I would wager, however, that now that the idea is out there we will hear it in spades from lunatics like Netanyahu - in other words: pushing for something that can never be as a way of paying lip service to a peace that they have no desire to see occur.

More importantly - here's a solution: no one campaigns on company time - not the union and not the company - everyone campaigns after hours offsite - its called a level playing field - if the union can't call a meeting at 11 in the morning then neither can the company!

last but not least, exactly how is this undemocratic - a majority signs the card and you are a union - a majority votes in an election and you have a union. Seems that its still a majority to form a union either way and if you aren't interested in a union and you are in the minority after the card check or a secret ballot you still get a union.

That said, I've actually written several Appellate Briefs - this schedule isn't actually all pretty ahort. Drafting a cogent appellate brief for an regular old run of the mill civil case ordinarily takes me something like a week or two - and I don't mean a week or two around my normal schedule - its a week or two with no one bothering me, someone else taking my calls and making my court appearances. Ordinarily, a briefing schedule is 30 to 45 days and frequently longer in complicated cases.

This is a very complicated case in light of the many many days of testimony, the voluminous documents in evidence, the number of witnesses etc. Thus in this instance - the schedule is actualy pretty fast, even in light of the fact each party has a team of really high level legal talent and can put in almost an unlimited number of hours on drafting the brief. The more people involved however the harder it can be to keep the arguments consistent, same language etc. Ultimately one or two members of the team will be responsible for making sure the brief is consistent throughout, cogent etc.

In the end, no matter how much I want Al Franken to be Senator Franken - I don't think the briefing schedule is all that out of whack with reality and is, probably, much faster that would ordinarily happen on such a complex matter.

I live in Connecticut - three years ago I watched two really good, dynamic, big (for CT) city mayors who would have made great governors tell me that primaries are good - that they energize people - that they get people involved early - that they motivate people - etc. - all sorts of things about them that were good.

Guess what? They had a primary - spent about $ 5,000,000.00 between the two of them - went right down to the wire - 1.5% between the winner and loser on primary night.

The winner of course had no money for the general election and hadn't talked to anyone not a Democrat in months because of the primary. General election 2006:
(in a state where Dems now have veto proof majorities in both houses of the legislature, and became veto proof in the state house that year, now control all five Congressional seats and that year had Chris Murphy knock off a 24 year incumbent for the 5th Congressional district)

said primary winner went out and had Jodi Rell, a do nothing no vision train wreck if there has ever been one, beat him like a rented mule 65% to 35%.

Sure primaries are a great thing - unless of course you are concerned with winning an election.

primaries aren't always bad and they aren't always good - pick your battles wisely.

First they don't indicate that she made notes, they don't turn them over and then they coach her during a recess. She hems and haws over the existence of the notes, won't id the computer file until just about forced to. It all makes it appear intentional and no judge will ever let you get away with intentional nonsense like that.

Last but not least: yes I agree they've been fairly relaxed with what they have let Coleman get away with - that said, and I think the preliminary rulings indicate where this is going, if they think they are going to rule for Franken then they are better off letting Coleman get in whatever he wants now, give him leeway and then there are few complaints that can be made later when he loses.

Read the court's opinion. If you are Franken or a supporter you should be very happy with the opinion. You win parts of it and the parts that you didn't win had little to do with whether you will win. Instead it had more to do with the fact that the "facts" actually before the court at the time it considered the motion were not sufficiently settled to permit you to prevail on what is ordinarily a difficult motion to win on. That said win or lose, the tenor of the motion (as set forth in the main comment) is all sorts of in Franken's favor.

Frankly, on the other hand if you are Coleman there is nothing in the opinion that helps you at all. In fact, this opinion is kind of like really early writing on the wall that Coleman's case is about to go down in flames.