r u n 2 t?

i know i'm hooked. but not like that. if you don't know that story about donny and into t, make sure to ask someone who does. funny shit. but yeah, tall cans of green tea are my new jam. this may even supersede diet coke (heresy, i know). but it is so delicious and only a dollar. this local brand called cintron has the right stuff, lots of good flavors of sweetened green tea. i think mango is my favorite, and guava passionfruit and pomegranate are quality as well. it is simply easier to drink, really, and yet somehow they seem to last longer. and the aesthetic quality of a big ass can is not something to underestimate. the question is always which flavors the people's market will actually have on any given day; i've given up hope for more variety at the truck by school that has them; it is always pomegranate or unflavored there. satisfactory enough though, i've got a habit to feed now. i guess these guys make energy drinks as well, but that is one thing i've steered clear of. show me a beverage that tastes better with liquor in it and i'll show you a beverage not worth drinking on its own. or paying that much for if no booze is involved. two-dollar eight-ounce energy drink? you don't put vodka in it or nothin'? i would say i have to find out what a two dollar energy drink tastes like, but i already know the answer is melted gummy bears.
it has been a long but fruitful day in the case law mines; i have sorted through a bunch of shit and found that i have a few diamonds in the rough. i've been working on researching a memo for my writing class, and while we have to start all over again, i don't find the topic to be too onerous. i was working on bankruptcy discharge of student loans before, and that was just depressing. it was like a big long neon sign flashing to let everyone know that they had better get their shit together already because your life has to go to or already have been absolute shit in the financial sector to get rid of student loans, even if you're bad off enough to declare bankruptcy. but this... well, i wish i could link it, but y'all can't very well log into blackboard for my school, so i guess i'll let it take up an obscene amount of the post. i'll just post the interview for my client i guess. or not. i tried it; it was even longer than i expected and an uncooperative pain in the ass when i tried to format it more better. ah well, i guess i should be able to write my own summary of the whole affair, i suppose that is one of the skills i should supposedly be developing anyway. my client is a small business owner in california. he runs a hemp products business and has a history of political activity. recently, he has made a small contribution to the campaign of a gubernatorial candidate in california. the other week, he participated in an online chat forum about the race and eventually made his support of a particular candidate (who is openly gay and supports legalization of marijuana) clear and got into it with the forum moderator. the moderator published an article on the ISP's website (he works for them) the next day, claiming my client is one of the candidate's "gay elite" who he will pack government posts with if elected. this article calls my client's company a "pot business" and insinuates that he made illegal campaign contributions. my client has since received numerous harassing emails and phone calls and lost an investor for his business. well, my client is not gay, runs a legal business, and only ponied up a modest sum in a legal manner for support. so basically i need to decide whether or not my client has been libeled. this entails finding out what constitutes libel in california, the status of online publications in regard to defamation claims, whether my client counts as a "public figure", whether there was "privileged communication" involved, and how the fact that he was libeled as a screen name factors in, along with a host of other stuff. all in all, not so bad.
in other "well, maybe law school is not completely terrible" news, i went to a training session for legal observing the other evening. basically what legal observers do is go to protests and wear silly neon green hats and watch what goes down. the idea is that you are a 3rd party presence who can offer an less-biased account of any problem between the authorities and protesters. they didn't need me for a small time thing today, but i could have gone. i guess something pretty big is happening in town next weekend and i'll probably wind up working at that one. sounds like it will be pretty chill though, they have a permit and all that good stuff. the more organization and planning, the less likely shit is to hit the fan. sounds like philly is usually pretty laid-back on this sort of thing anyway, there is a whole branch of the cops who just keep shit together for events like this. the real shenanigans are down in d.c., and i'll likely get down there for something somewhere along the line. i dunno, sounds like a decent time to me, feel like i'm doing something worthwhile and get a chance to scope out some scenes. at the end of the day though, it just makes me feel like i should have gone into journalism, even though it has its own set of bullshit and problems to deal with. jobs are jobs, but at least in journalism i wouldn't have to cramp my style into narrowly defined acceptable discourse. they really take a lot of the fun out of writing in the legal profession from my impression; ironic considering writing is really at the core of what a lawyer mostly does. law review "notes" aren't so bad, but official memos seem like a pain in the ass to me, that is what i have to write for that assignment i was talking about.
today i also gave myself a little time to take it easy in the morning. went and hung out with some buddies and watched the chelsea and man u matches, good times. after that we got some lunch and went and ate in love park right by the fountain. all i could think about was tony hawk, well, that was all i was thinking about apart from my sandwich, which was pretty stellar. they had me when they offered something with cappicola and prosciutto. seriously delicious. sharp provolone was also featured, and i had never encountered such a cheese. i have no problem with provolone on this sort of a sandwich, but usually it doesn't assert itself so much; kind of bland for a cheese. but this was top notch, along with the remarkable assortment of sweet and hot peppers. ahh, glorious. enough so that it sent me to a nap i could not avoid. the way saturday should be.
the way last saturday should have been for me was going to havest fest at founder's. no one i've talked to back home even bothered going, and i woulda killed to be there. parties at founder's are enough excuse on their own, but this was a huge night for the backest of all forties. fortunately, the show is on archive and i managed to get it a couple days after finding out, sizeable and worthy download; the show clocks in almost exactly three hours and forty-five minutes over three sets. a sick show on its, and one of the best recordings i've heard from the less than ideal venue i've ever heard. crowded, but a nice change from cavernous spaces. anyway, those dudes are cookin' for this one, give it a go-round. more than anything, i am stunned by their maintenance of sobriety; founder's makes it tough for ya. and there is that notorious new year's tape from this past calender shift with the hippo double bill. but they held on until the latest this time, you know how things tend to extend past traditional closing time down there. only downfall of the show is no theme song (see last t.c.'s show; they're getting it so right) and no ad jingle about laying carpet despite dan's weird new vocal processing equipment (but it is sweet, enough reason to check it out on its own, allows him to harmonize with himself in like four parts almost barbershop style while just singing one). he really restrained himself with it though, for the best, very commendable keeping it from taking over at all. the whole show had a a more old-school organic feel to it. i guess i should just review the thing on the damn website where someone might actually be interested, but let me just say it brightened my day, and i'll support those guys to anyone anytime, they're so much more original and entertaining than i find just about any current band, especially in the so-called "jam" realm.
i don't really get much in the way of television, but i read about this show on the food network called "two dudes catering" or something, and it centers around two california, well, dudes, i guess, long-hairs at any rate, providing service to L.A.'s elite. i guess i'm just encouraged to see anything about long-hairs being employed in any fashion in this day and age, as i ponder my options. is it really that big of a deal? not really. can i imagine how i would look without long hair or any at all? sort of. and i don't really like it; just does not seem right. we shall see, however...