|
lol 
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 14:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
builds character posted:also, from above the law. I assume folks have seen this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMvARy0lBLE i hope an asteroid hits your dilapidated house in a bad section of town
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 15:10
|
|
|
builds character posted:also, from above the law. I assume folks have seen this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMvARy0lBLE
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 15:24
|
|
|
Today, in celebration of his birthday and the tendency to use banana as a nonsense word in a list, my torts professor took an offered banana costume and taught in it. My law school career has peaked early.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 15:44
|
|
|
1) Texas bar results come out in 17 days. I had a dream last night that I had to write 12 essays on maritime law of the Faroe Islands in half an hour. 2) Apparently my law school took their largest 1L class EVER this year. This after spending three years telling my class that the reason they jacked up tuition was in order to accept fewer, more qualified people. My favorite professor, who I talk to pretty frequently, told me that it was a direct order from the leadership of the university to the law school admin to take as many warm bodies as they could, because the university is addicted to all that sweet law school loan money. 3) I have a job, and it's kicking my rear end, which I'm happy about, because it beats the alternative. It's a good job, it pays pretty well, and I enjoy experiencing different practice areas. My group of friends from school, though, don't have jobs, and have basically given up looking anything until after results come out, and spend all of their time partying. I am clearly in the better position, but I admit that it's hard when I come home after a 12 hour day and my friends are posting Facebook pics of them having a great time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 16:09
|
|
|
One of my classmates told me last night about his meth habit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 16:38
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwSljJAzqg&t=169s
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 18:26
|
|
|
Linguica posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwSljJAzqg&t=169s 
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 18:50
|
|
|
What part of "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion" do right wingers not understand? For gently caress's sake!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 19:46
|
|
|
qwertyman posted:What part of "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion" do right wingers not understand? For gently caress's sake! Bu- bu- bu- bu- bu- but mah' Bible!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 19:51
|
|
|
qwertyman posted:What part of "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion" do right wingers not understand? For gently caress's sake! Her point is that, contrary to popular belief, the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the Constitution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 19:51
|
|
|
Linguica posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwSljJAzqg&t=169s hahaha I love her cheeky grin at the audience as she totally misinterprets their laughter jesus loving christ
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 19:54
|
|
|
Wyatt posted:Her point is that, contrary to popular belief, the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the Constitution. That is true, but she exposed her ignorance of the Constitution seconds later by saying that she did not know what the 14th and 16th Amendments were. Also, Coons did not say that "separation of church and state" was in the Constitution, he said it was one of our country's most important principles. Her separation of church and state comment was in furtherance of her argument in favor of teaching creationism in local public schools, which has been repeatedly held to violate the First Amendment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 20:08
|
|
|
qwertyman posted:That is true, but she exposed her ignorance of the Constitution seconds later by saying that she did not know what the 14th and 16th Amendments were. Yeah, I'm not saying it was a good zinger on her part. It's the kind of pedantic nonsense that people rely on in these sorts of arguments. But a lot of people really aren't aware of where that phrase does (and does not) appear. I suspect some of the gut-laughers in the audience fall into that camp. Incidentally, it's really embarrassing for any politician to not know what the 14th Amendment is. The 16th I might give someone a break on, but not someone who talks about tax reform as much as she does.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 20:13
|
|
|
Wyatt posted:Yeah, I'm not saying it was a good zinger on her part. It's the kind of pedantic nonsense that people rely on in these sorts of arguments. But a lot of people really aren't aware of where that phrase does (and does not) appear. I suspect some of the gut-laughers in the audience fall into that camp. It's definitely possible that some of the laughers there think the First Amendment literally says "separation of church and state." I myself would probably have laughed at her statement too, because it's such nonsense, and the Supreme Court has adopted the "separation of church and state" language for decades - and the phrase itself goes back to Jefferson. Seriously, she may be technically right when she says that it's not IN the Constitution, but it reveals a greater ignorance that should be an automatic disqualifier for office. Incidentally, check out the 7:00 mark in the video. O: "Let me just clarify...you're telling me that the separation of church and state is found in the first amendment?" C: "The government shall make no establishment of religion." O: "That's in the first amendment?"
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 20:21
|
|
|
qwertyman posted:It's definitely possible that some of the laughers there think the First Amendment literally says "separation of church and state." I myself would probably have laughed at her statement too, because it's such nonsense, and the Supreme Court has adopted the "separation of church and state" language for decades - and the phrase itself goes back to Jefferson. Seriously, she may be technically right when she says that it's not IN the Constitution, but it reveals a greater ignorance that should be an automatic disqualifier for office. Because the answer is always No. It won't. 100 years of precedent and they still don't.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 20:26
|
|
|
Linguica posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwSljJAzqg&t=169s Haha this fuckin owns
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 20:31
|
|
|
qwertyman posted:Incidentally, check out the 7:00 mark in the video. Edit: After watching it a few times, I really can't tell if she just has no idea, or if she is really holding his feet to the fire over what the text actually says (which he never gets quite right). Wyatt fucked around with this message at 14:25 on Oct 20, 2010 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 20:40
|
|
|
Yes but what the MSM doesn't want you to know is that later in the debate, she asked Coons to name the 5 freedoms in the First Anendment and he couldn't name them. well, actually he seemed tired of her constant interruptions and badgering and told her to let the moderators ask the questions, but still. It is COONS who doesn't know the constitution! Lamestream media!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 20:52
|
|
|
here's a paraphrase of the exchange coons: "schools should be teaching broadly accepted scientific fact, not religious doctrine." (literally true, see, e.g., edwards v. aguillard) o'donnell: "well you've just proved how little you know about constitutional law. if local school districts want to give equal time to intelligent design, it is their right. the supreme court has always said it is up to the local community to decide which standard to teach. (literally false, see id.) this is just an example of why our country is in the lovely state it's in, because we've moved away from the indispensable principles of our founding." coons: "one of those indispensable principles is the separation of church and state." o'donnell: "where in the constitution is the separation of church and state?" (does not know difference between text of constitution and universally accepted canons of constitutional interpretation) (is a retard)
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 21:25
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Yes but what the MSM doesn't want you to know is that later in the debate, she asked Coons to name the 5 freedoms in the First Anendment and he couldn't name them. well, actually he seemed tired of her constant interruptions and badgering and told her to let the moderators ask the questions, but still. It is COONS who doesn't know the constitution! Lamestream media!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 21:25
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Yes but what the MSM doesn't want you to know is that later in the debate, she asked Coons to name the 5 freedoms in the First Anendment and he couldn't name them. well, actually he seemed tired of her constant interruptions and badgering and told her to let the moderators ask the questions, but still. It is COONS who doesn't know the constitution! Lamestream media! 
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 21:25
|
|
|
Welp, my boss, a county attorney, lost the primaries in August. My boss gets a job and leaves, and I found out last week that the county commission was going to probably vote in the victor of the primary today and he could let everyone go. Today, the county commission installs the guy who won the primary as the new county attorney. He comes in today and fires me on the spot first thing. I called yesterday to ask if he was going to fire me and left a message, but he never called back. To top it all off, I drove 12 hours last week round trip to a job interview. I think I interviewed alright, but at least it gave me a little hope for the future. They ended up hiring my co-worker within 2 hours of his applying this morning and all he had to do was a phone interview. They haven't told me yet that I didn't get the job, but they told him I didn't have enough experience. I found that out today at noon, then got fired right after. 
Torpor fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Oct 19, 2010 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 22:04
|
|
|
I thought it was funny that she didn't know what the 14th and 16th amendments were when someone asked whether she favored repealing them. And then I realized I didn't know what the hell the 16th amendment was. And I'm in law school. And I'm in Tax.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 22:07
|
|
|
builds character posted:I want a vote to change the text for to :moscowitz:
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 22:23
|
|
|
Defleshed posted:I want a vote to change the text for a million times yes
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 22:39
|
|
|
builds character posted:Very ballsy coming from somebody who didn't know ANYTHING about the 14th Amendment. I could theoretically understand somebody getting a few of the numbers mixed up (18 = prohibition, 19 = suffrage), but the 14th is actually a political issue! Republican senators have publicly called for its repeal, and it really does matter whether she knows a thing about it! O'Donnell is one of the leading proponents of the arrogant ignorance movement that we've been seeing throughout the Tea Party protests.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 23:44
|
|
|
Torpor posted:Welp, my boss, a county attorney, lost the primaries in August. My boss gets a job and leaves, and I found out last week that the county commission was going to probably vote in the victor of the primary today and he could let everyone go. edit: oh you said he only fired you. Why did he immediately fire you? Please tell me he ran on a tea party platform and you refused to donate to his campaign. BigHead fucked around with this message at 00:08 on Oct 20, 2010 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 23:49
|
|
|
builds character posted:Yeah... Well, I didn't really do anything to earn it honestly - a friend of mine who works at the company suggested me for the project and they hired me without an interview or even asking for my resume(not as risky as it sounds, I firmly believe that with enough training a second grader could do this job satisfactorily but I'm still not complaining because it's stress-free) so all I did really was have an awesome friend. quote:also, from above the law. I assume folks have seen this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMvARy0lBLE Have you ever agreed to mediation only to find out that opposing counsel planned it to serve process on your client after trapping him in the bathroom at wendy's
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2010 23:57
|
|
|
qwertyman posted:I myself would probably have laughed at her statement too, because it's such nonsense, and the Supreme Court has adopted the "separation of church and state" language for decades And where in the Constitution does it say that the Supreme Court defines the meaning of the Constitution?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2010 01:11
|
|
|
Nonprofit sector update: New York Legal Assistance Group just hired a lawyer. They had over 600 applications for the job.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2010 01:17
|
|
|
Draile posted:Nonprofit sector update: New York Legal Assistance Group just hired a lawyer. They had over 600 applications for the job. You're not making me feel good about sending out my latest round of articling applications.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2010 01:35
|
|
|
Shang Yang posted:And where in the Constitution does it say that the Supreme Court defines the meaning of the Constitution? It can be found in Article III, Section 1: "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." Judicial power is the settling of disputes and granting of remedies when one party suffers an injury by another. That is the essence of a disagreement over interpretation of the Constitution, treaties, federal laws, or anything else over which the Supreme Court has jurisdiction. When laws are contradictory, the Court determines the operation of them. And what is the Constitution but the most basic law of the United States?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2010 01:47
|
|
|
Draile posted:Nonprofit sector update: New York Legal Assistance Group just hired a lawyer. They had over 600 applications for the job. I have heavy nepotism connections to NYLAG, summered there once and know almost everyone including the person that likely signed off on that hire if they went into immigration. The year I summered was a recession special and was the first year they got any t14 resumes at all to speak of. This year, I'd be shocked if they got less t14 apps than the number of total apps when I was there. Oh yeah, they've laid people off in the last couple of years, too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2010 01:49
|
|
|
Shang Yang posted:And where in the Constitution does it say that the Supreme Court defines the meaning of the Constitution? Yeah overturn Marbury v. Madison that poo poo was bullshit
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2010 01:54
|
|
|
J Miracle posted:Yeah overturn Marbury v. Madison that poo poo was bullshit fuggin activist judges an poo poo
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2010 02:15
|
|
|
builds character posted:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMvARy0lBLE This owns so loving much. "What is fascinating is that you will be one of these poor people" "Do you move your lips when you read? Science cleared that guy. It was a lawyer that put his rear end in prison"
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2010 02:25
|
|
|
Torpor posted:why_government_lawyers_need_unions.txt
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2010 02:42
|
|
|
Shang Yang posted:And where in the Constitution does it say that the Supreme Court defines the meaning of the Constitution?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2010 02:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
Shang Yang posted:And where in the Constitution does it say that the Supreme Court defines the meaning of the Constitution? 1L gunner spotted
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2010 03:09
|
|