Just wanted to say that on all 13 pages of this thread, you represented yourself and your alma mater well, and it helps folks like me who are closely judging Taft, with little more to go on than Orly. I hope you keep up a presence on lawschooldiscussion.
I will point this out for those reading the thread. There are various advantages to different "law school" solutions. The Taft "Distance Learning" solution is not a good one for the vast majority of people. Allow me to explain why-
If you choose to go the Taft route, then (IIRC), you have to pass the Baby Bar in California. That's your first possible point of failure. They don't break it down by school, but recent statistics show that Taft is in the category of schools that have an approximate 25% passage rate (first time), lower for repeaters. So, assuming you get past that (showing your aptitude), then you get to spend even more money to take the real California Bar. And if you do, then Taft has a terrible passage rate on the real Bar. (again, look this up- it's 20% or so). So you have a 25% chance of getting to take the Bar, and then a 20% chance of passing it. Those aren't good odds.
If you do overcome those odds, you will have graduated with a degree that doesn't mean a whole lot in the legal practice, and isn't very portable. Yes, you can practice in California, but you won't have any connections. And you will find it nearly impossible to practice anywhere else.
There may be particularly motivated people that can make Taft work to their advantage; but most of those people would be better off at a different school. The number of people that a) succeed at Taft, and b) can only do distance learning, and c) are able to successfully practice law after Taft are vanishingly small.
This isn't impossible. But if you want to actually practice law with your JD, there are almost always going to be better options.