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 - Maintain FL 350

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 103
I agree with the above posters: minimize cost and consider a part time program, or consider starting in a part time program and switching to full time if the programs permits.

Normally I would say get it done in three years, but as an older student the part time program may be more feasible. I went to law school in my early thirties. I had a wife and kid, a job and a mortgage. I chose a large scholarship at a lower ranked school over a small scholarship at a big name school, and chose an evening program over a full time day program.

My fellow students were teachers, accountants, engineers and military officers. The general attitude was more laid back (although still VERY academically challenging). Several professors told me flat out that they much preferred teaching the evening classes.

In my last year I took a couple of day classes, and I felt a little like a fish out of water. The students were very nice and smart, but stuff like people texting and Facebooking during class, or whining about the amount of work just didn't happen in the evening classes. So, for someone in your situation it could be a better fit.

Also, are you taking an LSAT prep course?

Choosing the Right Law School / Re: UMass going anywhere?
« on: July 14, 2016, 08:12:02 AM »
As Loki stated, UCI is an anomoly. They had a huge budget to begin with (Donald Bren alone donated $20 million before they even opened their doors), and the full backing of the UC system. Hiring Chemerinsky was a huge coup for a start up law school, too.

UMass, IIRC, is the rebranded New England School of Law (can't remember exactly). The UMass system does have a good reputation, but UMD has not made the aggressive play for the rankings that Irvine has.

I would imagine that they will move up in the rankings, but over time. To which exact tier? Who knows. Remember, to move up you have to displace an existing school from it's position. So the question would be: What specifically is UMD doing that would put it ahead of other schools? Anything special? I'm not aware of anything particularly novel in their model.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 13, 2016, 09:42:56 AM »

I agree that the vast majority of Sanders supporters will vote for Clinton, if grudgingly.

My question is about they view Sanders himself after his endorsement of Clinton. This is anecdotal, but so many of the Sanders supporters I know were as opposed to Clinton as they were to Trump. I think Cinnamon falls into that category.

So, when the guy who they supported so strongly endorses someone who they oppose so strongly, does that change their opinion of Sanders? Do they think he's a sellout, or do they say "Hey, it's politics and the most important thing is defeating Trump!" (Which is essentially Sanders' line).

I'm curious because it seems like there would have to be some cognitive dissonance involved in order for it to NOT change their opinion of Sanders, at least somewhat.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 12, 2016, 08:47:12 AM »
Cinnamon, I have a serious question. This isn't intended as criticism, I'm just genuinely curious.

Since Sanders has officially endorsed Clinton today, and since you are so strongly opposed to Clinton, do you think that:

1) Sanders is a sellout?


2) Will you still vote for Sanders given that he has endorsed someone so antithetical to your beliefs?

I'm curious because I wonder how many Sanders supporters must be seriously disappointed by sanders himself.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 10, 2016, 09:40:16 AM »
You're not too bright. The line for the short bus is over there.

Well, nobody here can tell you what to write for a number of reasons. We don't know your situation, plus it's unethical.

Here's what I can say:

The key when dealing with the Bar is to be completely honest and transparent. They understand that you have had problems in the past, and they want to make sure that those problems are behind you. The also understand that people  with drug and alcohol problems are not always honest regarding the scale of the problem. They will be looking closely at what you tell them.

Be honest, don't make lame excuses, take responsibility.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 09, 2016, 10:34:16 AM »
couldn't read past the cliché national socialist comment, Bernie was the only person with socialist in his agenda

I'm not implying that he's a socialist, I'm implying that he's a racist.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 07, 2016, 08:38:33 AM »
The FBI with its condemning evidence of Clinton's pathetic lies, stupidity and total incompetence in a short shrift destroyed any chances of Hillary becoming president.

If she were running against anyone other than Trump I might agree with you. Incredibly, however, the GOP delivered her an early Christmas present decorated in swastika wrapping paper. Trump is the only person in America who is less liked than Clinton, and the election will essentially be a referendum on Trumpism.

Again, look at the objective statistical data. She has perhaps as many as 255 electoral votes. Trump has actually made Utah and Arizona competitive, which is amazing. His "campaign" is a twitter feed. He is close in a couple of swing states (OH and PA), but he would have to run the table and get all the swing states in order to have a shot.

If the Republicans had run Kasich, Rubio, or anyone else even halfway sane, she'd be toast. But they didn't, so she's not.

If there were any kooky conspiracy theory that I was willing to entertain, it would be that Clinton urged Trump to run and to be as crazy as possible. The whole thing is too bizarre.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 06, 2016, 12:14:55 PM »
To quote HRC's airplane-visiting hubby, "I feel your pain."

I was a registered Democrat for 20 years. At the time (mid 90s) I felt that my political views were more in line with the Democrats. Not totally in line, but more so than the Republicans.

Over the last 20 years the Republicans moved ever further towards over-delivering for the Chamber of Commerce/National Review types while simultaneously pandering to Evangelicals, NRA members, etc. It was a weird mixture of bedfellows that I never felt comfortable with.

The Democrats, OTOH, moved in some ways politically right (neoliberalism, interventionist foreign policy) while doing their own pandering to obnoxious politically correct "activists" (ie; rich kids from Dartmouth who like to lecture you about income inequality) and playing identity politics to the hilt.

I never liked this combination either.

So, I changed my registration to No Preference and grumpily concede that I am no longer represented by either party. I guess I'm a Kennedy Democrat, or maybe a Kemp Republican. Sad times.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 06, 2016, 09:44:17 AM »
Loki, by now we know that Cinnamon never lets facts get in the way of a good story.

Clinton is destroyed, just like Nixon: Except that every single major poll shows her ahead of Trump by 5-10. When she wins in November Cinnamon and her types will start talking about the inevitable impeachment because she failed to screen her phone calls or something.

As I've said before, I'm not a Clinton fan. In fact, the legitimate criticism from Comey was well deserved and illustrates why I'm not a Clinton fan. All politicians lie, but she does it clumsily.

What I don't get about the Cinnamons of the world, though, is the rabid nature of their anti-Clinton sentiments. When you get to the point where you think she's actually worse than Trump, or that the outcomes under either administration would be interchangeable, then you've left the world of reality and have camped in the world of personality-driven emotional outbursts.

I'm not happy about my choices in November, but if it is actually a close election I'm amazed, AMAZED, that a Sanders supporter would throw away a vote that could be used against Trump. Sanders himself has said that defeating Trump is the #1 priority. 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 103