar to that of the original 1923 stadium, clad in stone, it has tremendously wide concourses in most places, has improved sight lines (except for a few seats in the bleachers), and has more comfortable seating. The Yankees spared no expense in recreating a modern version of their 1923 stadium. Yet, they missed one thing, innovation. The new stadium has the feeling of an improved Yankee Stadium and no one will feel like the old stadium has been stolen from them, since there old friend is still here. This missed an opportunity to again rethink what a stadium should be. Instead they replicated their old stadium with a little Camden Yards thrown in for good measure. I guess what bothers me is that the Yankees had to copy from places like Baltimore for their new stadium and that it just does not feel like the Stadium is any different from those other parks.

A little could be said about the corporate nature of the place and the love of money that oozes from the field level "legends suites." All I think that needs to be said is that anyone who is paying $2500 a ticket for seats at Yankee Stadium should be ashamed that they could not find a more useful way to spend their money.

The Past Few Days

Sunday night I was pleased to attend a lecture on "Boxing and Jewish Law" given by my former student Rabbi Daniel Travis. The number two middleweight boxer in America Yuri Foreman (see YuriForeman.com) was also present. He is Rabbi Travis' student at the Rabbi's Rabbinical academy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This morning I am to be seen briefly commenting on the new Yankee Stadium on channel 2 news.

It is hard to imagine a more perfect combination of the old field with the amenities of contemporary stadium construction.

Wagoner is Gone

Its about time that the Administration forced out one incompetent chief executive, and GM's Wagoner is certainly deserving of this. It seems like the New York Times got the article about him in Today's paper from their obit vault. It is hard to disagree that Wagoner is in some sense a sacrificial lamb, a martyr to the public desire for blood before dumping money on these unfortunate zombie manufacturers. He was, however, a disaster as an executive. For all GM's problems when he took over, they still had a good legacy position in the marketplace and made tons of money. Now they don't, their market share is down and who can forget the Pontiac Aztec and other stupid decisions made by GM over the years.

Krugman Is Right, as Usual

See here. Today's column explains exactly why the Obama administration is not getting it. This is not a short term hiccup but this crisis is rather an indictment of the entire financial system as we know it. It amazes me how much the control over the Democratic Party is in the hands of the hedge funds.

On Jeter Batting Leadoff

Finally, the Yankees have figured out that Derek Jeter is their leadoff hitter. This is something that should have happened a decade ago, but Dear Leader Torre never could see it because Jeter didn't fit precisely into his mold of what a leadoff hitter should be. Apparently, Torre did not like guys with good OBP numbers and pretty good speed as his leadoff man, he wanted people who couldn't get on base, but boy if they did get on base they would have been great. Thankfully, Torre is gone, and the more we see of life after Torre the more I wonder how many more games the Yankees would have won without that tea sipping fool.

More AIG

The New York Times DealBook blog and the business section contributors from Breakingviews.com have never seen a bonus that they do not want to pay out from our money. First, I have no idea why the New York Times needs to publish the usually silly and inane commentary of breakingviews.com, which I had not previously heard of before they started being published in the Times. Today, these two defenders of Wall St's status quo ante say that AIG should pay the bonuses for NEXT year, despite the outcry about this year's bonuses, to preserve the august division that is AIG Financial Products. See the piece here. Really, as Brad Delong writes, why can't we get a better press corp, NYTimes?

Libraries and the Great Recession

This article in the Times is so true. I hadn't been to the library in years while working and now I go all the time. Another good place to go is Barnes and Noble. The stores usually have places to sit for free and plenty of books to read. No one seems to mind, at least at the B&N at 82^nd and Broadway.

AIG Financial Products Resignation Letter

Yesterday, the New York Times published this letter on its Op-Ed page. I reacted to this letter almost with the same level of disgust as I did to the original bonus story. First, if no one involved with AIG will admit to knowing anything about Credit Default Swaps then why do we need to retain them to unwind the these idiotic contracts. AIGFP cannot have it both ways on this, they need to identify someone who has useful knowledge in regard to the swaps before saying they need to retain these people. Second, I view this guy's tone as totally self righteous – I was promised and I stayed because I love my country. Buddy if you loved your country so much you would work for a reasonable salary instead of stealing our money. Since you don't love your country enough for that, shut the hell up. Third, if you are worried about being shamed, then you should not have taken the shameful bonus. The shame is that you took money that you knew to be wrongfully promised and paid, which is also why you kept seeking reassurance that it would be paid. You knew it was wrong and you took it anyway.

As a separate point, we need to get rid of this ridiculous notion that people should work for $1 a year. People need to be paid a living wage for their work and the government should understand that. Not everyone talented enough to work for the government or in politics will have the wherewithal or desire to work for nothing. It's not honorable to work for a dollar. It's about turning our government into the playground of the rich and powerful who will be the only ones who can afford to have anything to do with the government. Isn't this the exact reason that we started paying people in government in the first place?

The Tickets Arrive

At long last the pasteboard strips landed. For some reason no signature was required. And I wasted all morning waiting to sign for them! There may be nothing new under the sun, but Yankee tickets without a signature are a sign of the new way in the Bronx.

My daughter sold her opening day tickets (via Stub Hub) to someone who insisted on the cardboard original. Stub Hub now essentially sells electronic tickets. I think that purchaser will be disappointed. The opening day ticket is as bland as all the rest, not even indicating that it is official game one of the inaugural season. I suppose whoever the purchaser is was fooled by the elegant last game ticket of last season and expected a playoff quality ticket. Oh well.

I split the pack up, gave some out and await the arrival of the minor buyers to get theirs. There is always an anti-climactic feeling after the tickets, anticipated (and paid for months ago) so very long finally come.

Will this be the extraordinary season the pitching staff makes one believe possible? A season like that season of magic, 1998? We shall find out bye and bye.

Automobile Reorganization

Two veteran bankruptcy lawyers propose a new solution for the automakers problems here. Their proposal assumes a number of things that may not be true in reality. First, they assume that the creation of Amtrak and the creation of Conrail were unmitigated success stories. This might be true about Conrail, which was eventually returned to the private sector, Amtrak has not exactly been a success. Both due to the difficulties in coming up with a viable plan for a profitable passenger rail system (there has never been any reason to assume that passenger rail could be profitable), which was a key assumption in the formation of Amtrak as a private corporation, and the fact that Congress has long starved Amtrak of adequate funding that would be necessary to reach profitability or in truth a state of adequate usability on most of its routes. Amtrak just has been starved while roads and airports have had huge government subsidies thrown at them year after year. In truth, it is not necessary for Amtrak to be profitable, but that requires a different conception of its role than the one devised in 1970. It hardly seems likely that an automaker bailout structured to create a semi-private entity along these lines would not have the same difficulties in achieving appropriate funding levels to carry out its mission of maintaining an American automaker, helping preserve defense capabilities, long term job promotion or ever be returnable to the private sector. Finally, those arguing that a traditional bankruptcy reorganization under Chapter 11 would be inadequate to the task have no evidence on their side. Assuming the Federal government will support the automakers with DIP financing, creating a new mechanism for the automakers seems unnecessary.

Donating to my Alma Mater

I love Columbia Law School, I really do, but this post, detailing article in the NY Times this weekend, was infuriating. I know very little about Edward Morrison, but do know that Columbia Law School loves asking for money while at the same time giving million dollar loans to professors. Does Mr. Morrison really need to live in Morningside Heights? How about NJ, or does the busy schedule of a law professor require his being within a few blocks of the law school?

Geithner and the Failure of Obama’s Economic Policy

John Judis has some smart things to say about why Tim Geithner has been such a disaster. It appears to me that as long as Geithner sticks around, Obama's economic team will continue to flail around for a solution. This guy is way too connected to Wall St. to see solutions that Wall St. may not like. I sure hope that we won't be remembering Geithner as Obama's Rummy – the guy to whom the President has such unfailing loyalty that he will allow him to destroy his administration.

Free Museums

For those of us for whom the economy is taking its toll, check out this detailed list of free hours at museums and those which are only suggested donation - http://www.newyorkology.com/archives/2009/03/free_hours_at_m.php

Wow!

Sunday, March 22, 2009

Wow!

I went to the Stadium Monday.

I walked all around. A friendly guard at the bleacher entrance (under the el) whom I engaged in conversation suggested I go to the lobby (on 164th and Jerome) and ask to be taken to my seats.

Sure enough, the security people obligingly called up to the tickets department. An employee of that department named Andy came down and told me that if I had called, I would have been told “No” but since I was there he would take me up. He even waited for my son to arrive and park. We signed the safety waiver (the Stadium is not finished) and put hard hats on. The new stadium is lovely. Our seats up above the plate have more room than our old ones, are comfortable and have cup holders. There looked to be numerous bathrooms for both genders. The eerie thing about the field, which was the best thing about the old stadium, is that it still looks the same. Everything is still the same down there.

I think we are going to enjoy this. That is, when the tickets finally arrive. I called Friday and was told they won’t come until March 31st or thereabouts. That is awfully close to the workout day on Thursday April 2nd.

Henry Frisch

Welcome from Henry Frisch

Why be different from everybody else? Blogging is the way of the world as we charge through to the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century of the Common Era. And so I am joining the hoards with their own blogs after some years of jabbering around on all and sundry 's blogs.

Joining in this endeavor is my son Avi, who will share in this endeavor. He will speak for himself, as I will for myself.

My mind passes freely through the cosmos of Judaica, the arts, baseball and politics -- of the world, Israel, the United States, the Northeast, New Jersey and Teaneck. So as for me, most anything that crosses the range of my mind will be subject to jotting here.

I invite responses to my musings. Please be civil.