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 - Burhop
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14  16 17 18
« on: December 18, 2005, 09:56:23 PM »
the rule of thumb for quoting is to "keep the language"--if the language isn't that compelling, it can be better to paraphrase athe idea and just mention the author/speaker. In my PS I had two short, direct quotes--one from MLK Jr and one from Thane Rosenbaum (The Myth of Moral Justice) and one longer paraphrase from Boyte & Kari's Building America: The Democratic Promise of Public Work. All folded nicely into my own chosen theme, and none dictated my content.
I will say this: How comfy are you incorporating quotes into text? If it's something you know you do just fine in papers for school, cool. If not--quotes are one of the most abused items in academic writing, and adcomms know this. Just "dropping in" a quote runs the risk of making a paper seem amateurish. Grab someone from a writing center, or a high-quality writer, and get them to tell you (honestly) if you've done a good job with it.
« on: December 18, 2005, 09:47:28 PM »
when it uploads to LSAC it all gets dumped in a communal PDF with your resume & whatnot--not sure it matters
« on: December 18, 2005, 09:46:20 PM »
You could PM me as well. I give uber-thorough comments.
« on: December 18, 2005, 09:45:14 PM »
My professors wanted my PS & My resume. Both got earlier incarnations of the PS--I was still editing--but I wanted to give them some more time.
« on: December 18, 2005, 09:35:48 PM »
1) My senior seminar professor who has seen loads of my writing, including a major paper, and whose wife just graduated from my #1 pick, SU-law;
2) The writing center director, who has a doctorate, has worked closely with me for two years ('m a tutor in the center), and who was my advisor when I ran the campus lit mag;
3) will probably be a professor from my minor (human rights) or a professor who I know really likes me who I've had for two classes. Havne't asked for this yet cuz SU does not require a 3rd, but I'll probably get one anyways.
« on: October 19, 2005, 03:05:23 PM »
I'd take the job as well. With the Dec LSAT being kinda late already, you trying to drag your score up, and not having much work experience, you'll just be a much better candidate next year. Work hard on the LSAT, take it in Feb or June instead, take the job, maybe apply for law school next year. The average age of law school applicants is going up, and many schools are specifically stating the prefer candidates with work experience (see Northwestern).
best of luck, whatever you decide--
« on: October 01, 2005, 05:37:08 PM »
I concur--that second LR started to freak me out a bit. I still finished early, but I was starting to sweat it, and I had to go back and look at a bunch of them. I ended up changing two answers, even.
That experimental LG section was a mindf**k for me--I could tell it was probably the experimental cuz it seemed really odd, and I think that others in my room felt the same way, cuz it looked like a few people checked out during that section.
I coasted through RC--finished with 10 min+ to spare. makes me wonder if I had a diff section than others or something.
Overall I feel pretty good--here's hoping for a killer score!
« on: March 22, 2005, 03:29:22 PM »
I think the big difference I'm seeing here is the "killing her" argument vs. the "right to die" argument. Those that say she should be fed say that she is "being killed," and those that say pull out the tube say "let her die."
I don't know that there's any getting over this--either you believe the husband or you don't. I personally don't know anyone who would want to be in a vegetative state for 15 years, religious or not. But I'm familiar with a parents' love, so I can see how this has become so protracted. And hey, maybe Terri wanted this.
I think it's interesting that our little poll in here pretty much mimics those taken by-and-large as well! Little microcosm, we are. This is one of those cases where your heart ends up arguing with your brain, ad infinitum.
I don't think the federal courts are gonna let this one fly.
« on: March 21, 2005, 05:29:54 PM »
weeelll...it's probably not a very happy life, either. I think the 'cruel and unusual' argument goes both ways.
26! By god, you're right! Man, that's how old I am. Ack.
There has to be some unbiased medical opinion out there on her brain, prior to all the leagl wrangling. Any physician in the House or Senate that is voting on this should not be voicing their own professional opinion--it just muddies the waters, IMHO. We implicitly trust doctors, and I think it's an abuse of their power in that sense. When they toss thier opinions into the public discourse, their opinions are trusted--and they shouldn't be. They have political objectives either way.
« on: March 21, 2005, 02:23:14 PM »
I'm on tenterhooks about this one....one of the more interesting things I've seen is the possibility that Rehnquist (who is back!!) would swat this down in an instant as federal meddling in a state case.
Terri is brain dead--though there are those that have said otherwise. I was a bit disturbed by (Dr.) Sen Frist watching a video (only)and saying that she could recuperate--Doctor's words are often taken at face value, and accepted by-and-large as 'truth.' I feel he's abusing the medical authority he has for this case, and muddying the waters in an effort to cloak the fact she's not coming back. The previous posting about the state of her brain is irrevocably true.
This is such a bizarre case...I'm fascinated. I bet this'll become another law school staple case.
...and now, I should probably go and fill out a DNR order myself. Those that wonder why Terri didn't have one--she was 41--not that old, eh? How many of you have a living will?
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14  16 17 18