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 - FalconJimmy
Pages: 1 ... 57 58 59 60 61  63 64 65 66 67 ... 69
« on: March 31, 2011, 09:12:44 PM »
Well I got the rejection letter today.
I am not going to law school. Sad. I really wanted to, at 36 I don't want to wait a year just to be rejected again. I cant do anything about my 2.5 GPA it was 14 years ago.
Sorry, Bro (sis?) I feel your pain. Are you able to relocate? You could probably get in a school like Cooley. If you got good enough grades, you could transfer to a different school after a year. (Not saying you could transfer to any particular school, but if you got good grades, you could transfer somewhere, for sure.)
Anyway, best of luck whatever you chose to do.
« on: March 31, 2011, 05:38:12 PM »
Indeed it is. Apparently I hang out on the internets too much.
Oh, sorry. My bad for not understanding the joke.
« on: March 31, 2011, 05:24:30 PM »
Then you need to do better research.
Hmmm... so, that's what a smart and unique rejoinder looks like. Who knew.
As far as my "research", its been pretty solidly documented that affirmative action has generally been used, in this century, to increase the presence of MALE college students, not female.
Where they're banned, male enrollment drops.http://diverseeducation.com/article/10672/
Have a nice life.
« on: March 31, 2011, 05:10:51 PM »
Unless you talking about the USMC, of course, in which case "Marine Core Soldier" is the correct appellation.
I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a joke that I'm not understanding, but the "correct appellation" would simply be "marine". The Marine Corps is spelled "corps" not "core". Marines prefer not to be referred to as "soldiers", since that is typically used to describe a person in the Army. They prefer to be called "marines". Although the term "soldier" is correct in a very generic sense, one could also argue that Air Force or Navy pilots are also "soldiers", but are soldiers who take the field with very advanced weaponry that allows them to fly.
« on: March 31, 2011, 03:22:47 PM »
I got nailed on that section. I got a good enough score to get into the school I want, but if I had studied and prepared, I would probably have had a shot at a full-ride.
There are a few books on how to prepare on Amazon, and if I were doing it over again, I'd do one of those. I think the key is diagramming and I had no clue how to diagram. I ended up with a 159 LSAT, but if I had prepared for logic games, I bet I'd have been in the 170+ range.
« on: March 31, 2011, 03:13:16 PM »
and believe me, it would be a foolhardy endeavor to ask for advice from people who know more than me and then ignore it. haha
I guess I feel I should clarify that I do not know more than you. I'm a law school applicant just like you are. I'm just expressing a viewpoint and it's far from authoritative or definitive. It's absolutely possible that I know no more than you do or that I know less.
You were accepted to the AF academy and graduated from Rice. You have your act together to a far greater degree than I ever did when I was your age. I considered applying to Rice, and instead took a scholarship to a different school because the idea of going to a school where my SAT was average was pretty darned intimidating to me.
« on: March 31, 2011, 02:50:23 PM »
I've always felt that military justice is to justice what military music is to music.
I don't mean to sound condemnatory when I say this, but it sounds like the AF's style produced justice (you apparently did use drugs and that is exactly what they threw you out for), but it was not done in a manner that most would consider legal.
Shame, I wish this hadn't happened to you. I really do. I think our drug laws related to marijuana are idiotic and I suspect they'll come down in a heap like the anti-gay laws have. The only trouble is that various groups (for profit prisons, prison guard unions) have a vested interest in the criminalization of this relatively harmless and victimless "crime" and will do all they can to keep it illegal.
Anyway, yeah, I would not mention this on your application. It is one thing to admit that you're working hard for drug-law liberalization. Also, some folks may infer that you are a minor law-breaker and infer that you smoke pot. Most folks wouldn't possibly care.
However, the fact that you were a member of the military would tend to make people view this differently. It's one thing if my neighbor smokes pot. It's another if he's a nuclear reactor operator who is also hiding his crime by going to GNC to buy stuff to beat the drug test.
Smoking pot is likely to be viewed as a minor, misdemeanor type transgression. However, accepting a position in society where you affirmed that you would not do it, then using various means to cheat the test? Could be viewed differently.
Just my two cents. I can't say what an admissions board would say, but that's my views on the subject.
As for why you transferred to Rice, I wouldn't even bother explaining it. Lots of people decide that the military just isn't for them. I don't think I'd mention anything about it. Especially since doing so could open up the topic of being thrown out of one school for violating the school's honor code.
Again, just my two cents. Take them for what they are: free advice given over the internet and probably worth every penny of what it costs.
« on: March 31, 2011, 02:15:03 PM »
. Black Americans are the only group of Americans who werenít immigrants. We helped build a country that wouldnít allow us to fully participate in.
Test arenít biased against minorities, they are biased against people who werenít properly educated. This is connected to discrimination because discrimination affects where people live,work and where their children will be educated and the type of teachers that school attracts. Schools had to be created so black people with aspirations of being an attorney could pursue their dream.
I agree with this, but wouldn't the answer then be to grant additional priviledges to people from underpriviledged backgrounds, regardless of race?
Even if you havenít been discriminated against as a minority, I bet your giving the benefit of the doubt.
Do you question the ability of white women, people from rural areas, children of alumni etc..or other beneficiaries of preferential programs. If so, why didnít you originally address them in your post?
I'm not sure that women really benefit very much from affirmative action, except for certain initiatives to include greater numbers of women in the sciences. In many academic disciplines, white women are over-represented.
Children of Alums? I'd say that's an evil that universities take part in out of practical concerns. If that's your counter argument, then what you're really saying is that affirmative action is evil, but that's okay because other things are evil, too.
I don't know what your intent is but I think it is insulting to the point of being offensive to compare an immigrant expierence to a black American's.
To you, perhaps. Others might find it insulting to the point of being offensive that some folks would chose to shut down discussion of this possibility.
« on: March 31, 2011, 01:37:59 PM »
Sorry for screaming, but I am in a pit of despair, surrounded by albinos.
Well, you survived the ROUSes, which means you're strong. You survived the fire-swamp.
I'd say no news is not necessarily good, but not necessarily bad. Perhaps you're an applicant on the bubble. My impression is that the admissions committees who know is basically going to be an automatic admit and who is going to be an automatic deny. If you haven't been told "no", yet, you're still in the running.
I know it's easier said than done, but try to think about something else. Best of luck to you.
« on: March 31, 2011, 08:56:29 AM »
Good call. I forgot that Wayne's classes are so large. So, yeah, 3-5 applicants sounds good, but that's going to end up being the top 1.5% - 2%. I see what you mean: the folks likely to do that well probably didn't appear out of thin air and probably had a great academic background, anyway. So, U of M doesn't gamble much by admitting them.
The implications are pretty profound, though. Not only do they get one more U of M grad, who is likely to be very successful, AND who pays sticker price for two years, but they deprive other schools of their top grads. So, that guy who would have had a really good law career as a Wayne State grad will now go on to have a really good law career as a U of M grad. This makes U of M's alumni network stronger and Wayne State's alumni network weaker.
Really, the name of the game is that U of M wants graduates who inspire people to think of "top law school". It makes it all the harder for Wayne State to get people to think "top law school" if so many of the people who would have made the best alums end up going to a different school.
Pages: 1 ... 57 58 59 60 61  63 64 65 66 67 ... 69