DEAR DAWG:
I noticed on page 16 of this publication that you reported on the case of Hiri v. Isaac Newton. How did Mr. Newton respond to this lawsuit? I’m assuming this is the world famous Isaac Newton we are talking about, since the suit also challenges his “earth center gravity” theory. I did not realize that you could sue a theory. Or a dead man! Wait till the creationists hear about this!! Mr. Darwin will have to defend numerous lawsuits. Can I sue the global warming theory? Can I sue the trickle-down economics theory? This business of suing a theory and a dead man has a lot of potential! CONTACTING MY LAWYER RIGHT NOW.
DEAR CONTACTING MY LAWYER:
Slow down there, bub. You are correct that the case was brought against Isaac Newton of mathematical fame. But you should note that the petitioner brought the case “pro se” meaning that there was no lawyer behind this effort. You should also note that the Commissioner tossed the case out. So, the theory of earth center gravity is safe for now. You can check this out for yourself. Jump up in the air. What happened next? DAWG
DEAR DAWG:
I seem to be the only one around here who has read the new law about wishing people Merry Christmas. Our district, Politically Correct ISD, had a “winter break” party. Odd, that they did this right before CHRISTMAS. And every one was walking around on egg shells trying so hard not to offend anyone. I do not wish to offend anyone either, but I have read the law, and it says that it is OK to wish people a “MERRY CHRISTMAS!” So I did, and I got a lot of ugly stares in return with wishes for “happy holidays.” Well as far as I’m concerned you can take your happy holidays and stuff it up your Yule log. Things got worse when we had the “winter break holiday gift exchange.” You know how this works, Dawg—everyone brings a gift and takes a number. When your number is called, you can either open a gift that has not yet been opened, or you can take a gift away from someone who has one. Thus people are encouraged to be greedy and selfish. This is supposed to put us in the holiday mood. Well—it was very noticeable that my gifts kept getting taken away. When they called my number, I opened an unopened package and found a beautiful scented candle. Mr. Barth, the math teacher, promptly took it away from me. Then I opened up a letter opener with a nicely carved wooden handle, made by one of our students. Ms. Applebaum, softball coach, gleefully stole it from me. So then, I picked out a small envelope that turned out to contain lottery tickets. I didn’t think anyone would take that from me, but Mr. Rodriguez, the bilingual director, took it right away, and last week cashed in a winner for $100. I finally picked out a nicely wrapped package that looked to be the size of a nice picture frame. I thought maybe my mean-spirited co-workers would let me keep that. It turned out to be a picture frame alright, containing a color 8×11 of our superintendent. No one took that away from me. I think this was all a concerted effort at retaliation, Dawg. I was exercising my rights under the new law to wish my co-workers a MERRY CHRISTMAS and they punished me for it. Do I sue all of them? Or just the ringleaders? HO HO HO.
DEAR HO HO HO:
You are correct that the Texas Legislature passed legislation designed to ease the minds of nervous educators about what sort of holiday greetings should be offered. The law says that it is OK to wish people “Merry Christmas.” But the law does not say that your co-workers will be pleased with you for doing so. We think your PC district is in a distinct minority in Texas, where “Merry Christmas” is more the norm than the exception. Nevertheless, the law does not dictate how people are to respond to your greeting. We are sorry to hear that your chosen gifts kept getting taken away from you, but that’s the nature of those kind of gift exchanges. When we put on our lawyer hat, we think you will have a hard time convincing a court that this kind of treatment amounts to an “adverse personnel action.” We suggest you drink a cup of eggnog, tinkle your sleigh bells, and get over it. And enjoy that picture of the superintendent!
DEAR DAWG:
I’m retiring from the superintendency in June and everyone around here is asking me what I plan to do after that. I do have a plan, but I thought I ought to get some legal advice before I tell anyone about it. My plan is to spend the first six months going to every person who owns a business in town and tell him or her how to run it. Do you see any problems with that? BEEN ON THE RECEIVING END TOO LONG.
DEAR BEEN ON:
No, no legal problems, but we hope you are not planning to run for mayor after that.
DEAR DAWG:
Can you explain the legal term “argle bargle”? DIDN’T FIND IT IN THE LAW DICTIONARY.
DEAR DIDN’T FIND IT:
Well, it may not be in Black’s Law Dictionary yet, but we think it will get there soon, now that the term has shown up in a Supreme Court opinion. Justice Scalia used this term in his dissent in U. S. v. Windsor, the case that struck down the Defense of Marriage Act. Argle bargle is a flexible term that, when used, makes the user feel smarter. Try working it into a sentence within the next 24 hours. Amaze your students with it, as in: “Jennifer, your paper on Newton’s Theory of Center Earth Gravity contains a lot of scientific argle bargle.”
