Jan. 25; "Descarte, I hardly know ye!''

Some of you will note that the pace of my blog entries have slowed considerably over the course of the past couple of weeks.

It’s not as though I have run out of things to write about; rather, I’ve run out of time to write about them.

I blame this primarily on a man who has been dead for 360 years and The First Amendment.

I have been pre-occupied with both. I have also been pre-occupied with trying to avoid being asked to audition for “The Biggest Loser Goes to Campus.’’

This must seem convoluted to the point of frustration, so if you will be patient, I will try to sort out all of this in a way you can understand.

But first, I’d like to make an observation about the differences I’ve noticed between Slim, circa the early 1980s and the Slim of the Present Day.

As I reflect on my first experiences as a college student, it is a marvel to me that I made decent grades. Oh, it’s not as though I was a Dean’s List student, but I did make mainly Bs and Cs in everything. What I find remarkable is that I managed to make those grades despite a near total indifference to learning anything. I hardly ever went to class, rarely remember doing anything that would even vaguely resemble serious study and spent all of my energy on chasing co-eds and drinking beer (more of the latter than the former, as it turned out).

I marvel because I find that the Slim of the Present Day is doing a lot of studying and not only attending every class, but taking copious notes and paying so much attention to the professor that my classmates are beginning to resent me. I have not chased a single co-ed, which would be a very silly thing.

And that leads me back to the dead guy, the First Amendment and Biggest Loser.

The dead guy I refer to is Rene Descartes (1596-1650), widely regarded (at least that’s what I am told) as the Father of Modern Philosophy. We have been studying Descartes’ six Meditations of First Philosophy for two weeks. Since we are only through the third of the six meditations, I suspect will be with Descartes quite a while.

It’s not exactly summer reading, either. It’s confusing, random, self-contradictory and vague. It’s even vaguer when our professor “explains it.’’

So I spent some extra time studying before the last class and slowly a glimmer of understanding began to emerge. And that is when our Professor said, “Now do you really think that’s what he means?’’ He said it in a tone that strongly suggested that the appropriate answer would be “Of course, he doesn’t mean that.’’

So, just when I thought I had a handle on Descartes, I find out that he doesn’t mean what he says at all. What he really means? I have no idea.

Studying Descartes is like trying to nail Jello to a wall.

Less frustrating, but equally time consuming, is this First Amendment business.

In lieu of a test, our Mass Media Law professor divided the class into groups of five and gave each of us a Supreme Court case to use in answering the following question:

“Should Wikileaks founder Julian Assange be extradited and charged for releasing classified documents?’’

So my group’s assignment was:

Based on Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, should Wikileaks founder Julian Assange be extradited and charged for releasing classified documents?

Now, I am sure many of you have often pondered that question.

But I’ll admit, I had never thought of such a thing.

Our group met to discuss what each of our roles would be. Each of us has to deliver a part of the presentation. The group can get up to 25 points and each individual can get 5 points. So a perfect score would be 30 points.

But I don’t feel good about this at all.

We broke down our assignments this way: Carolyn will make the introduction, Connor will discuss the point of law relating to the “necessary link to a terrorist organization.’’ Danielle will handle the point of law relating to “material support.’’ Deanna will do the summary.

My role is to discuss the “limitations applied to “bad tendency.’’

I have to tell you that I suggested all of these topics. The rest of the group just stared at me as if I were – oh, I don’t know - Rene Descartes. We agreed each of us would email a copy of our presentation to the other members of the group.

Here is what I put together for my part, followed by what Conner came up with. You will note a difference, I am certain.

Limitations Applied to Bad Tendency

In general, Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project supports the idea of “bad tendency’’ being grounds for prior restraint. But it is important to note the condition under which ‘Holder’ makes this distinction – i.e., its connection to a foreign terrorist group.

It should be noted, however, that even under ‘Holder,’ the “bad tendency’’ argument is limited.

This is noted in the opinion where Justice Roberts wrote, “In particular, we in no way suggest that a regulation of independent speech would pass constitutional muster, even if the Government were to show that such speech benefits foreign terrorist organization.’’

Court precedent certainly supports this idea.

In New York Times v. United States, the Supreme Court held that a “prior restraint” on publication of government documents was unconstitutional in the strikingly similar leak of Daniel Ellsberg’s famous “Pentagon Papers,” which shed light on the decision to go to war in Vietnam.

Since then, it has been taken for granted that the news media enjoys broad protection under the First Amendment, even to publish information that could pose a national security risk, and was obtained originally through legally questionable means.

Clearly, if ‘Holder’ revives the “bad tendency’’ standard, it does so on a limited scale.

Now here is Connor’s presentation:

The necessary link to a terrorist group

One of the most important elements of the Holder case is that the people wanting to donate money were directly linking themselves to a terrorist organization. Julian Assange, however, has not been proven to have any link to terrorist groups or groups affiliated with terrorism. Without this link, the justice system cannot extradite.

OK. Do you see the disparity here? I strongly suspect Connor had a frat party and was unable to devote more than, say, four minutes to the presentation. Slim circa 1980 would have no problem at all with this. It’s a matter of priorities and beer and co-eds are involved. You gotta respect that, right?

But Slim of the Present Day has grave concerns about the success of this “group effort.’’

I took the liberty of sending Connor a portion of the majority opinion in ‘Holder’ that applies to the “necessary link’’ aspect and strongly suggested that it would be wise to work it into the presentation because, well, it’s awfully hard drinking beer through a straw. (Hey, I’ve been to prison; don’t mess with me.)

Finally, the other reason I have been away from the blog is that I’ve been spending an hour at the gym every day.

There are two reasons. First, MSU has an awesome gym and it’s free for students as part of our student fees. This works well with my new Life Motto: “If it’s free, it me!’’

Second, I have discovered the hazard of the meal plan. I have unlimited access to the school cafeteria and since it is a school cafeteria located in the southern United States, the places simply oozes calories.

I have discovered that if, on a daily basis, you eat biscuits and gravy, waffles, hash browns, omelets and doughnuts for breakfast; fried chicken, pasta, 12 varieties of baked goods, fried foods of all sorts and endless arrays of desserts for lunch and dinner, you are likely to blow up like one of those Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade balloons.

So I am back to watching the breads and carbs and hitting the treadmill for a hour every single day.

If possible, I am an even more conspicuous presence at the gym than I am in class.

The sorority girls show up to the gym as if one of those vampires from the “Twilight’’ movies might show up suddenly looking for a date: Full make-up, color-coordinated work-out clothes, no noticeable body fat. They are Cute! Cute!, Cute!

Invariably, a Chi Omega will grab the treadmill to my left and a Tri-Delta will grab the one on my left. So, looking left to right, it is: Cute! Cute! Cute!; followed by Old! Gray! Sloppy!; followed again by Cute! Cute! Cute!

It ain’t easy being a college student. At least, it ain’t as easy as it used to be.

But, really, what is?