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 - EdinTally

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12
Non-Traditional Students / Re: Non-trad financial question
« on: September 03, 2008, 10:13:56 PM »
Bank>>>>>>>Withdraw>>>>>>>>>Cash>>>>>>>>Water/Fire Proof Box>>>>>>>>Bury>>>>>>>>Yard

Maverick?  I'm not seeing it.  This is a man and a party who tried to beat up on Obama for his lack of experience in relation to McCain.  Now she may or may not be a good person or a good politician, but that isn't the  issue.  The issue is McCain's flop on the issue of experience.

The only bright spot I see is that no matter what, we will see either a first time female VP or a first time black president.  In the long run, I don't think that can hurt.

I'll ask this question again:
Would you let a surgeon operate on you with less than 150 days of medical school under his belt?  Would you let a dentist with less than 150 days of actual practice work on your teeth?  Obama has next to no experience as a senator and absolutely no executive experience (an issue I have with McCain as well, btw).

And McCain just destroys this argument for you by picking a running mate with 20 months of experience as a Governor.

Elitist argument is dead with McCain's homes.
Experience argument is dead with his VP pick.

It's going to be interesting :)

Non-Traditional Students / Re: for us older folk...
« on: August 27, 2008, 10:23:17 AM »
I miss working
I miss earning money, and
I miss being around people my own age

(sorry 20-somethings, you are boring :) )

It seems we have moved far afield, from the original topic  :D

You obviously have an abundance of passion, even if your arguments are a bit too general.  I'm sure LS will help focus that passion into a useful tool.

I'm going to assume "good" government is off the table since you chose not to address it.  It seems we also are using "sympathy" to mean two different things.  I take it you mean: an inclination to support an opinion?

First, Courts do not just take things away as soon as the(y) get the chance.

You are misrepresenting my argument.

Things are only taken away if your peers feel you have committed a wrong and must pay retribution by money or jail time.

I do not consider judges to be my peers in the context of a courtroom and yet; do they not have the power to take?

In a civil case, could there be no finding of wrong doing (e.g. no fault divorce)?  Does retribution have to be an element of the settlement?  Can payment ruin (make less than whole) one party and benefit (make more than whole) the other party?   

Also, you will be studying tons of appellate cases where there is a panel of judges. Majority makes the law and rules in favor of one party or another. There must be some agreement of feeling, some sympathy granted towards one side or another. They see it one way or another. Thats just how it works. It is not random. The fact that we even are given a trial and have a right to appeal is proof that our government is sympathetic, and even grants that errors are made.

hyperbole, equivocation, oversimplification.....too much here 

Second, maybe you should reread the constitution, specifically the Bill of Rights. It's definitely worth a reread before you start law school. There is some really great proof that the government is sympathetic towards its people.

The Bill of Rights was written by men who feared the power of government.  It provides protection FOR THE PEOPLE against the over reaching power of the STATE.  If government is sympathetic or benevolent, why would these protections have to be put in place?  Under your interpretation, we need not have any fear of the government since it is sympathetic.  Your example destroys your argument.

While it may not help you with law school, I suggest you read the Federalist Papers. 

Studying for the LSAT / Re: PS for LR page 444 Q. 4
« on: August 25, 2008, 05:45:43 PM »
You're getting closer but Section 1 of the 09/95 exam is an AR section (per the 10 Actual Official LSAT Prep Test Book).  It sounds like you mean Section 2 (the first LR section). 

So, you have a bit of a math question.  Choice E adds a new given (premise) - total revenue (from tuition) has remained the same.  So, can you infer tuition has gone up? Sure. 

If the number paying double tuition has gone down but total revenue from tuition has remained the same then the amount of tuition must have gone up.

Thanks for taking the time to dig for that.  My PS book says Sec. 1

Ugh, now I see it!  I didn't allow for the average when reading "per capita"  In my head it was X and X(2) instead of the average(per capita).  They got me :)


Inference questions are Must Be True questions;
Must Be True answers come from the stimulus;
"IF" answers can add another premise but must still follow from the stimulus.

Sound good?

Studying for the LSAT / Re: PS for LR page 444 Q. 4
« on: August 25, 2008, 03:51:09 PM »
If you only post the PS page number but not the actual PT, section and question number, you limit the number of people who can respond.
Sorry about that.  First time question poster.  I don't know the preptest #  best I can do is:

Sept 95 lsat Sec. 1 #20


Thanks.  That helps disqualify the answer I chose but still having problems wrapping my head around the right answer (E)

Just Some Guy,

My apologies :)

"Harmony or agreement in feeling"?  Really?  Be prepared to have your idealism take a hit.

Take a hit from what? I don't think it is too idealistic at all. I think that good government is sympathetic to its people in all branches. You haven't said anything constructive at all. Just "Really." That just makes me think you are nontrad and think you have had more life "experience." No need to be condescending. I would like to hear your version.

Although a bit harsh, my intent was not to be condescending.  My "version", as it were, is that government is neither good nor sympathetic.  Of course, we would have to define what "good" means since, in essence, it describes nothing.  Your idea of good and my idea of good may be completely different.  I have seen no evidence that government acts benevolently towards it's people.  If there is such evidence, I would think it a byproduct of larger intent and not the intent itself. 

The Branch to which we all hope to give oath to one day, certainly can't be seen as being sympathetic.  Given the chance; a lawyer, a judge, the "court" will take from anyone, at anytime, anything it is given license to take.  It will do so without a second thought as to how someone or some entity will continue forward. 


Studying for the LSAT / Re: Kaplan
« on: August 25, 2008, 01:37:50 PM »
I took the month long class.  My score went up 1pt.


1)  I think I could have worked harder outside of class.  I did all the required and about half of recommended material.  I should have done all the recommended.  I did a lot of timed sections, but probably only 2 or 3 complete timed tests outside of class.   So I failed myself there.

2)  My teacher.  Ok, he just wasn't good.  His stated goal for the class was to practice his public speaking for trial litigation.  A lot of "ummms" and "ahhhs" without a real mastery of the questions.  I have no doubt he knew how to do the questions, but his ability to teach practical methods was subpar.

If you take the class just try to squeeze as much out of it as possible.  I'm using the powersource books and have so far found them to be very helpful.


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