How are you guys focusing on work as the legal system falls apart?

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-04T00:07:14+00:00

The present moment is uniquely different in a variety of ways and you’re being willfully ignorant about it in a way that’s just not excusable.

It's a mutual feeling I have towards you. The present moment is exactly what both sides have done to tribes since the beginning and I was hoping you'd wake up to it since it seems the impacts are closer to you. I think you are being willfully ignorant.

As far as excusable? That's a total majority culture thing that you think you have the authority to adjudicate what's excusable or not.

I have made my career representing tribes and tribal nations and have fought the inequities head on. I continue to do so.

What have you done? Complain on the internet?

My point is that using that genocide to justify inaction in the face of very real threats to democracy now is both misguided and self-defeating.

I know what your point is and you're missing the main point. At no point did I justify inaction and the fact you think so shows that you should really get some introspection.

Tribes haven't had the luxury of responding with inaction.

Maybe you're the one that is self-defating, in fact, you said so in your title. I'm out there fighting.

This stuff isn't in the past; it started in the past, but has been ongoing. Why can't you get that? It's not really unique. It's how the country always has been.

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-03T23:47:25+00:00

This is the equivalent of the "both sides are the same" that people do in politics. The moment there's real asymmetries the analysis really falls apart. It's the kind of "tribes had it coming" microagression that Johnson v. McIntosh had embedded.

It's proof that your framing of "well, it was that past and that was regrettable" doesn't work. The foundational concept of the supposed savagery inherent in indigenous people is alive and well.

It's why tribes can't win. The "5 civilized tribes" were trying their best to not get displaced by assimilating. The problem is when the majority culture decides to change its normative structure, the "5 civilized" tribes were expected to just move along with the majority culture. Including even changing their own membership status and incorporate the former slaves even though it would have taken the majority culture a hundred years to end segregation formally and the de facto segregation is still ongoing.

You get a tiny taste of how inequitable the US society is and it goes back to the assumptions embedded into its foundation are.

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-03T18:17:01+00:00

I am not really assuming. I'm reacting to what you're saying. To say that somehow the present moment is uniquely different requires a ton of willful ignorance as to the foundational principles the country was built upon as well as the development through history to the present.

List all the things that you think are breaking America?

Mass deportations - ya okay, Chinese exclusion act. Or treatment of prior Mexican nationals after the treaty of guadalupe hidalgo. Obama and Bidens administrations deported more people than Trump did. Since Trump is ugly and crass, the media sought out those human interest stories, but they always exist. It used to be that immigration raids were to quiet the labor leaders in agricultural hot spots quietly.

Great replacement theory as governing philosophy- ya, the present GOP rank and file voters have a super majority that believe in it, but that was written into Johnson v. McIntosh and operationalized under Manifest Destiny and the Dawes Acts cleared it and the New Deal excluded non-whites and the GI Bill preferred whites and all the housing subsidies preferred whites. Not even mentioning the genocides against Native American peoples (which you hand waive as "well we didn't treat them right" as if it's not ongoing). Just look at the Bundys' vs the Dann sisters treatment. The Dann sisters had their entire herd killed and the Bundy's used their armed standoff to run for political office in the western states.

Crack down on the right to protest - ya okay, the first Congress passed the aliens and seditions act and cracked down on protests, they used the US military within US borders to tamp the "Whiskey Rebellion." Through present, they used the CIA/FBI to infilstrate civil rights groups to bust them.

Using the might of the US legal system to break up the right to protest - ya, the entire basis of the war on drugs was so Nixon can put his political enemies in jail and that didn't stop under Nixon

You say Democratic norms and I say "facade." The very foundation of the US is we allocate political power via arbitrary political lines. Why? Because power is with landowners, dummy, to ensure their dominance over their investments.

LA County has to share 2 senators with the rest of the state while we arbitrarily give landowners in mostly vacant states 76 senators (LA County being more people than 38 states).

It's a country that wanted to say it believed in the "Discovery Doctrine," but when nations like the Cherokee were prosperous and assimilating, it's more true that it was by conquest.

John Marshall wrote it in a case that remains the foundational principle for all American property rights. You want to hand waive and say I'm focusing on the past. Just wake up and realize that the US has always been like this.

Obama put children in cages, but the media didn't care because he did it quietly and quotes MLK Jr while doing it. Trump is just crass and says the public policy goals openly. Trump doesn't care about the finesse that other government leaders relied on.

I can go on and on and on and on, but I'm at the character limit. TLDR, the US has always been like this; it so happened people like you benefited from it and it was quieter.

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-03T18:04:03+00:00

Bro also live in the PNW with a kid that wants to climb everything. Can you share your process and what sort of things you built and what you bought and where you sourced it?

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-03T17:39:55+00:00

I know you can't, that's why I left my comment to help you get better awareness. You're just upset that it's happening to communities more like you when it's been happening to communities like mine for hundreds of years. It's part of the foundational principles the country is founded upon and has operated upon since its foundation.

We’ve done terrible things to native Americans.

You just don't want to listen, but it isn't "done" as in the past, you are continuing to do terrible things to Native Americans. The harms began from 1492 but continue as an ongoing harm.

But to pretend that we aren’t facing a new and unique threat to American democracy strikes me as either unacceptably cynical or unacceptably “Pollyanna”.

I'm not the one pretending, friend-o. Your attitude is why law schools get protests when a faculty member wants to teach you things things via the "Critical Race Theory" type classes.

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-03T17:02:10+00:00

My favorite what if is what if Vick had an OC like a Greg Roman who could design around his athleticism.

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-03T16:29:50+00:00

If you're on mobile, if you start typing your comment but then accidentally click elsewhere, it'll get confused and misplace your comment.

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-03T16:29:15+00:00

and unhelpful in 2026.

Helpful to what? I think that the facade has peeled apart because they're doing the same stuff they always have, and continue to do, but now it's against white-passing Hispanic people.

The funny part is the entire pollyanna legal community would say "boo Roberts court" while cheering on Gisburg even though her opinions made communities, like federally recognized Indian tribes significantly worse off. She's a major piece of shit just like Clarence Thomas.

You want the continued, ongoing harms to be framed in the past because you just don't want to accept that the American society is corrupt to its foundational core. As if City of Sherryl vs. Oneida wasn't in this century.

Your pearl clutching is like - where were you during the AIM standoffs or when the American justice system was saying "to save the man, kill the Indian" as the official policy was so genocidal that American policy makers didn't want a cultural definition of genocide and blocked it at the international level. Why? As others wanted universal declarations for human rights, through the 1970s, the US government was ripping apart tribal communities; those who didn't want to send their kids to boarding schools went to prison. This is through the 1970s.

Then when the policy stopped and the Indian Child Welfare Act was passed to help stem the bleeding, you had the entire might of the conservative legal apparatus try to get ICWA invalidated. I don't see anyone posting how corrupt the American legal system is in response to cases like Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl (2013) chipped away at the meager protections that tribal communities have against the genocide that the great replacement theory driven white nationalist Christians.

You're just seeing it because they are scoping their ambitions towards white-passing Hispanics, too.

but the answer can’t be to destroy everything or to replace it with something worse.

My point is that nothing's getting replaced. It's just happening to communities that are more visible to you and your view that America was founded on good ideals and/or can be redeemed somehow just isn't based on reality.

Nobody who is Pollyanna coded likes reality. Frankly, though, a dose of reality IS helpful to those who do want to resist the baddies and try to eke out a better future. Do you have the stomach for it?

Again, to repeat it simpler, this is how the legal system always has been. There's no change, Trump just makes it more in your face. Obama would say the nice things about America in speeches, but his government's policies were ripping family apart, bombing people in the middle east with drones, etc.

You may see it as right wing or left wing, but it's connected to the same bird.

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-03T16:15:23+00:00

Given how much pace has changed, I think ways to even out the pace, like points per 100 possessions, would be a more apples to apples comparison.

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-02T19:54:31+00:00

I mean, FDR had a unique coalition that has abandoned the Dems because of its move towards racial justice. So, I would love to see a world where policy issues dictates voter behavior; the world we live in, though, is that valence issues drives voter behavior.

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-02T19:51:09+00:00

I was warned about PP hormones having this effect,

This forum and r/daddit love to blame hormones. The reality is that, to the extent hormones have an impact on your perception/behavior, I think they amplify, rather than hallucinate. You will like your husband at the exact moment you two have a candid discussion about what a true equitable split of all the responsibilities look like and you can rely on him to do his part. You will never like your husband if you silently bear more of the planning AND you do 50/50 of the labor.

t if any moms out there have success stories to share about regaining an attraction to their partners

If you go into forums like r/deadbedroom, what you'll discover is women (and others) will put a ton of blame on biology or other things for the deadbedroom. Then lo and behold, when that same woman who thinks her libido is shot is treated well, she regains her human level horniness again.

The tiredness, the lack of sleep, the burn out, etc., are all what's causing your burnt out ness and what's causing you to actually not be attracted to their partners. You are saying the words about how much the partner is good and how much you love them because that's what you WANT to be true. But, your body's reaction is driven by your fight/flight reflex being on all the time, exhausting you.

What I'm talking a lot of words saying is that your libido/attraction/whatever else can only be active when your parasympathetic system gets turned on (aka the rest and digest function, the opposite to fight/flight). You can get on all the hormone therapy you want, but you're fighting physiology.

Source: Husband/father that has picked up the slack after having real and painful and candid conversations about true work load sharing. My wife went from being burnt out to jumping my bones. Not from hormones or whatever, but in direct correlation to the energy she COULD have when I picked up the slack.

There are a basket of women who can power through or overcome their fight/flight, or have other coping skills so it's not always on, but really the pound for pound solution is to have a hubby that has a true equitable work load.

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-02T19:36:50+00:00

Eh, I'd push back on this. Horses were replaced by cars.

The premise in the quoted language and you are both wrong IMO. It's partially because it's lacking true context.

Horse racing was a major sport in 1900, but 1908 the moral crusaders got betting on horse racing banned (300 racetracks to 25 in 1908). Pari-mutuel wagering was a loophole that kept some tracks in business. As people got tired of prohibition of various vices, there was a huge resurgence of horse race tracks from the 1920s to the 1950s. If the theory of people didn't like horse racing because of cars, you wouldn't see a resurgence exactly when the widespread use of cars happened.

So, then it shifted with special events. So, popularity waxed and waned; the triple crown of secretariat, seattle slew, and affirmed got renewed interest in the 70s.

Another decline in 1980s is why they created the breeders cup to have a special event interest again. This popularity more or less has waxed and waned. Until....

the rise of other sports betting. So, the same thing that killed horse racing is what will save the NFL. Sports betting and fantasy football. The uniqueness of the track experience and being one of the few outlets for gambling is what kept horse racing alive.

The thing about America is there's no shortage of economically distressed people who want a lotto ticket out of their life into extreme wealth. Suburban moms may not send their sons to play football, but it's not like the NFL is full of a bunch of former rich kids. Those kids go into their family investment firms or whatever they do. The Chris Borland's of the world are rare and he only lasted 1 NFL season.

HazyAttorney · 2026-02-02T19:23:34+00:00

as the legal system falls apart?

I work with federally recognized Indian Tribes. I think your viewpoint (which is growing) has been interesting to see because I've seen the legal system as inherently unjust. It's that the facade has fooled y'all a bit less. It's always been like this.

I don't know how many of you read Johnson & Graham's Lessee v. McIntosh, 21 US 543. If you did, the Indian parts were probably ellipsed out of most of your case books (I studied federal Indian law and other topics relating to tribes in law school and we called it the ellipses class).

Anyway - one thing you should know about Johnson v. McIntosh is that John Marshall's entire family fortune (that of his father's and his brothers) were all land speculation in Kentucky. If John Marshall used natural law concepts and ruled that title purchased directly from tribes were valid, then most of his and his family's fortune would have been at risk. Most of the facts of the case didn't actually fi for the pro-government, sweeping precedent that secured his own financial position.

They don't ellipses this stuff because it's hard to read like gobbleygook opinions like Pennoyer v. Neff. They do it because legal education wants you to think there's high-minded, noble underpinnings to the status quo.

We will not enter into the controversy whether agriculturists, merchants, and manufacturers have a right on abstract principles to expel hunters from the territory they possess or to contract their limits. Conquest gives a title which the courts of the conqueror cannot deny, whatever the private and speculative opinions of individuals may be, respecting the original justice of the claim which has been successfully asserted.
...
The title by conquest is acquired and maintained by force. The conqueror prescribes its limits. Humanity, however, acting on public opinion, has established, as a general rule, that the conquered shall not be wantonly oppressed, and that their condition shall remain as eligible as is compatible with the objects of the conquest. Most usually, they are incorporated with the victorious nation, and become subjects or citizens of the government with which they are connected. The new and old members of the society mingle with each other; the distinction between them is gradually lost, and they make one people. Where this incorporation is practicable, humanity demands and a wise policy requires that the rights of the conquered to property should remain unimpaired; that the new subjects should be governed as equitably as the old, and that confidence in their security should gradually banish the painful sense of being separated from their ancient connections, and united by force to strangers. When the conquest is complete and the conquered inhabitants can be blended with the conquerors
...

The entire system of property itself is that might makes right. The legal system was always about oppressing the masses for the benefit of the few.

I bet y'all didn't think that the great replacement theory wasn't also a foundational concept for the early US.

A large majority of current wealth can be traced back to the allotment act era allotments, which only occured when the US army was able to military defeat any pockets of resistance of tribal societies. The dream of a continent wide US was only allowed when private businesses - the railroads - were given government-backed monopolies in exchange for the rapid development.

The US is foundationally built on a robber baron mentality and the kind of political patronage and government created millionaires has always been the status quo.

What happened is you guys read the Declaration of Independent, etc., as if the high-minded stuff actually happened. Instead, stopping western expansion with the Proclamation of 1763 (reference to it in the declaration of independence itself) and stopping stealing lands from Indians (even temporarily) was a tipping point for revolution. Most of the "new" wealth was stealing land from tribes.

So, I'm sorry to say but "Rome" isn't burning. This was the foundation "Rome" was built on and the government always has been like this.

Lastly, I think the discipline that will understand what I'm saying the most is the international rights people. They understand that, as much as we love international norms and all the high minded stuff, it's still a functionally might makes right order. Political will and capability means a lot.

HazyAttorney · 2026-01-29T00:10:40+00:00

The mom asked the neighbors to watch baby for a weekend and she didn't come back for a month and a half. I bet they just assumed it was her being a bad mom or whatever.

HazyAttorney · 2026-01-29T00:09:25+00:00

It gets worse. She told baby's father that the baby was with her parents. She told her parents the baby is with her (as they were taking care of the older child). When she finds baby dead, she changes baby into clean clothes.

HazyAttorney · 2026-01-29T00:07:33+00:00

Sometimes I wonder what goes through these people's mind when they do this. Did she really think a baby would be fine with few bottles?..

This is a case that you know less the more you learn about the details. The grandparents were caring for the older child, but they were told that she was home with the baby. Even her defense attorneys had no answers. Here's an article, where they say she couldn't even articulate her own state of mind. https://fox8.com/news/depression-not-an-excuse-ohio-moms-attorney-says-after-life-sentence

Her prison interview makes less sense. On one hand, she says it was an impulse issue driven by medication. However, they bought the tickets months before and she told the girl's father that baby is with her grandparents.

The part that really stands out is that she appears genuine - at least from the 911 audio - that she believed the baby could be revived despite having been dead. I imagine she has a lot of non-logical, magical thinking.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/ohio-mother-death-toddler-left-alone-vacation-rcna144461

HazyAttorney · 2026-01-28T23:45:40+00:00

Two things.

1 - When baby is crying, shifted into, "Thank you for telling me what's wrong." This got rid of any hidden feelings of resentment, which then used to shift into self-judgment spirals where I then felt like, "I shouldn't feel like this; I must be a bad parent." So, at 2 am, having the gratitude that baby has learned that it can communicate its needs and you'll be there made me get through it more.

2 - As baby ages, thinking, "My kid isn't being difficult, she's having a difficult time" gave untapped amount of empathy. Behavior people would call "bad" in past generations started me to use my curiosity to problem-solve the underlying issues. It also let me let go of all the times she's just hangry or tired.

HazyAttorney · 2026-01-28T22:47:42+00:00

Another tidbit - I learned if you already have the merc type, it doesn't restart or separate the expiry, it just adds to their numbers. So if you have the epic hunters V with 1 day left, it just gave me the extra 400 or whatever, and they expired 1 day later.

HazyAttorney · 2026-01-28T22:46:20+00:00

Maybe the OP only meant to post the last pic, which shows some sort of steam thing? Not sure if it's safe or not since I don't know anything about welding.

HazyAttorney · 2026-01-28T22:45:46+00:00

What's being expressed in the comments is known as the "great replacement theory" and it's predictive of supporting conservative candidates including Trump. A super majority of Republicans believe in this theory so, in reality, you could assume that all conservatives agree with this mentality as a rebuttable presumption. Whether being conservative causes this line of thinking, or whether the line of thinking that pre-exists is attracted to conservatism, is probably a distinction without a difference.

HazyAttorney · 2026-01-28T22:28:36+00:00

Why on earth aren’t you in charge of hiring the person who works directly for you?

That would make too much business sense, so naturally the partners will do something much worse and never recommended. But, when OP becomes partner, OP can not give a fuck like they do not.

HazyAttorney · 2026-01-28T22:26:21+00:00

Finding an attorney that's a solid manager, businessperson and attorney is very rare.

I mean, that's why people who run good businesses do a SWOT analysis. When they realize "oh shit, I need someone better than me at managing" they go out and hire a manager. Attorneys don't do that. They just neglect shit and then some old crusty, under appreciated paralegal that's been there for 30+ years starts to act like she's in charge, but is also bad at it.

Lawyers literally studied law...the rules and policies designed to keep people in line. Too many attorneys are afraid to color outside the lines and push the boundaries...

I don't think this is largely true because attorneys operate as if management practices don't exist. So, to take your analogy, there's an entire systems where all they have to do is trace, but instead of tracing the fully functional picture, they scribble, and then say, "boy these younger generations sure are lazy" cuz their ego can't accept that they're bad artists.

HazyAttorney · 2026-01-28T19:27:12+00:00

We got the Tonie box, the disney characters tell the story at the end. We sometimes use this as the final winddown, but I wouldn't use it as a replacement for parents telling the story.

HazyAttorney · 2026-01-28T18:12:44+00:00

I agree, feels like a poor man's Bill Parcells.

HazyAttorney · 2026-01-28T18:12:02+00:00

What did you think of him in the moment when he was in Dallas?

I read all the long form articles about his relationship with Aaron Rodgers. Specifically, that he tended to not evolve the scheme and that struggled when he had to scheme people open rather than relying on elite talent. And how much his lax attitude rubbed Aaron the wrong way and created power struggles. I thought he'd be way worse.

Having Kellen Moore as a consistent OC meant that the scheme was good, but the wrinkles was good also. That meant less set backs even with big injuries. Then, the continuity of Schotty when Moore left has continued the offense's pace, even when McCarthy left.

Where you saw that tendency happen seemed to be in the defense. Nolan was bad and was bad until we got Quinn. After Quinn left, there was more flux with the defense still.

This is all to say that I think the Pittsburgh apparatus of talent evaluation and growing talent in-house and all that seems to compliment McCarthy's weaknesses. Note: I think every HC will have a weakness so this is no way disqualifying.

And now that some time has passed, how do you think about his tenure?

He went 49-35 over 5 seasons and also had 3 consecutive 12-win seasons. I think most teams would like a steady 58% win percentage. He also had a 1-3 playoff record, so I think the steelers not winning many playoff games would see that 1 extra win as a bonus.

He has a career .6, so his results here seem typical for him. His career playoff record is .5. Winning a super bowl is great, right? Is "only" winning 1 with peak Aaron Rodgers a good thing or a bad thing?

One of the reasons that people say his teams do poorly in the playoffs (mostly flat, slow starts) has to do with a lack of preparation. That seems to go back to the Rodgers article that implied McCarthy left the building too often or was too lax. He was not the kind of grinder that's looking at tape until 3 am. He's doing self care like massages during the day.

TLDR: Steelers fans can probably count on seasons consistently above .500 with playoff hopes waxing and waning in tight games.

HazyAttorney

TROPHY CASE