Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - SemiMBA

Pages: [1] 2
If it saves a single life, then it is worth it.  They say that most people realize their mistake on the way down (at least those who survived - we really don't know what the others thought).  It should have been installed years ago along with the moveable barrier to prevent head-ons. 

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: Meg Whitman controversy
« on: October 02, 2010, 06:19:17 PM »
Whether or not you beleive Whitman or support her or Jerry Brown - it is obvious that this is yet another political ploy from a media lawyer.  They say one bad apple spoils the bunch - this is true for cops, teachers, and especially lawyers. 

I refer to them as Tea Baggers (which is a derogatory term that has another meaning all together -  I will let you look it up) for the same reason why the far right castigate liberals.  (calling them socialists, libbies, etc). 

Problem is - 99.99% of the baggers are Republicans.  Everyone knows this - and yet the baggers want to think they are something new -- against the system.   You cannot be against the system if you helped create it.  The very leaders of the movement - Palin, Armey, and others - are just as guilty if not more for the problems we have.  They fool no one with an IQ greater than 90. 

Everyone seems to hate liberals for whatever reason. OK - if you hate liberals
1. If you are a civil servant - give up you 3% /50 pensions.  Either die or give back your pension benefits after 5 years of retirement because after 5  years, the money has run out and the rest is welfare.
2. If you live 8 years into  your retirement, the same occurs with social security.
3. Don't accept farm subsidies.
4. Forget student loans
5. Send your kid to a full tuition private college.  All public colleges are on teh public lam.

We can go on and on.  However, both the right and the left are unwilling to give up thier benefits (whether earned or not) - always pointing at the benefits of others as the source of the problem. 

Politics and Law-Related News / Meg Whitman controversy
« on: September 30, 2010, 08:43:29 PM »
What is your take on the Meg Whitman controversy?  Do you think she took the right steps when she found out her maid was here illegally - or did she really know in 2003 that she was an illegal alien?

My take:  (opinion)
Meg used an agency to vet a potential hiree -- this agency guaranteed the status of the maid and she was paid very well for her services. (how many maids do you know that make $23 an hour - most technicians barely make that much)  When Meg found out about her status, she terminated her employment.  Why do I beleive this?  Because it is logical and beleivable.  Frankly the timing of these charges by none other than the queen of media lawyers, Gloria Allred, makes this suspect (IMHO Ms. Allred is the very reason why so many in the general populace don't like or respect the profession). 

I am not a big Meg supporter.  Up until  yesterday, I was leaning towards a vote for Brown (although I didn't vote for him in previous governor races because he was flakey - remember the Med Fly mess?)  Now, I am voting for Meg.  I have no doubt that Brown is involved in this.  Reading various message boards, a great number of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents are not fooled by this move.  I may even send a donation to the Meg Whitman campaign. 

Just my take - what are your takes?

The problem is that the Republican's are just as if not more responsible for the financial mess we are in.  They were in absolute control of the House, Senate, Executive, and Supreme's for 6 solid years and mucked things up quite a bit.  Now the Orange man and the man with four necks is trying to backpeddle and say it was all the Democrat's fault.  The Tea Baggers are almost all Republican's.  Anyone who would follow a guy who ripped off Medicare for over a billion dollars and a former House Majority Leader (Richard male private part Armey) is a Republican - not a Independent and not a Libertarian. 

I like Meg.  I like her because she actually took a company and made it profitable and created real jobs  -- (not the Wal-Mart kind).  I don't think she will win against Moonbeam Jerry because no one has been able to buy an election for Govenor in California (I am referring paying for your own campaign).  It has been tried numerous times.  (Arnold "donated" a large sum to his campaign, but most contributions came from others). 

Fiornia?  As I have told all of my friends (and a lunch is riding on it) - the only thing the Republican's had to do to lose an election against Boxer was to put her against ole Carlton.  Alas - see?  I predict a double digit loss.   ;D

I doubt Boxer will lose her seat against Fionia.  The reason - too many people remember what a poor job she did as not only the CEO of HP, but for Lucent.  Under her rein, she didn't make dollar one in real equity.  In order to trump  up the balance sheets at HP, she sold off prime stock and took a once great company and made it into a joke.  It took Mark Hurd to put Humptey back together again. 

Palin?  There are a lot of very good and intelligent Republican's.  There are even some fairly intelligent members of the Tea Party.  I don't discount them as contenders.  I do doubt Palin will be able to pull anything off as she has proven herself to be too much on the fringe.  Some people might think that Palin is to the right as Obama is to the left.  This may or may not be true.  I don't think most educated people would say that Obama is a unintelligent man.  I do think a great number of people think that of Palin.  If the Republican's want to lose in 2012, just put Palin on the ticket.  It will assure another 4 years of Obama.  (not that this is a bad thing). ;D

Online Law Schools / Concord School of Law
« on: September 23, 2010, 08:46:28 PM »
I came across the Concord School of Law which is DETC accredited, but apparently not CALBar accredited.  What does this mean?  You can take the bar exam and they have a higher passage rate than other Tier 3 and 4 schools like Lincoln and JFK -- any input?  Any value to this degree?

Choosing the Right Law School / Re: Tier 4 Law Schools
« on: September 17, 2010, 07:48:15 PM »
Can anyone provide a definition of a Tier 4 law school?  What is the difference between a Tier 2, 3, or 4?  (Tier 1 is easy - Stanford, Harvard, Yale, etc)

Choosing the Right Law School / Re: Deciding which route to take
« on: September 17, 2010, 07:46:36 PM »
Thanks for the input.   Someone mentioned patent law (because I am an engineer).  Isn't this just as  hard to do as any other type of law?  I really want to get away from the corporate grind.  (including being a corporate puppet - I had to deal with a lowlife corporate attorney at my current place of employment - most useless individual I have ever spoken to). 

I am not looking at this to make a lot of money.  As long as I can make 50-60K a year I can make ends meet.  I am going to audit a class at Lincoln.  Can you do the same at GGU or JFK?  There is another law school in Marin County (I forgot the name). 

As far as useless degrees go - if I had to do it all over, I would have forgotten the MBA.  I did prove once and for all that the MBA is not that big of a deal anymore (unless of course it is from Harvard,  Yale, or Stanford)


Pages: [1] 2