Calvin “Snoop Dogg” Broadus, Jr., is a violence-advocating, drug-addicted pornographer. See Snoop Dogg, Serial Killa (Deathrow Records 1993); Snoop Lion, Smoke the weed (Vice Records 2013); Snoop Dogg’s Doggystyle (Hustler 2001).
To put the degeneracy into perspective: Snoop Dogg is such a degenerate that, by comparison, he could almost make Martin Luther King, Jr., seem like a decent person!
Yet Broadus features among our learning material, whereby we are to add quotation marks, dispassionately and diligently, to reflect that “Calvin ‘Snoop Dogg’ Broadus, Jr., has enjoyed a successful entertainment career.” See Attached (Screenshot of Snoop Dogg sentence practice via Core Grammar for Lawyers (CGL)) on www.CoreGrammarForLawyers.com/lesson/7). This, while short of Shakespeare, is arguably above some other work of CGL’s authors: “Greta shook her head to clear it, reminding herself that ether actually referred to specific chemical compounds that are unable to form hydrogen bonds, and that heaven, in the Judeo-Christian meaning, is a load of crap.” Katie Rose Guest Pryal, Entanglement: A Romantic Thriller (Hollywood Lights Series #1) (Kindle Locations 384-386). Blue Crow Publishing, LLC. ebook.
Moreover, if I were to post, on this discussion board, certain lyrics of Snoop Dogg, then I’d likely be expelled from school. Further, if I were to send, by email, such lyrics to the two authors of CGL; who invoked Snoop Dogg, as an entertainer, in their curriculum; then I’d likely be investigated by law enforcement for making criminal terrorist threats.
To echo, to an extent, another of our text’s authors, as to the extent to which I “care greatly about [certain pedantries prostrated unto by those within the legal profession:] The truth is that I don’t.” See Tracy McGaugh Norton et al., Interactive Citation Workbook for The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation at ix (2017) (ebook). Nevertheless, I too, along with Norton, recognize the practicality of “car[ing] about . . . credibility [deigned by] supervising attorneys and courts” (Id.) and such. Still, somewhere beyond these “trees of technicality” stands a “forest of fortitude.” (Similarly, eagle-eyed onlookers may be presently recovering from the jarring effects of my having forgone italicizing the preceding dot which indicates truncation of the ibidem.)
On a related note to the decline of our culture, we have the following: “I would hope that a wise Caucasian man with the richness of his experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a brown female who hasn’t lived that life.” For a quotation that is identical to the preceding except with (1) genders reversed; (2) “white” in lieu of “Caucasian”; (3) “Latina” in lieu of “brown”; (4) “woman” in lieu of “female”; and (5) “male” in lieu of “man”–See Sotomayor’s ‘wise Latina’ comment a staple of her speeches (CNN 2009) (reporting on several widely publicized speeches given by a racist, sexist, pro-death feminist named Sonia Sotomayor, who now sits as a Justice on the most powerful court in the world).
Moreover, among the more immediate motives for which I’m learning legal writing is to prepare for assuring and reminding various moral lepers, in their own tongue and tenor, that the key reason countless citizens take seriously the law solely to the extent necessary as to avoid state-violence is because they are sane; even as plenty anointed, disjointed scholar-trolls positively relish being listless, pedantic detail-bots whose ruse provides pretense for various Justice Sotomayors to bumble on, book-smart at best, while the rest of humanity indelibly identifies with Roscoe Pound’s famous half-truth:
“The most important and most constant cause of dissatisfaction with all law at all times is to be found in the necessarily mechanical operation of legal rules.”
Causes of Popular Dissatisfaction with the Administration of Justice, 29 A.B.A. Rep., pt. I, 395-417 (1906).
Made whole, Roscoe’s raconteuring would clarify that these legalized, lauded legalese dysfunctions only dissatisfy those dissidents forced to smell it reek and wreak in their lives and feel it lurk and leer against their liberties–forced by those governors who would cavalierly classify their clodhopping, crumbling cloisters as being necessary. Otherwise, they’d gladly leave alone–to their own, decadent designs–these glutted, gilded, gaudy, godless moral-geldings:
The young man knows the rules, but the old man knows the exceptions. The young man knows his patient, but the old man knows also his patient’s family, dead and alive, up and down for generations. He can tell beforehand what diseases their unborn children will be subject to, what they will die of if they live long enough, and whether they had better live at all, or remain unrealized possibilities, as belonging to a stock not worth being perpetuated.
Oliver Wendell Holmes, The young practitioner (1871) (emphasis added).
I enjoy perusing the intersection of limp legal scholarship and manic moral myths; for example how limp edicts, and even limper echoes thereof thereafter, have led to current, manic myths of, for example, imaginary moral-imperatives to sanction infanticide. Thence, among my long-term aims for learning legal writing is to do my part to dismantle slavery, including mental slavery, in these United States.