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 - Phillip79

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7
Incoming 1Ls / Re: Republican or Democrat
« on: April 13, 2004, 10:56:56 AM »
How would you guys feel about Clinton (bill or course) as Kerry's running mate?  The assistant dean at NYU Law recently wrote an op ed for the nytimes suggesting just this, and I think it'd be brilliant. 

Here are some factors to consider:

1.  At the risk of stating the obvious, the Vice-President's only official function is to serve as President if needed.  Clinton could only serve for a max of two years, and I think it would be very frowned upon to take advantage of this Constitutional "loophole" for political gain. 

2.  Clinton would overshadow the Presidential nominee, and would constantly remind voters that Kerry is no JFK/Clinton. 

3.  If the economy becomes the major issue of the election, having Clinton on the ticket would be a big plus in pushing the "Return to Prosperity" theme. 

However, if terrorism is the defining issue, having Clinton on the ticket would be very bad for the Dems.  You would be matching up someone who ignored the Al Qaeda/Iraq situation for 8 years, with someone who will basically continue the same policy for another 4 years.   Voters trust Clinton on national security even less than they trust Kerry, which is saying something. 

4.  My guess is that, as the convention draws closer, Bush will pull away from Kerry in the polls, and Clinton will not want to be associated with Kerry's faltering candidacy. 

Incoming 1Ls / Re: Republican or Democrat
« on: April 13, 2004, 10:24:27 AM »
Iím a fiscal conservative, and also conservative on some social issues, but liberal on others.  Constitutionally, Iím a strict constructionalist, and adhere to the concepts of statesí rights and limited government.

I support an activist foreign policy, using military force, economic strength and diplomacy to promote the establishment of liberal democracies throughout the world. 

I vote solidly Republican, and believe in a strong party system.  While ideology is important, I embrace pragmatism as an underlying principle of government. 

Incoming 1Ls / Re: Republican or Democrat
« on: April 13, 2004, 09:57:32 AM »
Well, speed limits are one situaion where I become even MORE extreme in my views.  I advocate the replacement of speed limit signs with transmitters which send a signal to your car (which would be equiped with a receiver) and limit your speed.  Speed limits would be personalized, based on driving record, experience, and road conditions, thereby allowing us to stop employing the majority of our police force as traffic cops.

Wow.  That's an interesting idea, but there's a few problems with it. 

1.  It's WAY too "Big Brother" to be accepted by the public.  You can only police people to the extent that they're willing to be policed, and nobody will stand for electronic transmitters in their car.  The fact is, pretty much everyone speeds, to varying degrees. 

2.  Anything that would drastically reduce the number of police officers needed is dead in the water.  Police unions hold too much power.

3.  Automatic controls on speed means no more speeding tickets.  Great for us, bad for the tax collectors who depend on this as a source of revenue. 

The first deposit was due April 1.  However, if you haven't heard from them yet, that doesn't mean you won't get in.  You may have to pay two deposits at once.  I'm not really sure.  (The next one is due June 1, and it's $600.  The April 1 deposit was $200).

I just can't understand how a one week allegedly "intense" Law Preview -- where all you get is a glimpse of the awaiting ardor -- can outweigh a few solid weeks of self preparation using Primers where you actually get acquianted with Black Letter Law.

You're right.  These 5-day "crash courses" are a joke - and a very expensive joke at that.  Skip the feel-good, shallow,  fake experience that they'll give you, and take several months to prepare adequately. 

Incoming 1Ls / Re: How much $ for living expenses?
« on: April 07, 2004, 01:17:45 PM »
Y'all living expenses are insane. I spent 100-150/mnth on food absolute maximum in undergrad. Seriously though, what are you people eating with $500 budgets? Caviar? Or do you just not cook and eat out all the time?

It depends on your lifestyle, but I don't think $100 a month is a realistic food estimation for a law student, given the fact that there will be times when you eat out because you're too tired to cook or out of time. 

$500 a month for one person is high, though - that's definitely factoring in restaurants.  I budgeted $400 for two people.  I actually budgeted for "Food" (essential groceries), and then created a separate allowance for "spending money," whether it be on fast-food or other things.  It's important to be relatively frugal, but also necessary to be realistic.  You don't want to have a bare-bones budget that gets thrown out of whack when you order a pizza. 

Incoming 1Ls / Re: Government Law
« on: April 06, 2004, 02:49:41 PM »
C. - Email me directly on this.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: Pres. BUSH
« on: April 06, 2004, 02:35:29 PM »
To take it one step further, I wish that the current administration were more consistent in upholding the sanctity of human life. 

The Bush Administration has been quite strong in this area, in my opinion. But he's taking a calculated approach to chip away at abortion rights, rather than attack the issue head-on. 

It works the same way with other issues.  There are many "anti-gun" legislators, but few if any would propose amending the constitution to repeal the 2nd amendment, and confiscating all legally-owned guns.  That's too extreme, and people would never go for it.  So they advance their agenda by chipping away at the edges.  They push for burdensome registration requirements and fees, taxes, mandatory trigger locks, waiting periods, and on and on.  Rather than pushing for sweeping bans, they push "gun safety initiatives" that are intended to make it so expensive and difficult to own a gun that most people won't bother. 

You can see many parallels in this to the abortion debate.  President Bush has signed a ban on partial-birth abortion, and more recently, has signed "Laci and Connors law," which attacks the assumption that a fetus should not be accorded the protections and rights of a person.  He's also withheld U.S. funding from United Nations programs that are performing abortions. 

I'm fairly certain you will never hear President Bush explicitly say, "I support overturning Roe v. Wade, and I promise to appoint Supreme Court justices who will do so."  It would be stupid to do that.  It's all about framing the issues in terms that are winnable for the pro-life side, and if the issue if framed in terms of "overturning Roe v. Wade," pro-lifers will lose. 

To use an NFL analogy:  40-yard passing plays may look pretty, but if you complete enough 6-8 yard passes, you'll eventually get to the endzone.  On the other hand, if all you're doing is throwing "hail marys," you will certainly lose. 

Incoming 1Ls / Re: Anyone know the e-mail address of Atticus Falcon?
« on: April 06, 2004, 02:11:58 PM »
You should check out the Yahoo Group, Planetlawschool

He posts there frequently, and you can also e-mail him directly from that site.

Incoming 1Ls / Re: $alary Range query
« on: April 06, 2004, 12:58:49 PM »

   I'm not sure that i can rationalize 3 more years of arduous schooling to secure a $45,000 a year job that i less than love.  I can make that kind of green in sales right now.. and if not right now than definitely after 3 years of putting all my efforts into the same.  I will say however, that asertaining a certain quality  of life for myself and my future family far excedes any monetary compensation received for services rendered.    p.s. thanks for your input Revenant

Regardless of salary considerations, I don't think you should go to school for 3 years to get a job that you don't particularly love.  That's true even if you get into Yale or Harvard.  A lot of people get into law for the wrong reasons, and they find out that money and "prestige" aren't everything. 

Having said that, you need to set realistic expectations for yourself. 

I'm not going to sugar-coat this, I'm just telling it like it is:  If you go to a Tier 3-4 school, the odds of you getting "rich" (i.e. six-figure salary) are pretty low.  The lower ranked your school is, the more pressure you will have to be in the top 5-10% of your class just to have any chance of making a decent salary. 

If you're going to law school because you love the profession (and especially if you want government / public interest), then go for it.  But if you're dreaming of a $125,000 salary, and you only applied to Albany Law School, I think you're setting yourself up for huge disappointment. 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7