« on: November 16, 2004, 09:02:18 AM »
"How to get into the top law schools" has an in-depth LOR example from an employer.
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.
For sure. This is how to become the best law school in the US by the Cooley ranking standards:
1. Cut out all unneeded junk, such as professors who graduated from non-T.T.T.s. This will free up resources to buy chairs and other critical components.
2. Admit EVERYONE. Literally EVERYONE. This way you become "big," which of course is very important to rankings. It is much better to have 900 students with 2.0's and 140's than 250 students with 3.7's and 165's. Bigger is better- your JD diploma will now say "Super Sized," right above "Unemployable."
3. Buy lots of chairs for the library. Send Coolies out to garage sales all over the country, pillage the Home Depot, whatever. JUST GET THOSE GODDAMNED CHAIRS IN THE LIBRARY! As a general rule, there should be 3 chairs per student. 900 students = 2700 chairs. This will be Yale's downfall.
4. Rent lots of those metal trailer-on-wheels classrooms that T.T.T. high schools use. This will increase the square footage of the law school, which is much more important than bar passage rates and employment stats. Remember, bigger is better- and you had better get used to this concept because all you're going to be doing after you graduate is asking, "Would you like it Biggie Size?"
5. Publish your own rankings, but make sure they seem credible. "Hmmm, Stanford and Yale are T.T.T.s, nobody will notice if we rank ourselves higher than them."
I can see the Cooley Ranking Team: "Well, Yale has an amazing student body and great employment statistics....but we have MORE CHAIRS! That's right, we HAVE MORE CHAIRS! Put Yale several spots beneath us."
What's next, who has more toilets? Who has more condom dispensers in the bathroom? At Cooley you'll need lots of both, as you attend the most festering of all third tier toilets and your future is about to get f_cked.
I definitly don't believe there to be a correlation between slavery and red states. When you really think about this one, it just doesn't make any sense. First of all, Republicans do not condone slavery. This is a no brainer, but needs to be said. Second, even in Mass., Bush received something like 40% of the vote. Our nation is not divided into red and blue states, this is a product of the media. Pennsylvania, Ohio, and many other states were won by a handful of votes. What does this tell us? It says that almost every state in the nation has a large proportion of both Republicans and Democrats. A "blue" state could easily become "red" and vice versa. The whole thing is ridiculous if you ask me.